Spyware Sucks
“There is no magic fairy dust protecting Macs" – Dai Zovi, author of “The Mac Hacker’s Handbook"

FTC versus Innovative Marketing et al – developments re Sam Jain

July 30th 2009 in Uncategorized

Regular readers of this blog will know that Sam Jain filed a motion for protective order requiring deposition to proceed by written questions, a motion which was DENIED on 22 July 2009.

Sam Jain has now refused to be deposed, even refusing an offer from the FTC to be deposed by video-conference from a location of his choosing (an offer that was made by the FTC to allay any fears held by Jain that a deposition would lead to his arrest).

Jain has a history in the courts that is less than complimentary.  As has been mentioned on this blog (and elsewhere) before, Jain was sued by Symantec in 2004 for pirating Symantec’s computer security software. He evaded service during those proceedings, and basically ignored the whole thing until judgment was entered in default. Then he tried to have the default judgment overturned. As noted by the FTC in its latest motion, the Court at that time described Jain’s action as a “cynical and intentional manipulation of the[] proceedings”, and rejected the application.  I have tried to find out if Jain ever paid the default judgment in the Symantec case but have been unable to find out for sure, one way or the other.

Also, let’s not forget that Jain is a fugitive.  He had a bench warrant issued against him in the United States District Court for the Central District of California early this year – a warrant that remains in effect.

The FTC now seeks sanctions against Jain (that sanction being default judgment), and has filed a MOTION for Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 37(d).  Any responses must be filed by 17 August 2009.

3 comments to...
“FTC versus Innovative Marketing et al – developments re Sam Jain”


Thank you for your attention to this case. It’s very important.


The big question is – is Sam still alive ?

It would be a good idea to refuse service to stretch out the proceeding, if you were not alive to testify.

Sam Jain owns or is co-owner of many businesses in the USA, and many overseas. If the FTC really wanted the money, they could attach on of his businesses for the money for the court case.

However for some reason they have not done this. They have the information, and the phone numbers….. What were they thinking ?


There is more than one Sam Jain out there, John, and there has already been misinformation spread claiming that the Innovative Marketing Sam Jain is the same Sam Jain as owns other businesses, when in fact they are different people.

Innovative Marketing and Daniel Sundin continue to ignore proceedings and are unrepresented. Maurice D’Souza Maurice D’Souza’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (paper number 90) has been DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.     Sam Jain Sam has been busy, filing a motion for protective order requiring deposition […]

Previous Entry

  This investigation started after I read a report by a fellow member of the security community that his mother had called him downstairs "because her screen had been filled with warnings and download boxes whilst she was on Facebook’s ‘Owned" site’", […]

Next Entry