Send him to jail throw away the key!

Jeremy Jaynes should be the model for Cable Television. When cable started the selling point was "Comericial Free" TV. Sure you have the Preimium channels that are CF during the movies, but look at TWC, 30 mins ads, 30 mins forcasts.
I think that the pay for test should apply to the cable industry as well. Whats good for the goose should be good for the gander!

I say take all his profits, sieze his property, home and cars and then put him in jail for 9 years. It's time to get tough and take out the trash. Enough with the excuses. He knew exactly what he was doing and the amount of damage he did. He and all spammers should be severely punished both financially and by long term imprisonment.

All spammers should be sentenced to atleast 15-20 years and have all their money taken away and get community service imo. Aswell as people who write adware and viruses both cost money aswell.

Make a martyr of him the right way! Seize all his property, bank accounts, cars whatever, put him before a firing squad, cut him up into little pieces afterwards and feed him to the vultures! That should not only make a real martyr out of him but serve as an example for all the other spammers out there who live by similar means!

Try looking up the word martyr (mw.com). Oh, and read the article, it points out a few things such as the fact that you'll only be getting more unsolicited emails for Argentinians.

Jaynes should have received a 25-year sentence, and be forced to serve a minimum of 70% of it. Spam is the computer equivalent of vandalizing my house and car every single day year after year, and those who engage in it need to learn to stop screwing with other people's property. My email address is MY property, not Mr. Jaynes'!

Finally someone who realizes the seriousness of spam

This is somebody who first of all, choulda/shoulda been charged with over 100 counts:
Over more than 5 years he repeatedly developed dozens of different campaign scams/cons(not just useless spam, but actual thievery too) using 16 web accounts & multiple computers-- his messages reached millions of people; he wasn't a script kiddie gone awry with one computer: he was a professional AND serial thief.

To now say that his sentence was harsh as compared to unrelated cases misses the point: this sentence should be judged on its own merit-- this lucky sleaze compares with say, Ted Bundy being charged with only 3 bodily assaults, or Osama only with attempting to injure 3 folks.
And as far as the sentence being on par with other types of crimes: no multiple(this is a multiple offence case) murderer, kidnapper, rapist, child molester should receive 9 years only-- heck, not even someone guilty of one only, except with extenuating circumstances.

And, though it may not apply in this case-- there's always the specter for a 9 year sentence of serving just 1/3 of it: thus, how many would be willing to steal a good amount, stash most of it away, do a little time for that, then come out and live the good life?

Well, as much a I hate spam, this nine-year sentence is wrong. A good filter will, or you are using the wrong software, filter spam away from our inbox. His punishment should fit the crime.

So using this argument, we should only give car thieves a year or two since, you know, a good car alarm will keep them at bay? I mean, hello?

rofl =))))

LOL
what a funny argument indeed. His games were in place way before most spam programs became available. He was scamming/robbing people and he should be considered as part of the mix he was placed with. You can't whine after the fact and plead - "I didn't know this was going to happen to me."

He needs to pay dearly.

But he was not breaking the law at start...

That is not the same thing, stealing a car has always been a crime, sending spam not!

maybe not by definition, but come on.... it's always been totally wrong.

Ok, but not in legal terms, and that is exactly what I was (trying) to address.

Are you nuys? Or are you a spammer?

Can't the government take his money and estate away from him since they are the proceeds of a crime like they do with big time drug dealers.

For those that say 9 years is too much remember he won't serve even half that he will be able to apply for porale in about 2 years and since he wouldn't be considered a threat to society and be out easily with little restrictions.

punishment suitable to the crime.

IMO - take away his assets, and fine him an additional xxx dollars equal to ther estimated net income he made off the spam.

if he cant pay, then he can go to prison and in most states, for thiose with no income or assets, the state awards them xx dollars a day served towards the fines owed. at a million dollars, in most states would be 20-30,000 days in prison (at 25000 days, thats 68.49 years lol.)

"For this violation of Virginia's spam law, Jaynes faces a prison sentence comparable to that of people convicted of violent crimes such as rape."

That says alot about our justice system. Perhaps rape should be punished harder, eh?

"But is forging headers on par with heinous crimes such as armed robbery, kidnapping, and child molestation?"

Robbery? How about causing billions in damage? Why do kidnappers get a lesser sentence than armed robbery in the US? Using these two examples together shows a potential flaw in our justice system. The point is made about Virginia law, but unless the Supreme Court rules that the law is unconstitutional, it goes.

My friend, your the one who bought the erectile disfunction pills, so blame yourself.

And I say this because no on else would take this "perspective". Everyone else knows that spamming costs companies money, and lots of it. I have a small IT firm and 85% of our email is spam. 85%! That is absolutely ridiculous. That means that over 3/4 of our e-mail server bandwidth is bandwidth WE PAY FOR TO BE ADVERTISED TO FOR THINGS WE NEVER ASKED FOR.

Brian's idea is that 9 years is the same sentence which rapists get, therefore it is too harsh. Well, the problem there is that rapists should get heavier sentences than 9 years. 9 years is perfect for someone who has cost business millions of dollars. Stop looking at it from the perspective that spam is just a minor annoyance. It is a huge problem for those of us that have to pay for our bandwidth.

Brian says that international spammers won't pay attention to a virginia law. Does that mean we should just let this guy off the hook? It is TOTALLY irrelevant what russian spammers do. Jeremy has broken US laws. Our laws are not dependent on other countries.

Brian says that Internet users are getting more accustomed to living with spam. So I suppose that means since people are getting used to it, it's okay? How absurd is this argument? Is this for real? I suppose if people just get used to other crimes being committed, they should be legal.

Not only is spam costly because of wasted bandwidth, but it wastes employees' time. Either they waste time sifting thru worthless e-mail, or they waste time being conned into going to a fraudulent website, etc.

It is simple. Time = Money. Bandwidth = Money. People who cost other people money without their permission have to pay for that.

This is one of the weakest articles I have seen on Betanews.

Question though... what good does it do you, or any other person in your position, to have him locked away? Do you get any of that lost money returned? Are any of the damages that were brought upon you lessened? Do you really think that locking up this one guy is going to make a difference on a one-by-one basis?

Why not do as others have suggested, and take away the money and materials gained from his actions and put them to work fixing the problem.

"In fact, it's entirely possible that Jaynes may do his prison time, and still have his 5,8000-square-foot, million-dollar Raleigh mansion and spam fortune awaiting him when he gets out."

I think I'd rather see him lose all of that and do a little time than take a 9-year vaction only to come back and sit well-off for the rest of his life.

Another absurd argument. You are saying since I won't regain my losses if he is locked up, he should be set free or just get a slap on the wrist?

Well lets see, we prosecute murderers even though the victims aren't brought back to life. What is the point in that? It is exactly the same. You need to examine fundamental aspects of the justice system I believe.

We put Martha and other white collar criminals behind bars for committing crimes, and sometimes they return to their mansion. Does that mean we should just say "You know, they're going to live it up when they get out of jail, might as well just let them go"?

Alright, so we might take away the items he has gained from his illegal activity. How is this justice at all? It's like saying car thieves should just return what they stole and everything will be okay - justice served. Come on, get real.

DigitalSin, the bit about freeing Jaynes was meant as a joke. Sorry for any confusion. Personally, I hope he enjoys his time with Bubba. (See this funny comic: http://ars.userfriendly....050410&mode=classic)

I'm just predicting that the harsh sentence is going to backfire. I hope I'm wrong.

Oops, do I feel like an idiot. I checked my email this morning and 4/6 e-mails were spam that managed to get through my filters and that kind of put me in a bad mood.

Sorry for the harsh response Brian :)

You're looking at this in black and white. Just because 9 years may be too harsh for what he was actually convicted for, that doesn't mean he should get a slap on the wrist. The title is more of a joke (read: Kevin Mitnick).

He should be drained of all his assets and forced to do thousands of hours of community service. Why not spend 9 years doing work for the country, rather than locked up waiting to enjoy his millions?

And Brian's point is that 9 years isn't going to teach international spammers a "lesson," which is what prosecutors wanted to do. He's not saying let him go simply because it doesn't impact foreigners.

Wow... maybe before you attack me, you should READ my post.

1) Never did I say "...he should be set free or just get a slap on the wrist..." I for one would rather give up a few years of my life if I knew I would be set financially for the rest of my life than lose everything. Maybe that's just my opinion, but I'm entitled to it.

2) "Well lets see, we prosecute murderers even though the victims aren't brought back to life. What is the point in that? It is exactly the same." This isn't the same at all. For one, what benefits have the murderers gained from their actions that could be taken away? None. And you're right, the victims can't be brought back. But money lost can be... from the spammer's bank account. Saying they're the same is totally irrelevant, it's like comparing jay-walking to rape... the crimes are on completely different levels.

3) "We put Martha and other white collar criminals behind bars for committing crimes, and sometimes they return to their mansion. Does that mean we should just say "You know, they're going to live it up when they get out of jail, might as well just let them go?" Did you even read my post? I'm not even going to waste my time to come back with a retort.

Anyway, again, that's just my opinion, and if you don't like it that's fine. Next time though, try attacking what was actually said, it will lend you more credibility.

Yes I do think it would do good. I think that spammers will start to think twice when thier cohorts are being tossed in prison and they begin to take it up the rear without even so much as some crisco to ease things.

In fact, this makes me feel warm and fuzzy just thinking about it. If you ask me, the penalty was far too leniant. I think he should have not only gotten a bigger sentance, but forced to pay every ISP, every company, and every enduser/home user restitution for the spam he generated.

Do you realize how long it would take to analyze all of his assets and figure out what money went where? Who knows how many accounts he had and in how many countries he spread his money across. Only a small portion might be even in federal jurisdiction. I have dealt with people who run online casinos and they are cut from the same cloth as people like Jeremy. None of them kept money in US accounts. They stash their money in the caymen islands, costa rica, etc.

Lawyers could drag that on for years and years all the while Jeremy gets to do what he wants. Not just that, but every time a dispute would come up a hearing would have to take place, costing our legal system even more money and resources. I think that is not even remotely practical nor would it lead to any real punishment.

Why shouldn't he have to do 9 years?

The point is punishment. The punishment should fit the crime. You do have a good point about getting the money back. I think that should be added to his sentence, although I'm not sure if 9 years is enough myself. The U.S. needs to start taking cyber-crimes more seriously IMO.

The Defendant will have the pleasure of knowing obligatory unwritten rules that could have fatal consequences if broken. He may also get to experience new recreation activities such as rough anal sex.

Are you nuts?

How does spamming cost people money unless there stupid enough to click the item and buy it. Also how does it cost the ISP? I don't understand please explain if you have a little time.

> How does spamming cost people money unless there stupid enough to click the item and buy it. Also how does it cost the ISP?

Urgh. Because it WASTES TONS OF BANDWIDTH. Bandwidth is money.

Thank you. Cost is a measure of an opportunity. In this case, it is also a measure of the opportunity forgone...so the cost essentially of what *could* have been done with the time, bandwidth, and brain-power of having to deal with spam. Similar, in concept, to suing a person for wrongful death. You aren't suing/prosecuting to bring back a loved one... You are suing/prosecuting for the compensation of what that person could have done with their life had it not been taken away. Not that any amount of money is worth a loved one's life,

Great explanation. It's also true that companies have to dedicate hundreds of hours each year to fighting spam, and spend thousands of dollars putting solutions in place to stop it. Not to mention the amount of productivity of workers it kills while they spent 30 minutes each day wading through hundreds of spams.

Still, 9 years is a bit overboard. I would much rather see Jaynes serve 1 year in prison, go bankrupt, and have to perform 10,000 hours of community service. I don't want to pay for this guy to be in jail.

An excellent point. This holds true for many "white collar" crimes such as the Enron guys. Yea, they get 2 years in prison, but when they get out they are laughing all the way to their multi-million dollar estates. I think it was the CFO that during the entire process after he was caught he continued work on his mansion. Take that away, and his cars, and all of his luxuries, and that is punishment. I also think it is hilarious that Martha Stewart tried to get her sentence reduced. 5 months in a resort prison and 5 months at home in her gigantic estate is light by any means. If it were you or I it would be a couple years in some regular prison with "Bubba".

I totally agree. Yes he's serving time, and like the author said, he deserves to be punished. But I too feel the punishment should be in different form as locking him up does nothing to help repair his actions other than keeping him from doing it again.

"...companies have to dedicate hundreds of hours..."

I spend a couple hours every day at work cleaning up PC's crammed with junk mail and spyware (though another topic).

"...amount of productivity of workers it kills while they spent 30 minutes each day wading through hundreds of spams."

Where I work we have several people that get upwards of 500 e-mails a day, MAYBE 50 of which are valid. Granted this could partially be their fault for using their address irresponsibly... but it's still spam.

Agreed. I think a short prison sentence, restitution, and plenty of community service would probably be better for all parties involved. I am sure Jaynes is a smart enough guy to be doing something productive for society.

Heh take away all the money that you from him and give it away to charity for all I care. Sell his house and then put him in prison with the killers and rapist for 9 years. if he survives give him 1,000,000 hours of community service or community service for life. Dont allow him access to a computer or cell phone for that matter and make him do back breaking work for the rest of his life. I think he should be punished worse than what he can be here in the U.S. like cutting off his fingers and along those lines. I hate spam and it is a headache in my personal computing time and also in my line of work. I just wish other countries would follow suite and take the spammers down, kill them for all I care they are just low life scum trying to make a quick buck illegally.

Your an idiot!