California Tries Spam Ban

Schlemphfer writes "Spammers have likely received their biggest setback yet, when California governor Gray Davis today signed a bill outlawing all unsolicited email sent to and from the state. Two things about this new law stand out: first, it puts the burden on senders to prove that they are sending solicited email. Second, it bans the entire practice of spamming, with no loopholes at all like allowing messages with ADV: in the subject. Keep in mind California has the world's fifth largest economy, and they are planning to enforce the law with fines amounting to $1000 per each piece of spam. This law could be ruinous to spammers when it takes effect January 1st."

Comments

Can we really enforce this?

[soren42]

The issue here is one of enforcement. What's to stop the dishonest from forging e-mail headers and the rest, to fine a company or individual out of existance?

There's a huge issue with the volume of spam potentially involved. In the case of "fraudulent spam", who's going to investigate it, since the burden is on the sender?

Not that I'm defending spammers, I think the law is a good idea, but if the execution is flawed, it could be short-lived.

Re:spam is ramping up

[ewhac]

Keep laws off the internet, use technology to fix technology.

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you; the fewer poorly drafted laws, the better. However, in this case, the problem (mostly) isn't technological, it's sociological.

There are a surprising number of very broken people out there who live their day-to-day lives with the maxim, "If it's not expressly illegal, it's perfectly okay." This idea is, of course, hogwash, since it completely ignores unwritten social custom, which often varies regionally.

On the local region known as The Internet, it is the custom that it is impermissible to send unsolicited bulk email, particularly when it is commercial in nature. However, it is not, per se, illegal. So these sociopaths clog the network because, hey, it must be perfectly okay.

Normally, the counterbalancing force to such aberrant behavior is social ostracism or, in extreme cases, pillorying (or equivalent). Spammers are aware of this, and go to great lengths to conceal their identities and escape accountability.

While technical measures can thwart these people, such as widespread deployment of SMTP AUTH, it does nothing to fix the underlying sociopathy. Spammers are already deploying viruses and worms to create a network of open SMTP relays. Who here honestly believes they won't escalate into stealing SMTP AUTH passwords? Hence, spam is mostly a social problem, needing a mostly social solution.

Schwab

Novel new approach to politics

[interstellar_donkey]

Simply amazing. The citizens want you gone, so you use your power to help pass laws that the citizen actually wants!

What's next?

Amnisty for p2p traders?
Caps on insurance hikes?
Regulation of energy to keep costs down?
Actually following the letter and intent of the weed decrimilization law?

As a Californian who isn't too fond of Davis, I have to snicker a bit. So the threat of being kicked out actually does make law makers push to enact laws that the average person wants, instead of pandering to corperations.

Gosh, the next thing you know, Davis will be the champion of providing a quality education.