April 28, 2008 5:43 PM PDT

MySpace wins suit against 'spam king'

by Greg Sandoval
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 8 comments

Sanford Wallace, the so-called spam king, has often been accused of sending annoying messages that are typically ignored by the recipient. Perhaps he considered a series of court orders as something he could blow off.

If he did, he was wrong. MySpace has won a legal judgment against Wallace after he failed numerous times to turn over documents or even to show up for court, according to records obtained by CNET News.com.

In March of last year, MySpace filed suit against Wallace alleging he launched a phishing scam to fraudulently access MySpace profiles. Wallace was also accused of spamming thousands of MySpace users with unwanted advertisements and luring them to his Web sites.

To say Wallace, who could not be reached for comment, failed to mount a vigorous defense would be an understatement.

According to records filed on April 15 with U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, Wallace was ordered numerous times to turn over documents requested by MySpace and provide a deposition. A MySpace representative did not respond to an interview request.

Each time, MySpace waited and each time Wallace failed to comply. Early on, Wallace informed MySpace he was having a hard time finding legal counsel. Soon after, he said he couldn't comply because he was unaware of his court dates; he wasn't accepting mail or signing for packages and that's why he missed receiving notifications.

The court did not accept his reasons as a valid excuse, but continued to give him chances to comply. Nothing worked. After Wallace continuously failed to appear or respond to filing deadlines, the court issued a default judgment against Wallace.

"It is...a defendant's responsibility to respond to discovery, obey court orders, and avoid dilatory tactics," the court wrote in its order. "Taking all of the above factors into account, a default is appropriate. The court finds that Wallace's noncompliance is due to willfulness, fault, or bad faith...Wallace has had every opportunity to avoid the sanction of default. (He) has never provided any explanation for his behavior to the court."

By now, Wallace should know his way around a courtroom.

He has been sued by the Federal Trade Commission and companies such as AOL and Concentric Network Corp. In May 2006, Wallace and his company Smartbot.net were ordered by a federal court to turn over $4,089,500.

CNET News.com's Declan McCullagh contributed to this report.

Greg Sandoval covers media and digital entertainment for CNET News. He is a former reporter for The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. E-mail Greg, or follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/sandoCNET.
Recent posts from News Blog
Nvidia puts NForce chipset development on hold
Opera 10 browser is here
Neil Young Archives Blu-ray: Rip off?
Acronis revises survey results about backup habits
Acronis miscalculates data on users' bad backup habits
Flickr co-founder presses beta button
Comcast, Sony open retail store
Cox to try coaxing the Internet into submission
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
article
by pochi586 April 28, 2008 6:49 PM PDT
This article was very poorly edited. I expect more from google
front page items.
Reply to this comment
It is a blog, moron.
by groink_hi April 28, 2008 9:30 PM PDT
<EOM>
View reply
What good is a fine going to do?
by i_am_still_wade April 29, 2008 5:06 AM PDT
Okay, so he faces a huge fine. Will that stop him? Obviously not, because he already has a huge fine. If you want to stop spam and phising, take away their computers for years and/or put them in jail for years. Of course, China and Russia would still be a problem with this sort of stuff.
Reply to this comment
Fines
by Fireweaver April 29, 2008 11:27 AM PDT
Either he makes way more money than the cost of any fines by doing what he does or he just doesn't pay the fines (he seems to have a general contempt for court processes).

Jail time seems like the only reasonably action for this jerk, followed by probation that prohibits him from using computers- backed up with more jail time if he fails to comply.
huge fine? there is NO fine.
by an eccentric old geezer April 29, 2008 8:38 PM PDT
The court did not fine Wallace. The court issued a judgment against Wallace and in favor of MySpace. In other words, the court said that Wallace owes MySpace a certain amount of money. It is now up to MySpace to ask Wallace for that money. If Wallace explicitly and absolutely refuses to pay, then Myspace might be able to go back to court and ask for help enforcing the judgment, but only if Wallace has assets within the jurisdiction of the court. If Wallace doesn't explicitly refuse, but does more of the delaying/avoiding tacticts he has already shown himself expert at, then MySpace will have to convince the court that those tactics are the equivalent of an explicit refusal. To collect anything will take many many years and much more in court fees and attorney fees than they will ever collect.
I'm surprised that fool is still alive.
by Penguinisto April 29, 2008 7:24 AM PDT
...I would've sworn by now that some torqued-off mail sysadmin would've put his severed head on a pike by now.

/P
Reply to this comment
(8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About News Blog

Recent posts on technology, trends, and more.

Add this feed to your online news reader

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right