According to the US Justice Department, Jennifer Clason, 32,
Jeffrey Kilbride, 39 and James Schaffer, 39, have each been charged
with one count of criminal conspiracy and two counts of fraud and
related activity in connection with the sending of unsolicited
email under the CAN-SPAM Act.
The CAN-SPAM Act, which came into force on 1st January 2004,
established a framework of administrative, civil, and criminal
tools to tackle unsolicited commercial email.
It provides for a national Do-Not-Spam list; requires that spam
sent to consumers includes a means of opting-out of the mailing
list used by the sender; bans the sending of fraudulent emails or
unmarked sexually oriented emails, and provides for civil and
criminal sanctions for those spammers who breach the rules.
The penalties may amount to fines of $6 million and five years
in prison in the most severe cases.
In this case, the Justice Department alleges that the spam was
sent in ways that made it difficult for ISPs and recipients to
identify or respond to the senders – either by sending the spam
from Internet Protocol addresses registered in the Netherlands and
domain names registered in Mauritius, falsifying the “From:” line
in the emails, or installing the computers and equipment used in
sending the emails in the Netherlands and remotely controlling them
from the US.
In addition, according to the indictment, the spam sent by the
defendants contained graphic pornographic images embedded in the
emails, while some emails advertised porn sites in order to earn
the defendants’ commission for directing internet traffic
there.
The indictment therefore charges Kilbride and Schaffer with two
counts of interstate transportation of obscene material using an
interactive computer service and two counts of interstate
transportation of obscene material for the purpose of sale or
distribution.
The indictment also alleges that Kilbride and Schaffer created
two overseas companies to hide their activities and used overseas
bank accounts in Mauritius and the Isle of Man for the purpose of
laundering and distributing the proceeds of the spamming
operation.
Finally, Schaffer has been charged with one count of operating
three pornographic internet websites without including statements
describing the location of identification and other records for the
performers portrayed in the websites, as is required by federal
law.
According to the Justice Department, the defendants’ spamming
operation resulted in more than 600,000 user complaints to America
Online between 30th January and 9th June 2004. Estimates as to the
actual number of users who received the unsolicited emails run in
the tens of millions, it says.
The Department also reveals that the operation was listed as one
of the 200 largest spaming operations in the world by Spamhaus, an
international non-profit organisation which collects information
and evidence on the worst spammers worldwide.
If convicted, Kilbride and Schaffer each face a maximum sentence
of 20 years in prison on the money laundering charge, and five
years in prison on the obscenity charges. All three defendants face
a maximum sentence of five years in prison on each of the spamming
and criminal conspiracy charges, while Schaffer also faces a
maximum sentence of two years in prison on the improper
pornographic record keeping charge.
A fourth defendant, Andrew Ellifson, 31, pleaded guilty in
February to one count of spamming under the CAN-SPAM Act and one
count of criminal conspiracy, marking the first federal conviction
related to the transmission of obscene spam e-mails.
According to the indictment, Ellifson assisted in the creation,
operation, and management of the computer network used to transmit
the spam sent by the operation. He faces a maximum penalty of five
years in prison for each of the spamming and criminal conspiracy
offences.
“The internet is both a blessing and a curse,” said US Attorney
Paul Charlton of the District of Arizona. “Unwanted e-mail and
pornography in our houses represents a kind of home invasion.
Children are especially vulnerable to this kind of act and we will
vigorously pursue those who put children at risk in this way.”
