[Mimedefang] Filtering idea for stock pump&dumps

[WBrown at e1b.org]

Ben Kamen wrote on 07/02/2007 01:30:29 PM:

> That's a good point. If the company whose stock is being pumped could be 
held
> liable for the SPAM. Doesn't the CAN-SPAM (in the US anyway) cover for 
that?
> 
> The spammer isn't just guilty, the company represented in the spam is 
> guilty of spamming too.

That not always the case.  See 
http://www.kiplinger.com/columns/picks/archive/2007/pick0601.htm

The one who wins is the scammer that bought alot of the stock up front, 
for cheap, and is hyping it so the price goes up and he can unload at a 
profit.  In the long run, the company's stock price is back where normal 
market forces would have it.

> I realize the next question is: where is the company based and what 
> are the laws 
> there, but the exchanges holding the company liable is a great 
idea.There's a 
> place where present laws could possibly apply a little pressure.

Without tying the spam to the company, that would be rather unrealistic. 
For that matter, you would need to be able to prove that any large trader 
in a stock was responsible for the pump and dump spam.  Not likely given 
the state of the art in spam's traceability.