View Full Version : AOL Sues CEN
candidpublishinginc
01-05-2001, 01:56 PM
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-4361564.html?tag=st.ne.ron.lthd.ni
Talk about lame. AOL is suing CEN for spamming because some dumb kids signed up for CEN webmaster accounts and spamming the shit out of their service. AOL claims that CEN conspired with these stupid kids. BULLSHIT! AOL is so fucking dumb, most CEN's profits come from legit traffic not spam.
see this post http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002358.html
QuietMike
01-05-2001, 05:02 PM
candid, you might be wrong on this one. I used to spam and still know a lot of people that still do. Almost all webmaster programs say "Do not spam!", but if you email them and tell them that you want to spam aol, they are almost always interested. Some companies I have done it for have given me special rates, and free webspace on their servers to spam aol on. The reason they like aol, is the low flame rate and good conversion rate. They usually keep close in contact to tell you how bad the flame rate is to keep the heat down, but if they didn't... One of my friends had 20 computers, all spamming aol 24/7 with specially made programs (fully automatic, only crashed once in a while)! It is true that most of there income is probably through legit webmasters, but don't underestimate what you can do with some cheap hardware and a good programer. Those kids could of easily of been getting 10+ million emails a day through aol's mail filters (not to mention if they used phish, which aol would be upset over too).
sandman
01-05-2001, 05:29 PM
QuietMike i remeber when my buddies used to rock aol back in the 3.0 days http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif Now most of my buddies have moved to irc.
Your right im sure spamming software has gotten a lot better for AOL http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif
QuietMike
01-05-2001, 06:03 PM
I was back using 2.5 because that was the fastest that worked. Today all of the public spammers suck ass because aol keeps changing with the rate limits, mail lag..... But if you are the only one with the program, then they can't get a hold of it to fuck it up. Expecially if you can get a programmer to make a spammer without using the acctuall aol program. Instead have it do all of the commands. That would rock.
Only if we were back in the day, when there wasn't any limits on buddy invits, emails, chat room switching, ims......$$$$$$$$$$ http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif
Oh man Quietmike, you are so damn right. I remember being on 2.5 and culling names out of chat rooms by the 100's of thousands and just hitting start on that program and leaving it running. Those were things I wasnt proud of and Im glad I went legit.
Originally posted by QuietMike:
I was back using 2.5 because that was the fastest that worked. Today all of the public spammers suck ass because aol keeps changing with the rate limits, mail lag..... But if you are the only one with the program, then they can't get a hold of it to fuck it up. Expecially if you can get a programmer to make a spammer without using the acctuall aol program. Instead have it do all of the commands. That would rock.
Only if we were back in the day, when there wasn't any limits on buddy invits, emails, chat room switching, ims......$$$$$$$$$$ http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif
candidpublishinginc
01-05-2001, 08:05 PM
QuietMike, I seriously doubt that CEN allowed this. Maybe back before UUNET blocked them, but not now.
Oh and yeah I had friends that would have a bunch of computers spam AOL too. Still most of these kids didn't ask their sponsors permission. They would just signup an go. My friend would signup on a CEN account and spam away. When they canned his account, he would make another.
Still CEN never really officially allowed this, and AOL really can't prove it. If AOL didn't make it so easy to do, than no one would be doing it. No other ISP brings in so much spam.
All I'm trying to say is that AOL is really lame for suing CEN for spamming. AOL should change their chatroom setup if they want to can spammers. If they added an extra name for the chat room that wasn't an email address, it would solve the spamming problem.
QuietMike
01-05-2001, 09:08 PM
Personally I think aol can shove it up there ass, but even if they did make changes, people would still find a way to spam them because it is the biggest ISP with the most *NEW TO THE INTERNET THING* people. Giving spammers a big gold mine.
Also though, I think CEN did allow the spamming. The kids had to sign up to them and give them an address to send the check to and an email address for the password to their accounts. If they were spamming aol enough to get sued, CEN had to be getting a SHIT load of flames each day. All they had to do was check which acount and email the kids to stop. Saying that they never told them that they could spam doesn't really cut it because they did nothing to stop it and gladly accepted the traffic.
TwinTone
01-05-2001, 09:50 PM
Shit yeah.. I remember back in the day. AOL 2.5.. I had a mining proggie that would go in and mine 10,000 user names an hour and then put an @aol.com extention on them. Then I would just run a spammer proggie using about 10 open SMTP servers and hit them all in about an hour. I never got busted and would get about a 250:1 ratio signup.. that was when I was under 18 and into that shit. Not worth it anymore. But it used to work pretty slick!
Carneal
01-06-2001, 03:59 AM
i been around aol for awhile and spammed aol for several months before going legit. i created my own spammer and made some nice cash with it on aol. 100k newbies come to the internet everyday through aol. imagine the possibilitys now. not even half the worlds population is on the net yet. think about it http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif aol is gay
I used to do usnet spamming.... a few years ago it was good for niche stuff. If you can find smaller companies they sometimes will let you spam... but those seem to be the ones that rip you off too http://adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/frown.gif
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.