CIS Internet Services, a Clinton, Iowa-based Internet service provider, has been awarded $11.2 billion in a court judgment against a Florida man who sent millions of unsolicited pieces of commercial e-mail.
Robert W. Kramer, III, the owner and operator of CIS Internet Services, filed a lawsuit against Miami, Florida-based James McCalla, alleging that over 280 million illegal spam e-mails were sent to CIS e-mail accounts.
The spam e-mails allegedly advertised mortgages, debt-consolidation services, and pornographic and gambling Web sites.
The judgment comes nearly two years after Kramer first filed his lawsuit against McCalla and other alleged spammers. In addition to slapping the spammer with a record fine, the judgment issued by U.S. District Judge Charles R. Wolle on December 23, 2005, prohibits McCalla from accessing the Internet for three years.
Last year, another lawsuit by Kramer resulted in a judgment imposing a fine of $1 billion against three other spammers. "This latest judgment is the largest judgment against a spammer, eclipsing Kramer's previous combined judgment by an order of magnitude," Kramer wrote in a statement issued to the press.
"The amount that this spammer (McCalla) has been fined is quite staggering, and is bound to raise some eyebrows," said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at security firm Sophos. "The size of the fine was determined on the basis of $10 per spam e-mail, but it's a certainty that the fine will never actually be paid."
However, Kramer said he intends to take the spammers for every penny they have. "I will seek the economic equivalent of the death penalty," he said in a telephone call. "Otherwise, it would have been crazy to have spent all this money to get a judgment."
Clear Message
Cluley said that successful convictions like the fine against McCalla help send a clear message to other spammers that spamming will not be tolerated. "For that reason, this sentence should be welcomed," he said.
"However, the unfortunate truth is that spam is a lucrative global business, driven by criminal intent, and well beyond the ability of the lawmakers to control," he noted. "Individuals and corporations who do not take proactive measures to protect themselves from the onslaught are certain to fall victim to the detrimental effects of spam in one form or another."
If no one bought goods sold via spam, the problem of unsolicited commercial e-mail would disappear overnight, Cluley argued.
