Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Why it's "fine" to spam from NZ

When someone breaks the law by spamming then they deserve to be whacked good and hard for their crime.

While it might be tempting to ask "what's the real harm?" when someone spams, I sometimes think that the courts overlook the true scale of damage done by such activities.

That certainly seems to be the case with the NZ courts.

Take the case of Kiwi spammers Lance and Shane Atkinson for example.

The US justice system has just fined Atkinson a whacking $21 million for his part in what is said to have been the largest spam operation in history.

Our courts fined Atkinson a mere $100K.

I'm sorry -- I don't quite get it.

US spammers can not only expect very steep fines but also time in prison for their crimes. Here in NZ they get a slap on the wrist by comparison.

Is it any wonder therefore, that Kiwis have figured so prominently in a number of the world's biggest spam operations.

Remember AKILL, the technical mastermind behind a massive botnet that was used for spamming -- another Kiwi. And what penalty was metered out for his offending?

Even after our own anti-spam legislation was passed I suggested that NZ may become a haven for spammers due to the comparatively tiny penalties associated with this crime. Was I right?

I have no doubt that Atkinson earned a great deal more than $100K from his spamming activities -- so the fine levied by our own courts would have simply been written off as a cost of doing business -- in much the same way other businesses have to pay rent on office space, power and phone.

What we must also remember is that spam is more than an annoyance and an unauthorised use of other people's computer/communications resources. Spam very often involves outright fraud, theft and other crimes.

Personally, I think we should remind our legislators and courts that it's time they got tough on spammers. If we don't, smart people will simply do the sums and realise that there's still profit in spamming.

What penalty is a $100K fine if you're making millions?

The problem of online fraud extends beyond spam however.

Yesterday I received an interesting email from a company which was trying to get me to join their affiliate program and I was shocked but not surprised at their suggestions.

Some of you may have noticed that I have a section on Aardvark which deals with the issue of weight-loss. Clearly the sender of the email I received had done some searching and found this page to be reasonably well ranked, therefore an ideal place to have their wares pushed.

The proposition advanced was that I promote their weight-loss product and publish a favourable review in return for collecting significant revenues whenever someone signed up. They even offered me US$35 if I could convince someone to try their "free trial".

I did a little research and discovered that this "fat burning" product was pretty useless and that it appears to be yet another bit of fakery designed to do nothing but part people from their hard-earned cash.

No doubt many website owners will be lured by promise of easy cash for publishing fake reviews or endorsements and pocketing the commissions/referral-fees... but not me.

It's pretty clear that if you make the rewards greater than the costs then huge numbers of people will be tempted to engage in stupid, dishonest and even criminal acts.

We can't remove the rewards associated with spamming (because there will always be utter idiots who want bigger private parts, greater sexual endurance or whatever) so we must raise the penalties and be prepared to use them without hesitation.

I sure hope that NZ's good name doesn't continue to get dragged through the tech media by more Kiwis engaged in spamming, safe in the knowledge that our courts will "go easy" on them.

Please visit the sponsor!

Have your say on this...

PERMALINK to this column

Oh, and don't forget today's sci/tech news headlines

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font