Forbes looks at the legal side of fighting spam

Forbes has an article up on how the law is not really helping stop (or even slow) spam.

DMA lobbied hard for the CAN-SPAM Act, specifically because it was afraid of state laws like one passed in California last year that required e-mail marketers to have an existing business relationship with the recipients or to receive permission before sending e-mail advertisements. Fines were imposed for violations.

The federal CAN-SPAM Act, which superseded all state laws, gives legitimate marketers a free shot at your inbox, but requires them to make opt-out procedures clear. But who's to tell a legitimate marketer that follows the rules from an illegitimate one?

The truth about spam is simple: Government is not the answer. It can't do much more than launch the occasional small-scale police crackdown intended to generate headlines. If you really want to control spam, you're better off calling your own hired gun, someone like Scott Petry.

Petry is the founder and senior vice president at Postini. While he says he supports the CAN-SPAM Act--it's a good idea for government to set guidelines concerning what is a legitimate e-mail and what constitutes a no-no, he says--the way to bringing the problem to heel lies in the private sector.

"Government is not in the business of providing a comprehensive anti-spam service," he says. "It's best at addressing the problem after it has occurred. We don't wait for you to get a message you don't want. We insert ourselves in the data path of the e-mail packets."

Wait, is it just me or did that article start off fairly well and then sort of devolve into an ad for Postini?

Regardless, I am inclined to agree that the current legal sytem in place for anti-spam in the U.S. (and Australia too apparently) is not designed to stop spammers.

Posted by Eric at September 2, 2004 05:20 PM | TrackBack