I'm not saying this to bash you in particular, but did you all actually read the article referenced? It does say that the penalty might be up to 20 years, but that'd be an application in 4 instances of a 1 to 5 year penalty.

Presumably if this guy spammed a little, he will end up at the lower end of the spectrum, and if some other guy has spammed a lot, he might have more than 4 instances. This should scale just fine for any spammer.

Newspapers write about "20 years" in big letters, but that's just the maximum penalty. You'll have to trust the courts to pick a proper sentence for each particular offence. You do trust the law, right?

If you'd have read a bit further, you'd see that you are correct, and that I hadn't read the article... :blush:

But even if I based my ideas on different punishment on the wrong basis (that you could get 20 years in prison for spamming), they still stand...

Sort of a side note, Bush signed the anti spam law today. all the dirty spammers will burn, burn, bur... sorry having a moment there. i will post an article in the news section as this thread seems to be getting a bit long.