Comments on: Spammer Sues Anti-Spammer - Cruise.com versus Mumma http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/spammer-sues-anti-spammer-cruisecom-versus-mumma/ Internet Safety, Windows Updates, Internet News, and More Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:26:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Cza Cza LaBoom http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/spammer-sues-anti-spammer-cruisecom-versus-mumma/#comment-2581 Cza Cza LaBoom Tue, 04 Oct 2005 03:34:26 +0000 /?p=451#comment-2581 Talk about adding insult to injury. First Cruise.com, a/k/a Omega World Travel, and run by John Lawless, spams the bejeezus out of anti-spammer Mark Mumma of Oklahoma. Mumma asks Cruise.com to stop spamming him. No relief. He asks them again to stop spamming him. The spam keeps coming. Eventually Mumma sends Cruise.com, Omega World Travel, and John Lawless a registered demand letter, indicating that Cruise.com has violated Federal and Oklahoma anti-spam statutes, and that he is prepared to file a lawsuit against Cruise.com for $150,000, but will settle for “a measly $6,250″. More spam. He also features them, and their likeness and logo, on his SueASpammer.com website. Omega World Travel/Cruise.com/Lawless send yet more spam. And, oh yes, a $3.8million lawsuit for defamation and trademark infringement. Mumma is now in the process of filing a motion to dismiss, based on “the blatant lack of personal jurisdiction the US Court’s Eastern District of VA has over my company or me personally.� It’s unclear why Mumma believed that his Oklahoma court would have jurisdiction over Cruise.com, Omega World Travel, or John Lawless (all, what a surprise, Florida entities), but that a U.S. Federal court would not have jurisdiction over him. Of course, on both sides the actions giving rise to legal claims are Internet-based, so hey, all bets as to jurisdictional issues - or any issues - are off. Ok, it might be that, I do not know how to read or is the above article confusing! Why is the party asking for anti-spam justice being sued? Is it because, Omega Travel holds federal contract and they can not be touch for whoring with the Feds or because it was a lied… I am lost! Talk about adding insult to injury. First Cruise.com, a/k/a Omega World Travel, and run by John Lawless, spams the bejeezus out of anti-spammer Mark Mumma of Oklahoma. Mumma asks Cruise.com to stop spamming him. No relief. He asks them again to stop spamming him. The spam keeps coming.

Eventually Mumma sends Cruise.com, Omega World Travel, and John Lawless a registered demand letter, indicating that Cruise.com has violated Federal and Oklahoma anti-spam statutes, and that he is prepared to file a lawsuit against Cruise.com for $150,000, but will settle for “a measly $6,250″.

More spam.

He also features them, and their likeness and logo, on his SueASpammer.com website.

Omega World Travel/Cruise.com/Lawless send yet more spam. And, oh yes, a $3.8million lawsuit for defamation and trademark infringement.

Mumma is now in the process of filing a motion to dismiss, based on “the blatant lack of personal jurisdiction the US Court’s Eastern District of VA has over my company or me personally.� It’s unclear why Mumma believed that his Oklahoma court would have jurisdiction over Cruise.com, Omega World Travel, or John Lawless (all, what a surprise, Florida entities), but that a U.S. Federal court would not have jurisdiction over him. Of course, on both sides the actions giving rise to legal claims are Internet-based, so hey, all bets as to jurisdictional issues - or any issues - are off.

Ok, it might be that, I do not know how to read or is the above article confusing! Why is the party asking for anti-spam justice being sued? Is it because, Omega Travel holds federal contract and they can not be touch for whoring with the Feds or because it was a lied… I am lost!

]]> By: ZacOz http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/spammer-sues-anti-spammer-cruisecom-versus-mumma/#comment-1351 ZacOz Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:30:18 +0000 /?p=451#comment-1351 Basically it will probably all come down to who bails out of spiralling legal bills first. Which is why spammers will continue to ignore spam laws and bank on the high costs of civil action protecting them. Basically it will probably all come down to who bails out of spiralling legal bills first. Which is why spammers will continue to ignore spam laws and bank on the high costs of civil action protecting them.

]]>