Home / Blogs

MySpace Wins Big Against Richter?

Venkat Balasubramani

News rumblings are that MySpace is celebrating its $6mm award against Scott Richter and his entities. Click here [PDF] for a copy of the arbitrator's decision awarding the above amount.

Who Won?

On the other hand, Jacqui Cheng at ars technica notes that this could just amount to a "shrug-off" penalty for Richter. Similar sentiments at news.com here. While not entirely clear, the arbitrator seemed to reject some of MySpace's arguments on damages. I'm not sure what MySpace asked for (their complaint is probably not a reliable barometer) but the overall tone of the document written by the arbitrator is that Richter's companies shouldn't be held entirely liable for all damages to MySpace. (In fact, the arbitrator's decision takes pains to show both sides of Richter. Some would say this is typical in arbitration.)

MySpace's Efforts to Curtail In-Network Spam

And, the arbitrator seemed to feel that at one point, it didn't seem entirely clear anyway that sending unsolicited commercial (but accurate) messages through MySpace is illegal. And that's one aspect of this dispute that is interesting. MySpace sued to prevent the proliferation of commercial messaging within its network. It's unclear as to what extent MySpace was complaining about identity/obfuscation issues, and to what extent it was complaining about plain old unsolicited (but accurate messages). Whether sending accurate (but unsolicited) messages via a social network (in violation of the TOS) runs afoul of spam statutes is a gray area legally. This is not the first time a tribunal has passed on this issue in a case involving MySpace. (see previous cursory post)

TOS

The discussion in the award (and multiple mentions) about "no one ever reading" agreements was quite interesting. The subtext here is that MySpace seemed to largely rely on its TOS to show that the conduct was improper. The arbitrator's reaction seemed to be that "this isn't a great argument since everyone knows that no one reads terms of service docs anyway."

* * *

Finally, why was this dispute in arbitration? I would think MySpace would want to be in front of a jury who could inflict its passion and emotion on Richter? It seems like Richter moved to compel arbitration of the dispute. (I say this based on a quick look at the pacer docket.) If Richter moved to compel arbitration, and MySpace opposed this, going to arbitration alone was a victory for Richter.

By Venkat Balasubramani, Tech-Internet Lawyer at Focal PLLC. Follow Venkat on Twitter here.

Related topics: Cybercrime, Law, Spam

WEEKLY WRAP — Get CircleID's Weekly Summary Report by Email:

Comments

Arbitration etc - you might want to read the full docket, and get a bit more context, before posting Suresh Ramasubramanian  –  Jun 17, 2008 11:04 PM PDT

Finally, why was this dispute in arbitration? I would think MySpace would want to be in front of a jury who could inflict its passion and emotion on Richter? It seems like Richter moved to compel arbitration of the dispute. (I say this based on a quick look at the pacer docket.) If Richter moved to compel arbitration, and MySpace opposed this, going to arbitration alone was a victory for Richter.

It was in arbitration because Richter's attorney (and his father Steve Richter) came up with a clause in myspace's own user agreement which said arbitration was the preferred course.

The unsolicited email to myspace users was allegedly sent using phished accounts.

There were two parties to this case - with Russian / Eastern European names - who were served with permanent injunctions against phishing myspace or accessing it.

I would suggest that you start reading up on the filings - start at http://www.spamsuite.com/node/64

Not that it'd help though .. Richter's net worth is quite a lot more than the $6 million he's had to pay out in this case.

Text of the arbitration award (OCR'd) - interesting quote there Suresh Ramasubramanian  –  Jun 19, 2008 6:06 PM PDT

http://www.47-usc-230c2.org/2008-06-16-application-to-confirm-arbitration-award-OCR.pdf

particularly page 59 -

The need to award substantial damages is informed by Scott Richter's undisputed admission that he would be willing to pay one million dollars in litigation to make eight million dollars in profit.

Like I said, you need to do a lot, repeat lot more research.

To post comments, please login or create an account.

Related Blogs

Related News

Topics

Industry Updates – Sponsored Posts

Nominum Launches Comprehensive Suite of DNS-Based Security Solutions for Russian Service Providers

Nominum Sets New Record for Network Speed and Efficiency

Implementing a Cyber-Security Code of Conduct: Real-Life Lessons From Australia (Webinar)

DNS on Defense, DNS on Offense

Managing Outbound Spam: A New DNS-based Approach For Stopping Abuse (Webinar)

DDoS Attacks: Top Trends and Truths (Webinar)

MarkMonitor Fraud Intelligence Report, Q4 2011

Afilias Says "No" to SOPA

Q3 2011 Fraud Intelligence Report

The Spookiest DDoS Attacks in History

Minds + Machines to Announce New .brand gTLD Pricing at INTA

MarkMonitor Fraud Intelligence Report Released for Q2 2011

.CO Recognized Alongside Industry Giants in Trademark Industry Awards

Verisign and Coalition for ICANN Transparency, Inc. ("CFIT") Resolve Litigation

Businesses Lack Safeguards Against DDoS Attacks and DNS Failures, New Research Shows

MarkMonitor to Co-Chair International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition Spring Conference

Q1 2011 Fraud Intelligence Report

The Botnet-Counterfeit Drugs Connection

Q4 2010 Fraud Intelligence Report

AusRegistry Int. and Crowell & Moring Join Forces to Support New Top-Level Domain Applicants

Hot Topics

Verisign

Security

Sponsored by
Verisign
Afilias

DNS Security

Sponsored by
Afilias
Minds + Machines

Top-Level Domains

Sponsored by
Minds + Machines
dotMobi

Mobile

Sponsored by
dotMobi
Nominum

IPv6

Sponsored by
Nominum
Neustar UltraDNS

DNS

Sponsored by
Neustar UltraDNS