It's fairly well known that spammers use "creative spelling", first in an attempt to get past simple word-based filters (e.g. "v1agra" and the like), later to get around Bayesian methods.
But I'm wondering what that does to boilerplate text that has to be included, presumably by law, such as in pump-and-dump scams or other securities stuff.
I just got spam that said in its last paragraph:
The info in this letter may contain "forward 1ook1ng sttatmentts" in the meaning of section Twennty Sevven A of the seccuririties Act of year 1933 and ssecction 21-B of the sekkurities exxchange Act of Nineteeeen Thirrrty Four. Our statements that imply or involve discussions with relation to proclumations, marks, predictions, be1iefs, strategy, predictions, mark, belief or forward actions or effort are not accounts of historrica1 fact and may be "forward llooooking statments" Be told that nothing within this e-mail will constitute a promise or an offer to aquistion or sell any security named heirin. This letter is neither a official investing advisor nor affilliated with any dealer or dealer. This email is not affiliated with the featured firm. This advertisment was created and distributed by an unnconnected third parrty. This flyer was paid 7,500 bucks to suggest and advertise these conclutions through internet channels . All announcements made are our express assumptions on1y and should be treated as such. We could hold, invest in and deal in any sekkurities featured at any time. This report includes "forrwarrrd 1ooking statments" in the object of The Priivate seccurrriiittiess 1itigati0n Reff0rmm Act of Nineteen-Ninety-Five. Please do your own due dlligence before innvvessttiinngg for any proffiled company. You may potentially lose your initial investment when invesstingg.
I wonder whether that satisfies the demands of the law? Or must it really refer to "forward-looking statements" and not to "sttatmentts" or "statments"? And I doubt that there's any "sekkurities exxchange Act of Nineteeeen Thirrrty Four".