JPCass
join:2001-01-23
Denver, CO | Is the devil, or the silver lining in the details? I think the thing that's being missed is, how would the do-not-spam list actually be implemented? The only logical way, is that reputable, professional address listers submit a list of addresses, and get back only the ones that are valid. The actual list can be in a sort of "black box", that would never be circulated. Reverse-engineering would be a federal crime, as would sending mass commercial e-mail that hadn't been properly checked against the list, or selling unchecked lists.
The point at which I think spam is really vulnerable to disruption, is the credit card payments. Virtually all SPAM that comes to the US, regardless of where it originates, relies on being able to electronically transfer money from the recipient in the US. If spam - unsolicited, commercial mass-mail - is a federal crime, and the feds can go to Visa/MC, AMEX and Paypal and get spammers' revenue sources suspended and turned off, that will just be the end of it. Even users might be empowered to, say, follow the SPAM through and make a payment, then immediately contact the credit card company and get the charge reversed and the merchant account instantly suspended from cashing out incoming payments for 24 hours pending resolution. The credit card companies will get tough about even giving out merchant accounts that might be abused for SPAM and have to be shut off. No money in it, no SPAM, end of story.
p.s. To those who keep saying users should implement the solution: number one, I don't think I should be responsible for the costs and hassles caused by someone else trying to use a trusted public resource for advertising, and number two, there will always be enough newbies and suckers that spammers can get enough of a miniscule response to make it profitable. |
