Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> FTC Shuts Down Four Spamming Operations
The Federal Trade Commission ('FTC') announced that it settled litigation against four spam operators, resulting in their permanent shutdown. Each operator was charged with sending spam that violated provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act, and one was also charged with violating the Adult Labeling Rule that requires that senders use the phrase 'SEXUALLY EXPLICIT' in the subject line of sexually explicit e-mail.
The CAN-SPAM Act requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender's postal address. It also requires that the spam give recipients an opt-out method, so they can elect not to receive messages from the spammer in the future.
The details:
Cleverlink Trading Limited settled in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The firm and its partners will pay fines of up to $400,000 to settle FTC charges. In addition to spamming, the firm's e-mails did not contain a link to allow consumers to opt-out of receiving future spam, did not contain a valid physical postal address, and did not contain the disclosure that it was sexually explicit, the FTC said. It also included sexual materials in the initially viewable area of the e-mail, in violation of the Adult Labeling Rule.
Zachary Kinion also settled in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The FTC alleged that Kinion sent spam that promoted adult sites, mortgage rates, and privacy software and paid other spammers commissions to send spam messages for him. The order contains a judgment of $151,000 ' the total amount he made from his illegal spamming ' which is suspended because of his inability to pay.
Brian McMullen, DBA BM Entertainment and B Pimp, also settled in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. He was charged with using spam to drive traffic to Web sites run by third parties, concealing the source of his e-mails, and possession of unauthorized credit card information. The settlement bars future violations and imposes a judgment of $24,193, which is suspended based on inability to pay.
William Dugger, Angelina Johnson, and John Vitale settled in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. They are charged with taking control of third parties' computers without their owners' knowledge or consent to conceal the source of the sexually explicit spam. Their settlement includes a payment of $8000 in ill-gotten gains.
The Federal Trade Commission ('FTC') announced that it settled litigation against four spam operators, resulting in their permanent shutdown. Each operator was charged with sending spam that violated provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act, and one was also charged with violating the Adult Labeling Rule that requires that senders use the phrase 'SEXUALLY EXPLICIT' in the subject line of sexually explicit e-mail.
The CAN-SPAM Act requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender's postal address. It also requires that the spam give recipients an opt-out method, so they can elect not to receive messages from the spammer in the future.
The details:
Cleverlink Trading Limited settled in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The firm and its partners will pay fines of up to $400,000 to settle FTC charges. In addition to spamming, the firm's e-mails did not contain a link to allow consumers to opt-out of receiving future spam, did not contain a valid physical postal address, and did not contain the disclosure that it was sexually explicit, the FTC said. It also included sexual materials in the initially viewable area of the e-mail, in violation of the Adult Labeling Rule.
Zachary Kinion also settled in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The FTC alleged that Kinion sent spam that promoted adult sites, mortgage rates, and privacy software and paid other spammers commissions to send spam messages for him. The order contains a judgment of $151,000 ' the total amount he made from his illegal spamming ' which is suspended because of his inability to pay.
Brian McMullen, DBA BM Entertainment and B Pimp, also settled in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. He was charged with using spam to drive traffic to Web sites run by third parties, concealing the source of his e-mails, and possession of unauthorized credit card information. The settlement bars future violations and imposes a judgment of $24,193, which is suspended based on inability to pay.
William Dugger, Angelina Johnson, and John Vitale settled in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. They are charged with taking control of third parties' computers without their owners' knowledge or consent to conceal the source of the sexually explicit spam. Their settlement includes a payment of $8000 in ill-gotten gains.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?