TrustE Launches Trusted Spammer Program

Silverhammer writes: "InfoWorld is reporting that such luminaries as TRUSTe, ePrivacy Group, MSN, and DoubleClick are getting together to develop a "trusted senders" program to certify "commercial email" and "elevate" it above ISPs' and end users' spam filters. Why, you ask? Because they believe it's actually our fear of fraud that's hurting their response rates. Apparently all that stuff about invasion of privacy and theft of resources is just a big misunderstanding..." The Infoworld story linked above has the best information about this seal program, but CNet has another story including a quote forecasting 1400 pieces of spam per person per day in five years. Update: 01/31 17:02 GMT by M : The FTC is announcing a crackdown on spam.

Comments

Makes it easy to filter now

[Phoex]

All we have to do is filter any e-mail with this "Trusted Sender" Seal and cut them out.

Truste is Irrelevant

[Ars-Fartsica]

This group could have taken a commanding role in privacy and users rights issues long ago, but instead it simply turned out to be a corporate mouthpiece.

Take a look at what it means for a site to be "Truste compliant" and you'll quickly see how worthless Truste is. To summarise - they don't care what your policy is as long as you state it publically. Well golly, I feel better already.

Re:Truste is Irrelevant

[CaptainSuperBoy]

This is completely correct. TrustE will certify that you have a privacy policy, that's about it. When RealNetworks spammed their users repeatedly, anti-spam groups reported to TrustE that Real was violating their own privacy policy. TrustE should have revoked Real's membership, but they did nothing.

Also, what does spam have to do with privacy? TrustE mostly concerns themselves with how companies use your information - but spammers don't have any information about you, only an e-mail address they harvested or bought!

Oxymoron

[Restil]

"Trusted Spammer" is an oxymoron.

The only spammer I would trust is a spammer that would never send me spam because I never intentionally informed said spammer than I wanted to receive email from him, in which case, it wouldn't be spam.

Damn... I think I just logically determined that spammers serve no useful purpose in this world.

What do you think?

-Restil

Re:Trusted Spam?

[Frater 219]

Question how can any spam be trusted?

How can any thief be trusted? How can any vandal be trusted?

Spam is theft. Never forget that. Sending email to someone requires the use of resources which that person legitimately owns or controls, and you do not. Therefore, if you are habitually sending email to people who do not want it, you are appropriating resources to which you have no right. That's stealing.

It doesn't matter if the commercial offers made in a spam message are themselves legitimate or if they are fraudulent. A legitimate advertisement wrapped around a brick and thrown through my window is just as offensive to my rights as a fraudulent advertisement delivered in the same way.

Opposing spam is not about opposing commerce, or "commercialization of the Net", or the free market. It is about defending private property from trespass and theft -- and defending a useful service (the email facility) from its ruination. For if spamming is "legitimized" by crooks such as these, the email facility as we know it is not long for this world.

Telemarketer tarpit.

[Restil]

This is an idea I'm working on to help reduce telemarking calls.

I'm envisioning a simple device that sits on your phone line. When a telemarketer calls you, as soon as you realize its a telemarketer, you activate the unit and hang up. The device takes
over after that.

While the telemarketer is talking, the device will play back every few seconds any of about 20 different small murmers "hmmm" "uh huh" "yeah" "interesting" etc. Then when the telemarketer stops talking, the device will detect the drop in audio and will play back one of several segue phrases "That sounds very interesting, could you tell me more" "Are you offering any other services?" "How much does all of this cost?" "Could you go over all that again so I can take notes?" "I've been interested in this very thing, but I need to make sure its safe. Could you tell me all the safety standards you stand to?" "Could you hold on for a couple minutes, I have something on the stove. DON'T LEAVE!" And so on.

Telemarketers are mostly script readers. The idea will to be to ask vague questions that will cause them to find the most appropriate script. And just keep them going for a LONG time. When the phone line finally goes dead, the device will hang up automatically. Maybe keep track of the longest call. Maybe record them too. The possibilities are endless!

This device probably wouldn't cost more than $20 to manufacture and is the perfect way to keep telemarketers busy when they call you at dinner. Not only will you be able to eat with a smug grin on your face, any other incoming calls will be blocked by the lively conversation. You'll be assured of a meal in peace.

-Restil