The growing battle against junk email (spam) has brought together arch-rivals Microsoft, AOL and Yahoo.

At a three-day Federal Trade Commission forum on spam held last week in the United States (US), everyone agreed that one of the biggest difficulties facing the industry would be tracking down the culprits. But there is widespread dissent over who the culprits are and what actually constitutes spam.

AOL representatives argue that the majority comes from 150-200 'master spammers' whose technical expertise enables them to hide behind false addresses and identities on the web. The big players are supporting tough new legislation, dubbed the 'Can Spam Act' which has recently started its journey through the senate, as well as better filtering systems.
However others argue that spam equals any unwanted email, even if it clearly states where it comes from and what its purpose is.

According to Saul Hansell in NYTimes.com: "Fighting these lesser offenders requires different tactics meant to force marginal players into legitimacy... there are some who argue that an email box is inherently more private than a postal mailbox and that nearly any marketing pitch that has not been clearly requested by the recipient should be banned.

"This view, as popular among some of the internet elite as it is detested by the marketing industry, has few backers in Congress or state legislatures. But it has led some long-time anti-spam activists to oppose legislation like the Can Spam Act because it would have the effect of legitimising some unsolicited email. The Can Spam Act, for example, would permit a company to send email to someone with whom it has no previous relationship as long as it does the following: clearly identify itself and what the message is; say what it is an advertisement for; and offer recipients a method to say they do not want any more offers from that sender."

The Direct Marketing Association, which represents companies that send email, argues that a minority are ruining things for the majority. They argue that if billboard posters and pop-up adverts are legal, companies should also be allowed to advertise their services via email.

In the UK, New Media Age editor Mike Nutley argues: "Technological solutions have simply led to an arms race between the spammers and the ISPs; each security measure that is introduced simply providing a challenge for the spammers to overcome. This technological approach forms the basis of the latest development, the suggestion by AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo! that more powerful spam filters are being developed, but that consumers will have to pay for them. This, they hastily explained, would not mean the end of free email services such as Hotmail, just that users would have to pay for a premium, low-spam product.

"Such a strategy might not be unwelcome in the internet industry, not just because of its benefits for email providers and marketers, but also because it would remove one more free service from the Web and further change the mindset that things on the internet are free. But any relief provided from spam is likely to be only temporary, lasting only until ways around the filtering technology are found. In this respect spam is exactly the same as many other problems bedeviling the internet that centre around security. Companies and organisations addressing hacking and piracy face similar arms race issues while lobbying to change the laws.

"AOL complains that taking legal action in the UK would be difficult, due to the absence of appropriate laws. And even though such laws are due to come into force later this year, they will only apply within the EU, leaving spammers the simple option of relocating their servers and carrying on."

Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/05/technology/05SPAM.html
http://www.wiredsussex.com/News/0305/nutleyspam.html
http://www.europemedia.net/shownews.asp?ArticleID=16118
http://www.europemedia.net/shownews.asp?ArticleID=16103

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).