Note: This column represents the opinions
of the writer and as such, is not purported as fact|
It was a good idea really -- pass a law that would make spam illegal
and by doing so, help to ease the burden of hundreds of millions of
Net users whose mailboxes are regularly filled with solicitations for
penis enlargement products and cheap loans.
Unfortunately, as is so often the case, it appears that US politicians
either didn't really understand the problem or were simply swayed
by lobbyists with big fat wallets.
The result -- a law which, according to some analysts, actually legitimises
spam and makes the sending of such dross less likely to land the
spammer in hot water because, being issued by the federal government,
it over-rides the tougher legislation some states have already passed.
Let's take a quick look at where the US legislators went wrong and
hope that our own government -- if it ever gets around to dealing
with the problem, can learn from those mistakes.
The Aardvark PC-Based Digital
Entertainment Centre Project
Yes, at last, this feature
has been updated again! (31 Mar 2003)
Firstly, this is basically an opt-out law. That means spammers can send
you email (subject to a few basic caveats) so long as they offer you the
right to opt-out of future mailings.
Unfortunately, opting out of a spam sent to promote one company won't
mean you're opted out of other spams sent to promote other companies or even
different products sold by the same company.
So, if there are 1,001 companies selling herbal viagra, you'll have to opt
out 1,001 times. If those 1,001 companies actually sell 10 different products
then you're already up to 10,010 opt-outs required!
But wait, it gets worse!
Since the opt-out process is not clearly defined by the law, there's no reason
why a spammer can't direct you to their website to opt-out.
Now think of the money to be made if you set up a page with a thousand
and one porno-banners -- you know, the type that pay affiliates a few cents per
impression or click-through. The opt-out process could earn a savvy spammer
hundreds, or even thousands of dollars in commissions!
Suddenly a new business model is born -- people spamming stuff that they know
nobody will buy -- simply so they'll opt out and, at the same time, view
enough ads to nicely fill up the spammer's bank account.
Let's see -- send out a million emails, expect 100,000 opt-outs. Each opt-out
visitor to the website generates 10 ad-banner impressions at $0.05 each ---
hey, that's a cool $50,000 per spam-run! Sure beats flogging herbal viagra
Another part of the law seeks to make it easier for us to cope with spam
and requires all spam to have some kind of identifier in the subject line
so that it can be more easily filtered out by those who don't want to
Yes, this is a laudable suggestion (although not so laudable as introducing
measures that might mean unwanted spams are never sent in the first place) but
there's no strict definition of how such emails should be identified.
The most sensible would be to use a tag such as [ADV] or [SPAM] in the
subject -- however, since there's nothing defined, spammers could use
almost anything and claim it was an indicator that the message was spam.
Hell, a lot of the spam I get now is already identifiable to humans because
it contains a series of random characters in the subject line -- but try
to get a computer to recongise that as a spam marker and you'll be wasting
a lot of CPU time.
Another seemingly sensible clause is the one that prohibits spidering websites
to collect email addresses -- but how are you going to enforce this?
There's just no way to prove that a spammer got your email address from spidering
Even if you set up a webpage with addresses that are only ever used on that
page -- there's still no guarantee that some hapless websurfer hasn't mentioned
that address to others as part of a conversation on a mailing list somewhere.
No, I'm sorry but the US legislators have simply proven that they're totally
incompetent when it comes to dealing with spam. Maybe our ITC Minister was
right when he implied that politicians simply aren't smart enough
to deal with the problem of spam.
However, speaking of spam solutions, David Harris (of Pegasus Mail) was
kind enough to respond to a previous column I wrote on the issue of spam.
I invite you to read his comments.
If any Aardvark readers want to share an opinion on today's column or
add something, you're invited to chip in and have your say in
The Aardvark Forums or, if you prefer,
you can contact me directly.
Yes, You Can Donate
Although the very kind folks at iHug continue to generously sponsor the
publication of Aardvark, the bills still exceed the income by a fairly
significant amount. It is with this in mind therefore that I'm once
again soliciting donations from anyone who feels they're getting some
value from this daily column and news index. I've gone the PayPal
way of accepting donations because the time involved in processing a bunch
of little credit-card billings sometimes exceeds the monetary value they
represent. Just click on the button to donate whatever you can afford.
NOTE: PayPal bills in US dollars so don't accidentally donate twice
what you were intending :-)
I'm always happy to hear from readers, whether they're delivering brickbats,
bouquets or news tip-offs.
If you'd like to contact me directly, please
this form. If you're happy for me to republish
your comments then please be sure and select For Publication.
Other media organisations seeking more information or republication rights
are also invited to contact me.
Add Aardvark To Your Own Website!
Got a moment? Want a little extra fresh content for your own website or
Just add a
to your pages and you can get
a free summary of Aardvark's daily commentary -- automatically updated
each and every week-day.
Aardvark also makes a summary of this daily column available via XML using
the RSS format. More details can be found
Contact me if you decide to use either of these feeds and
have any problems.
Want to link to this site? Check out Aardvark's
Did you tell someone else about Aardvark today? If not then do it