ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Why Spam is a problem

2002-08-15 19:59:01


--On Thursday, 15 August, 2002 22:12 -0400 "Perry E. Metzger"
<perry(_at_)piermont(_dot_)com> wrote:

Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
at least in the US we're extremely unlikely to get
legislation that  imposes substantial civil and criminal
penalties, because the DMA wants  to make spam legitimate,
and they have more money (thus influence) than  geeks do.

I no longer believe that. NPR's All Things Considered, for
example, had a 12 minute three part story on spam this
evening, and their view on legislation seemed very positive.
One of the reporters noted that she'd received a dozen spams
today alone. Average people are being impacted, which means
the Direct Marketing Association will soon be arguing with a
torch-wielding mob.

Somewhat more to the point, the DMA is very pragmatic.  If they
see the writing on the wall for "plain spam", they will almost
certainly rapidly start to retreat toward "responsible spam",
including opt-out systems, unenforceable laws, etc., with the
claim that they are trying to find a good balance between the
"needs" or marketers and consumer desires.  In the last
analysis, they --or at least the folks from there with whom I
had some long discussions a few years ago-- understand both
"backlash" and the principle that irritating people sufficiently
doesn't result in more customers.  Of course, from that
perspective, irritating people just a bit less than
"sufficiently" is just fine.

On the other hand, approximations to torch-wielding mobs can be
a powerful force, especially in congressional election years.
And the ISPs, who don't have a lot fewer resources than DMA,
are, I assume, getting fairly tired of the staffs they have to
maintain to try to deal with this stuff.

     john



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>