spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] FYI: FTC REPORTS VOLUME OF SPAM DOWN

2005-12-24 01:56:56
On 12/21/05, william(at)elan.net <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> wrote:

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Hector Santos wrote:

FTC REPORTS VOLUME OF SPAM DOWN
In a report to Congress, the FTC said the Can-Spam Act that
took effect two years ago has helped curb unsolicited
e-mail. The report also credits advances in technology, such
as better spam filters that weed out junk e-mail.The report
was met with some skepticism.
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/technology/13451
053.htm

It seems to be the can-spam act was designed to reduce number of spam
emails being sent.

No. The CANSPAM Act was not designed to control volume.

The Act does three basic things:

* gives recipients the legal right to object to receiving further
commercial email from a specific source;

* requires mailers to comply with specified statutory requirements
when sending commercial or transactional email;

* exempts the filtering policies of Internet Access Services from the
Act's application.

Representatives of the FTC have specifically said on a number of
occasions that the Act was not designed to control volume.

Furthermore the Act does not define the term spam, merely speaking
about unwanted commercial email.

The question that Congress wanted to know was has the Act been
effective in establishing the appropriate legal framework to allow for
concerted action in controlling unwanted commercial and pornographic
email?

According to the FTC:

* marketers are by and large honoring opt-outs; and

* more effective filtering has reduced the amount of unwanted
commercial and pornographic email the average user receives in their
inbox.

The FTC went on to state that one key element which has yet to be
solved is to find a way to thwart the ability of bad guys to remain
anonymous. The FTC indicated it was going to continue to work
vigorously with industry to find a solution to this problem, while
noting the work done by Microsoft utilizing Sender ID.

All that being said, I am of the view that the CANSPAM Act is an
ineffective legal framework to allow for concerted action in
controlling unsolicited bulk email and so allow for a safer and
stronger Internet.

John

John Glube
Toronto, Canada

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com