i usually dont post stuff like this but i thought it was relevant as this is a VA law. spamming is a felony in Virginia which this guy learned the hard way as he was sentenced to nine years. the interesting part is that he was in North Carolina.

Quote

A North Carolina man was convicted in Loudoun County two years ago of illegally sending tens of thousands of e-mails to America Online customers. Prosecutors said Jeremy Jaynes flooded the servers at the Internet company's headquarters in Loudoun with bulk e-mail advertisements for computer programs and stock pickers.

story - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/05/AR2006090501166_pf.html

a picture of the douchebag spammer is attached.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
Attachments:

Damn dude looks like he ATE a lotta spam as well as sending it.

But seriously 9 years in jail for basically the crime of sending a lot of MAIL? dude needs to get martha stewarts lawyers. Bit draconian to deprive a man of his liberty for just sending a lot of mail. COuldnt we be more creative with his punishment? LIke uh making him go WORK FOR AOL for 9 years? now THAT WOULD reform ANYONE

ferfux Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Damn dude looks like he ATE a lotta spam as well
> as sending it.
>
> But seriously 9 years in jail for basically the
> crime of sending a lot of MAIL?

if you annoied millions of people daily, i think that deserves serious punishment. yes, the article said 10K+ emails a day for AOL people but that was only the people in Virginia. spammers send no less than one million emails a day. if he had to stay in jail for 1 second for every email he sent, he would be a minimum 7 years for each day. people dont get caught for spamming for quite some time. at the 7 years a day rate, he would be getting out sometime next millennium. people dont seem to realise how many people that one spammer annoies each day.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

You can go to jail for spamming Virgins? Damn!

>to realise how many people that one spammer annoies each day

you can go to jail for, "annoies"(ing) people? WOW then 99% of fairfax underground posters would be locked up!

Nine years for a non-violent crime is pretty fuckin excessive for a first offense. And it's not like individual people lost significant amounts of money due to his actions. I hate spam, and I hate this guy. But 9 years of our tax money to "rehabilitate" a dude to "stop sending bulk email", that's misguided. I bet a solid year in the slammer would change this guy's ways.

Fuckin' sendin' email, like it's the biggest problem we got here.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fuckin' sendin' email, like it's the biggest
> problem we got here.

so i guess we should ignore all the problems that arent monumental?


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

so i guess we should ignore all the problems that arent monumental?

Not at all Gravis. This asswipe spammer deserves a permanent felony record, several years of probation, a 5-6 figure fine, and a year in jail followed by parole. Getting sent up the river for sending alot of annoying emails, for 9 years is a little crazy. We're not a police state. Save the nine year sentences for the machete wielding fucks and the bank robbers/muggers.

Hitting them financially is the way to hurt these guys. Corporations are legally people so they should be convicted and fined out of existence. And yes, 1 year felony convictions for those in charge.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/08/2006 11:18PM by mad max, JD.

financially is the way to hurt these guys.

I couldn't agree more. Hit those businesses as hard as possible.

Student loans are not dischargeable with bankruptcy, legal fines for corporations shouldn't be either. I should be a judge.

I should be a judge.

Fuck the courts, you should run for Senate.

Why fight with 99 other jerks to make a law when i can do it with a stroke of a pen(yeah, computers now)? If one of you a-holes ever becomes president, I'll expect my appointment. Federal circuit would be perfect, but I could deal with E.D. Va.

Dude, sounds like a good night for a kegger and drunken coup

AOL mail servers are located in Virginia, so the crime took place in Virginia.

PATRICK MICHAEL JOST of falls church is a SPAMMER

The anti-spam law he was tried under was declared unconstitutional by the VA Supremes in 2008, and his conviction was overturned.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9401EED61338F930A2575AC0A96E9C8B63

Don't know where he is now. Probably posting on FU.

This is the most absurd story. Why have I never heard of this? It is absolutely asinine to think that he would have spent one single day in jail. I dont know about the numbers (1 million in a day?) that seems like an extremely large number of addresses to need, Every 10 days, you would need an email address for 10% of the population of the country. I suppose it is possible but I doubt that there are more than a few people with lists of that magnitude compiled.

It all but enrages me that they would take a mans civil liberties for conducting what ammounts to a very motivated advertising campaign. They should be locking up the marketing executives at progressive and all of the big insurance companies. My lord, they spend a metric fucking ton on commercials.

Mr Clean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PATRICK MICHAEL JOST of falls church is a SPAMMER

PATRICK MICHAEL JOST OF 302O FREDSON PLACE FALLS CHURCH IS A SPAMMER

Mr Clean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PATRICK MICHAEL JOST of falls church is a SPAMMER

What happened to Jeremy Jaynes, the spammer in question?

Why can't I find anything on Google about his life for the last 3-odd years??

Did he change his name?

Anywho, dig the VA Supreme Court's somewhat unexpected but surprisingly robust support of freedom of speech in the context of SPAM, which they compare, somewhat mind-boggingly, to the Federalist Papers:

The United States Supreme Court recently reviewed the First Amendment overbreadth doctrine in United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 1830 (2008).

The Court noted

(i)n order to maintain an appropriate balance, we have vigorously enforced the requirement that a statute’s overbreadth be substantial, not only in an absolute sense, but also relative to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep....

(I)t is impossible to determine whether a statute reaches too far without first knowing what the statute covers.
553 U.S. at ___, 128 S.Ct. at 1838.

Applying that inquiry under Williams in this case is relatively straightforward as Code § 18.2-152.3:1 would prohibit all bulk e-mail containing anonymous political, religious, or other expressive speech.

For example, were the Federalist Papers just being published today via e-mail, that transmission by Publius would violate the statute. [ Comment: Is this a legitimate comparison? Weren't the Federalist Papers sold via serialization in newspapers? Under the technology available at the time, for the Federalist Papers to be analogous to spam, they would have to have been dumped for free on people's doorsteps, in multiple copies, day after day, week after week. This comparison to the Federalist Papers is RIDICULOUS and indeed "fanciful" in my opinion. Despite the lame analogy, however, and regardless of the general noxiousness of spam, the court is correct to err on the side of free speech rather than its suppression, amirite? ]color>

Such an expansive scope of unconstitutional coverage is not what the Court in Williams referenced “as the tendency of our overbreadth doctrine to summon forth an endless stream of fanciful hypotheticals.” 553 U.S. at ___, 128 S.Ct. at 1843.

We thus reject the Commonwealth’s argument that Jaynes’ facial challenge to Code § 18.2-152.3:1 must fail because the statute is not “substantially overbroad.”

. . . .

For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the circuit court properly had jurisdiction over Jaynes. We also hold that Jaynes has standing to raise a First Amendment overbreadth claim as to Code § 18.2-152.3:1.

That statute is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Accordingly, we will reverse the judgment of the [Virginia] Court of Appeals and vacate Jaynes’ convictions of violations of Code § 18.2-152.3:1.

Reversed and final judgment.

http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opnscvwp/1062388.pdf

Mr Clean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PATRICK MICHAEL JOST OF 302O FREDSON PLACE FALLS
> CHURCH IS A SPAMMER


http://www.rada-llc.com

Mr Clean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr Clean Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > PATRICK MICHAEL JOST OF 302O FREDSON PLACE
> FALLS
> > CHURCH IS A SPAMMER
>
>
> http://www.rada-llc.com

Mr Clean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr Clean Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mr Clean Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > PATRICK MICHAEL JOST OF 302O FREDSON PLACE
> > FALLS
> > > CHURCH IS A SPAMMER
> >
> >
> > http://www.rada-llc.com