Cornucopia of Spam

Eric Savage writes "The IETF, through IRTF, has formed an Anti-Spam Research Group. If there is any hope for a technical solution the problem, it appears the first significant step has been taken. More info here in itworld and here in ComputerWorld." Three more exciting spam related posts inside, including news from the Nevada legislature regarding spam, Arkansas dislike of the meaty email and "when students go bad" torklugnutz writes "The NV state assembly just voted 41-0 in favor of a bill which allows spam recipients to collect up to $500 per piece of spam. The new law also requires ADV to be added to the subject line so that recipients can more easilly identify unwanted ads. In addition, spoofing of sender's email address or having an invalid return address is made illegal. The old law imposed a $10 fine on spammers, but required prosecuters to collect it. This law will, more than likely, increase my chances of reading the spam I get so that I can try to cash in. So, maybe I CAN make an incredible amount of money from this "Amazing Offer""

And in Arkansas: A.G. Russell writes "With House Bill 1008, Subtitled "Unsolicited Commercial and Sexually Explicit Electronic Mail Fair Practices Act." Arkansas looks to join other states that have criminal and cival legislation in place to deal with spam. Can we help them craft this?"

And from academia: mansemat writes "Seems spammers are using a new tactic these days by paying students to send spam over univeristy networks. This particular student will be disciplined by losing his computing privileges, and being educated on the policy he violated. One can only hope the education includes being subscribed to every pr0n, male enhancement, mortage, etc. spam on the planet." Should have booted the miscreant.

Comments

Arkansas emphatic

[ratbag]

Arkansas obviously believe that if you

• underline something it MUST be obeyed

Pay me for spam?

[Nevrar]

While I would definitely be keen on being paid $500 per "Enlarge your member" emails received, I somehow doubt the effectiveness of legislation to stop spam...

Instead of all this,

[Omkar]

I recommend spammers be designated cyberterrorists. For spammers in uncooperative totalitarian countries, replies with randomly generated subversive messages should be mandated by law.

I can see the e-mails now

[snitty]

IMPORTANT! READ NOW!

Please sign this bill from your state assembly! I did it and I got my wish! If you don't want to get this e-mail from the state anymore click the sucker link at the bottom!

Loophole alert

[paiute]

Political speech is exempted. Advertising of the "call X and tell him that you are against his position on Y" is protected free speech. So expect emails of the sort: "Call Senator McGuffy and tell him that his penis can be enlarged in only three weeks!"

Re:Techinical solution

[frankie]

Think of spammers like an infection. How does your body deal with it?

An interesting proposal. Spews and SBL are probably Leukocytes. SpamCop users might be APCs. But I don't see any Macrophages in our virtual immune system. That must be why spam is so rampant -- we need activists to go eat the spammers! Volunteers, anyone?

Re:Techinical solution

[Raul654]

Well when your in the buisness of morgaging out Lolitas for the purposes of rape enlargement, I should think it would

Re:It'll never work...

[pclminion]

Also, what's stopping a Texan from spamming people in Arkansas? You can't enforce Arkansas laws in Texas. It doesn't work that way.

Maybe you can't enforce Arkansas law in Texas, but the Texans can sure enforce their law in Arkansas. All it takes is a shotgun and a pickup truck.