This, and the junk fax experiences, are perhaps why I'm starting to
think legislation, if not the answer, might at least be a powerful
tool.
I suspect that reduction in phone/fax spamming is a combination of
two factors: legislation imposing stiff penalties combined with
the investment and expense required to do phone or fax spamming on
a significant scale. The significant investment that is required
to do phone or fax spamming has two effects: it reduces the number
of potential phone/fax spammers (thus making them easier to identify)
and it means that they have real and identifiable assets that can
be targeted (and that they need to protect). Also, international
calling tarriffs tend to mean that the phone or fax spammer is in
the same country and legal jurisdiction as its targets.
With email spamming, significantly less investment is required and
the costs are not distance sensitive.
That's not to say that legislation could not be a useful part of a
solution, just that I don't think that legislation by itself would
significantly reduce the volume of email spam.
Keith