Gartman and McDowell sentenced to federal prison
Rape porn spammer Tom Gartman was sentenced on obscenity charges July 27, along with his brother-in-law former Houston cop Brent Alan McDowell.
Gartman first surfaced on my radar in 1998 when he was spamming usenet with advertisements for rape and torture porn videos. Alt.sexual.abuse.recovery was one of the newsgroups he spammed.
Gartman advertised a web site hosted by Psi.net which PSI allowed to operated unfettered until at least June-November 1998 when UDP discussions begain. At that time, PSI moved Gartman to another block of IP addresses but took no other action. Finally, in early November, on the eve of a full UDP, PSI began to remove spammers, including allegedly, Gartman. In late November of 1998, Gartman posted to usenet to brag that PSI had never so much as written him a letter asking him to stop, and were in fact asking him to come back.
In 1999, Gartman attempted to sue fellow spam-fighter David Ritz and threatened to sue me for interfering with his porn spam business.
Interestingly enough, in his letter to me Gartman wrote
In October, 2001, Qwest was forced to disconnect his Fort Worth provider, Nationwide.net/DFW.net, in order to get their attention to make them do something about Gartman.
Gartman first surfaced on my radar in 1998 when he was spamming usenet with advertisements for rape and torture porn videos. Alt.sexual.abuse.recovery was one of the newsgroups he spammed.
Gartman advertised a web site hosted by Psi.net which PSI allowed to operated unfettered until at least June-November 1998 when UDP discussions begain. At that time, PSI moved Gartman to another block of IP addresses but took no other action. Finally, in early November, on the eve of a full UDP, PSI began to remove spammers, including allegedly, Gartman. In late November of 1998, Gartman posted to usenet to brag that PSI had never so much as written him a letter asking him to stop, and were in fact asking him to come back.
In 1999, Gartman attempted to sue fellow spam-fighter David Ritz and threatened to sue me for interfering with his porn spam business.
Interestingly enough, in his letter to me Gartman wrote
Later it was learned that the porn he was selling had been stolen, so there was no way there could have been any model releases in his posession.I have model releases and copyrights to sell these tapes.
In October, 2001, Qwest was forced to disconnect his Fort Worth provider, Nationwide.net/DFW.net, in order to get their attention to make them do something about Gartman.
Labels: Ritz
4:18 PM |
permalink
3 Comments:
Dear Mr. Faulk,
Please review your facts.
1st- Mr. Gartman is going to prison for your freedom and you choose to support government control of what should be censored in your bedroom. If you think that this which hunt is justified YOU SIR are part of the thought police Mr. Faulk.
2nd- Mr. Gartman was ACQUITTED for the "rape" videos. He was convicted of shipping a nipple piercing video. This video contained no sex or bondage. I guess the Christian Texas jury was ok with fantasy rape.
3rd- Mr. Gartman did produce model releases to the court. The law suit filed against him was for only 2 movies out of 188. Please do not try to insinuate all of the movies were stolen. This exposes your hidden agenda and your inability to tell the truth.
4th- Posting in the open USENET was not illegal as he wasn't charged for that. It remains LEGAL to this day. I think you are misleading people to suggest that despite the BEST efforts of people like yourself the USENET is not 99% "spam".
Your writing is not responsible and has a bias media spin. Please tell the truth when writing and stop contributing to the lies. Shame on you.
1. Actually, I do have a problem with the use and abuse of obscenity laws, but the bottom line is that Gartman is a spammer and a criminal. Is it wrong to hang a murderer for horse theft, as the saying goes? Maybe, but I can live with the result.
And frankly, the image of Gartman as the defender or my or anybody else's freedom is laughable.
2. Just because he wasn't convicted of selling rape videos doesn't mean he wasn't selling them.
3. It's known that he stole at least *some* of the videos which he was reselling.
4. Spamming may be legal, but it's still despicable. Yes, I would have rather seen him go to jail for spamming instead of for selling porn, but I'll take what I can get.
And finally, of course my writing has a bias -- I hate spam and the people who do it.
Better check your facts Mr. Faulk. Mr. Gartman's brother in law was just release with his convition vacated by the appeals court. Will Mr. Gartman be next? Those who believe in free speech hope his conviction will be vacated as well.
Post a Comment
<< Home