Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is the CAN-SPAM Act Working?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the i-highly-doubt-it dept.

DynaSoar writes "Lance Ulanoff of PCMag.com offer his opinion on the success, or lack thereof, of the CAN-SPAM Act. It doesn't appear to be working, though spammers have noticed, in that they try to make their spam look "legit". What might make a real difference, according to US Senator Conrad Burns, co-author of the bill, is international standards and enforcement."

4 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. It doesn't work, but... by StuWho · · Score: 5, Funny
    You can buy your solution here for only $29.99.

    Free viagra with every order

    --
    "If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car payments." Earl Wilson
  2. Well... by enderanjin · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's working in the meaning of the word that means "not doing anything."

    --
    Anything in parenthesis may (not) be ignored.
  3. No. by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Big unsurprise, no CAN-SPAM isn't working (assuming by "working" you mean reducing spam).

    A sample from my spam-bucket this morning (one of those logo design offers) :

    [snip]This mailing has been performed by Internet Marketing Solutions, 1719 University Avenue, Bronx NY 10453 USA,
    in compliance with the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003,
    approved and signed by the president of
    The United States of America on Dec. 16, 2003.
    For this reason, this email cannot be considered SPAM.

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  4. We won't know until November! by El · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the congresscritters that sponsored it get re-elected, than it worked! What... you mean is it working to eliminate spam? Do you really think that was it's purpose?

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney