Email Marketers Struggling With Can Spam, Spammers Doing Just Fine

Grok Headline matches for Email Marketers Struggling With Can Spam, Spammers Doing Just Fine

Dutch Fine Spammers, AOL Reports Drop in
Spam

Dutch Fine Spammers, AOL Reports Drop in
Spam 12/28/2004 04:55 PM

E-mail Marketers! You're Invited to Take
an Email Marketing Survey. Permission,
List Growth Techniques and Spam Filter
Triggers are Covered in the 5-question
Survey.

E-mail Marketers! You're Invited to Take
an Email Marketing Survey. Permission,
List Growth Techniques and Spam Filter
Triggers are Covered in the 5-question
Survey. 08/04/2004 11:24 AM
With the Can-Spam law allowing opt-out, how have previously staunch permission emailers changed their practices...or have they? The online survey asks 5 simple questions about permission practices, growing email address lists, and marketer's understanding of anti-spam filtering. The survey is anonymous and results will be published. [PRWEB Aug 4, 2004]

Spammers Struggling, Moving Overseas

Spammers Struggling, Moving Overseas 12/15/2003 02:27 AM
Yet another in a long line of "spammer profiles." This one focuses on two grandparents who spam for a living - but claim that times are tough for spammers, and they may have to declare bankruptcy. I'm sure we all pity them and the "free speech rights" go on and on about. The article does a good job pointing out how spammers are quite different than direct mail companies - no matter what the spammers claim. It also points out, however, that spammers are all setting up shop overseas, where it will be even more difficult to track them down once the US law legalizing most spam goes into effect. I'm still wondering why no one is demanding that, if we must pass such a terrible law, why don't we have some clear review point, six months from the law going into effect that will show how much more spam is being received? If it shown (as most of us suspect) that the law does nothing to stop spam (and may even help increase it), then shouldn't a Plan B be lined up?

Anti-Spam - Fight Back Against Spammers
junk unsolicited unwanted bulk huge
commercial email spams e-mail! FREE

Anti-Spam - Fight Back Against Spammers
junk unsolicited unwanted bulk huge
commercial email spams e-mail! FREE 04/24/2004 11:48 AM
Anti-Spam - Fight Back

spampoison.com
track this site | 5 links

Dutch Regulators Fine Spammers

Dutch Regulators Fine Spammers 12/29/2004 01:05 AM
Information Week Dec 29 2004 4:15AM GMT

Spam, spam, spam, spam ... Canada
targets unwanted email (AFP)

Spam, spam, spam, spam ... Canada
targets unwanted email (AFP) 05/12/2004 04:17 AM
AFP - Canada unveiled a new action plan to combat unsolicited commercial e-mail, nicknamed spam, which jams inboxes and clogs Internet traffic worldwide.

Study: Marketers fall short on Can-Spam

Study: Marketers fall short on Can-Spam 04/21/2004 10:18 AM
According to a Jupiter Research study, many companies fail to respond promptly to opt-out requests from recipients of marketing e-mail, as required by the new law.

Marketers Try To Self-Regulate To
Prevent Mobile Spam

Marketers Try To Self-Regulate To
Prevent Mobile Spam 12/02/2003 11:28 PM
Seeing just how bad email spam has become, a group of marketers have come together to agree to a "code of conduct" to prevent mobile spam. With the recent laws against telemarketing and email spam, they're realizing that if they let things get out of control, they'll be next. The code includes (amazingly!) that marketers will only send mobile messages to those who opt-in (unlike the current email law), and promise to provide easy opt-out instructions. Finally (and why they had to put this in shows just how out of touch many marketers are with their job function) they promise that any mobile marketing message will "deliver something of value" to the customer - and not just be blatant pitches all the time. It's a good start, but I'm still cynical enough to wonder whether or not those who agreed to it will really abide by it, and whether or not it will really matter as traditional spammers increasingly send messages to phones themselves. It's easy for marketers to say they'll live by this sort of rule, but as soon as someone breaks the code of conduct, and there's no real punishment, someone else will feel that they need to break it too ("just to stay competitive"). Meanwhile, traditional spammers couldn't care any less about what some marketing group agrees to, and will continue to send annoying spam messages any way they possibly can.

Federal officials charge first e-mail
marketers under the CAN-Spam Act

Federal officials charge first e-mail
marketers under the CAN-Spam Act 05/03/2004 06:14 PM
InternetRetailer.com May 3 2004 9:25PM GMT

Marketers to lose $419 million from
e-mail blocked as spam, says Jupiter

Marketers to lose $419 million from
e-mail blocked as spam, says Jupiter 01/28/2004 08:43 PM
InternetRetailer.com Jan 29 2004 1:03AM GMT

Why UK's Anti-Spam Law Failed? It Was
Written By Direct Marketers

Why UK's Anti-Spam Law Failed? It Was
Written By Direct Marketers 06/05/2005 11:57 PM
Earlier this year, we noted that the UK's anti-spam law was turning out to be even less effective than the US's CAN SPAM. In fact, not a single spammer has been accused under the law. Some are beginning to investigate why this is -- and (surprise, surprise) have discovered that the original law was more or less written by direct marketing firms, who are still opposed to any changes in the law. Still, Silicon.com did get one company to admit that maybe it made a mistake -- saying that: "At the time spam was not such a big problem for business." I'm not sure what planet they were living on last year. Of course, setting up anti-spam laws is a difficult under-taking, but ones that basically do more to legalize spam don't seem to be doing much to help.

Spammers embrace email authentication

Spammers embrace email authentication 09/03/2004 10:11 AM
Junk mail tsunami continues unabated

Spammers Kill Email Support

Spammers Kill Email Support 04/10/2005 11:54 PM

The spammers win again. A hosting company we work with sent me this in reponse to a support email I sent. I used to email their support desk all the time with great results. It was really handy. Now:

Due to high volumes of Unsolicited Commercial Email (SPAM), this incident will not be responded to. We can only answer questions through our Knowledge Base or our Web Form.

I deperately need to punch a spammer in the mouth right now.

Actif Communications Announces GEF, the
Global eMail Format - Best Practice
eMails that Comply with US Can Spam,
Australian Spam Act and EU Directives

Actif Communications Announces GEF, the
Global eMail Format - Best Practice
eMails that Comply with US Can Spam,
Australian Spam Act and EU Directives 02/01/2005 09:10 PM
The risk in sending commercial emails overseas is not so much from the legislators; it is from the ISP’s who have the power to Black List your company. A new email format has been suggested that not only complies to Best Practices it also meets or exceeds the requirements of Can Spam, The Australian Spam Act and the EU Directives. [PRWEB Feb 1, 2005]

Mobile SMS spam surpasses email spam in
Korea

Mobile SMS spam surpasses email spam in
Korea 01/03/2005 10:21 AM

Scammers Setting Up Do Not Email Lists
To Give To Spammers

Scammers Setting Up Do Not Email Lists
To Give To Spammers 07/13/2004 12:12 PM
The latest trick in collecting email addresses for spammers is to set up a fake "Do Not Email" list, which collects email addresses (sometimes for a fee), puts them in a list, and sends them off to spammers. Even if they actually do have good intentions (unlikely), there's obviously no enforcement, so any such list is clearly going to be used to send more spam. Makes you wonder who actually signs up for such lists in the first place.

AOL Employee Arrested For Selling Email
Addresses To Spammers

AOL Employee Arrested For Selling Email
Addresses To Spammers 06/23/2004 07:00 PM
People have always claimed that AOL often gave out their email addresses to spammers, though many have questioned whether or not that was true. One that that's clear is they make it way too easy for employees of the company to access customer information. A few months ago we wrote about an AOL customer service rep who used the info she had access to in order to insinuate herself into the lives of celebrities who used AOL. The latest is that a 24-year-old engineer at the company has been arrested for selling a database of 92 million AOL user email addresses along with their phone numbers and zip codes. He sold this database to some spammers for about $50,000. How long until a class action suit is filed by AOL customers because the company didn't protect their info?

Spammers Technique of Bugging Email
Stopped by Messagewash

Spammers Technique of Bugging Email
Stopped by Messagewash 08/31/2004 02:11 AM
By using a so called "web bug" spammers are able to determine which email addresses are active without any interaction of the recipient. [PRWEB Aug 31, 2004]

Spam King gets only $40,000 fine

Spam King gets only $40,000 fine 07/22/2004 08:18 AM

Judge Says Messenger Spam Fine For Now

Judge Says Messenger Spam Fine For Now 12/15/2003 09:22 PM
Last week we reported that a small firm run by two college kids that was sending Microsoft Messenger pop-up spam advertising software to stop such pop-up spam was fightin g back against the FTC's claims that they were doing high tech extortion. As despicable as the practice is, I mentioned that they might have a case. It looks like a judge has agreed, and is refusing to grant an injunction against the firm, meaning that they can keep on spamming, at least until the trial occurs. Of course, the company might still lose the case. Either way, you would hope they would realize that their tactics of annoying their potential customers isn't the smartest way to go about offering a product.

Why do Spammers Spam?

Why do Spammers Spam? 05/14/2004 09:17 AM
Ladies and Gentleman that is the million dollar question and now we have some insight into exactly what is happening...

A Look Into How Spammers Spam

A Look Into How Spammers Spam 05/14/2004 01:32 PM
Nothing all that surprising here, but some anti-spammers have managed to get themselves into the various "spam clubs" where top spammers trade tips with each other. From that they've learned, as we all pretty much knew already, that the state of the art in spamming is using compromised machines that have had a trojan installed on them. Lists of such controllable machines are offered to other spammers, both for additional spamming capabilities and for denial of service attacks. Basically, the spammers have built up quite a distributed super computer - and those contributing cycles and bandwidth don't even know about it.

Hefty fine for X-rated spam scam

Hefty fine for X-rated spam scam 02/17/2004 01:02 PM
A telecoms watchdog has fined a US firm for spam that dialled up premium rate lines without permission.

Spammers undeterred by Can-Spam Act

Spammers undeterred by Can-Spam Act 12/30/2004 06:52 AM
ZDNet UK Dec 30 2004 10:43AM GMT

Spammers Not Complying With CAN-SPAM

Spammers Not Complying With CAN-SPAM 01/11/2004 07:53 AM

Misunderstanding The New Spam Law And
Spammers

Misunderstanding The New Spam Law And
Spammers 12/18/2003 04:35 AM
There are plenty of reasons to think that the new CAN-SPAM law that was signed this week is terrible. We've been pointing a number of reasons why this law is likely to make things worse, not better. However, reading the following article, by someone who is apparently an "analyst" makes me wonder about the writer's analytical skills. He suggests that the law is bad, because spam is good. He says that occasionally, you get something good in the spam, and this law will stop people from getting things they might want. Except, apparently, this analyst hasn't read the law, because it actually allows spamming. The only thing it forbids is using false headers to spam. Anyway, if you wanted to know who buys from spam, apparently, it's this guy - because, occasionally, he sees something worthwhile in the spam he gets. Second, this guy claims that spammers don't want to spam people who don't want their spam, and would be happy with a smaller list of interested parties. That's been proven wrong time and time again. Spammers, these days, are making money based on the size of their lists - which they sell to others. Therefore, they do want more names. These aren't sophisticated marketers we're talking about who understand why targeted marketing makes more sense than untargeted blasting. What they do understand is that when selling their email lists or their ability to spam, the bigger numbers they can show, the more money they believe they'll make.

IBM aims to spam the spammers

IBM aims to spam the spammers 03/23/2005 08:01 AM
Chicago Tribune Mar 23 2005 12:02PM GMT

Why Spammers Laugh at CAN-SPAM

Why Spammers Laugh at CAN-SPAM 01/07/2004 06:03 PM

Spammers not deterred by Can Spam Act

Spammers not deterred by Can Spam Act 01/02/2004 12:04 PM
Same old tactics

Anti-Spammers Don't Need CAN-SPAM

Anti-Spammers Don't Need CAN-SPAM 09/25/2004 12:00 AM
While the CAN-SPAM act was meant to stop spam, it obviously hasn't yet. Although it's pretty easy to point out some of CAN-SPAM's flaws, it's perhaps better that some anti-spam activists are actually taking spammers to court -- though mostly citing pre-existing laws regarding false advertising or deception. Armed with these older and easier-to-understand laws, the Informal Coalition of Private Anti-spam Litigants (ICPAL) and the Institute for Spam and Internet Public Policy (ISIPP) have helped some businesses and devout anti-spammers take some sleazy mass emailers to court and win a few sizable monetary judgments. Still, the strategy for these anti-spammers is to remain informal but organized, so that spammers can't retaliate. However, these anti-spammers also say they're not in it for the money, and some have refused to settle out of court on principle. Given that some of the spammers are hard to actually find, much less extract damages from, it looks like these vigilante organizations may remain small and informal until perhaps some bounties are put out on spammers heads.

States Can Still Go After Spammers For
Deceptive Spam

States Can Still Go After Spammers For
Deceptive Spam 04/23/2004 10:59 AM
When CAN SPAM first passed, one of the complaints against it was that it wiped out every state anti-spam law - many of which were much tougher than the federal law. However, Wired News is pointing out that there was one loophole that many states are now trying to use. States can still create and enforce anti-sp am laws that target "falsity and deception" in commercial emails. Since an awful lot of spam does both, that gives them some leeway (though, not very much). Still, it sounds like some states are trying to take advantage of this (helped with a push from folks like AOL). So, perhaps we will see some more state-level spam prosecutions. Of course, it would seem that "falsity and deception" in any kind of commercial announcement should already be illegal for a variety of other reasons, whether or not it's spam, so it's a little unclear if additional spam-specific laws are needed for just this aspect.

Spammers Pleased with 'Anti'-Spam Act

Spammers Pleased with 'Anti'-Spam Act 11/25/2003 10:22 PM

Major Spam ISP Kicks Off Spammers

Major Spam ISP Kicks Off Spammers 09/08/2004 12:32 PM
Apparently, Cable & Wireless US had absolutely no problem giving access to many of the most major spammers out there. Savvis bought C&W US earlier this year, and apparently had a big internal debate about how to handle the spam accounts, which continued to grow until they were hosting 148 of the world's largest spammers (how nice of them). Apparently (as you might expect) some of the execs at Savvis didn't want to do anything about these accounts since they were considered quite profitable. One former Savvis employee wrote up a 200 page report detailing all of the complaints about the spammers, and the executive battle was on. While some continued to insist that the spammers be left alone, executives realizing the potential damage to Savvis' reputation (helped along by a Spamhaus threat to have Savvis customers blacklisted) have apparently convinced the company to shut down the accounts of all 148 major spammers. While it's likely that they'll quickly find new ISPs, shutting off such a major (and well-known) source of network connectivity for spammers has to be seen as a good thing.

Feds Charge First Spammers Under CAN
SPAM

Feds Charge First Spammers Under CAN
SPAM 04/28/2004 06:44 PM
Well, we've already seen ISPs file CAN SPAM lawsuits, but now the feds are stepping in and have charged four people with spamming under the law. The four are charged with hiding their identities while sending out weight loss spam. Of course, all of these lawsuits don't seem to have done much to slow down spam. Plenty of studies have shown that spam levels have kept going up at about the same pace as they were before CAN SPAM. Personally, since CAN SPAM has gone into effect in January, my daily spam loads have more than doubled.

Email Spam worse now that Can-Spam is
Here

Email Spam worse now that Can-Spam is
Here 02/10/2004 02:45 AM

Has anyone else noticed that now that the Can-Spam Act passed by the federal government has gone into effect, spam via email is actually worse than it was?

This is ridiculous. In the past week I've received at least 4-5 times more spam than I did in a week last year...

I'd like to install a server-side spam filtering system that's compatible with qmail, but I don't have the time or knowledge to actually get it installed... especially since I've been considering buying a Handspring Treo 600 to check my email more regularly...

Although, I wonder if I'm getting more spam because of the social networks I've joined in the past couple of weeks? Hmmm... I'm going to change those email addresses now...

Anyone want to install a server side spam filter system for me on the cheap?

Anti-Spam Spammers Leading The Way To
Better AI -- Part II

Anti-Spam Spammers Leading The Way To
Better AI -- Part II 09/01/2004 11:04 PM
In what appears to be something of a copy of a ZDNet article that we wrote about just last week, the NY Times is now looking at spam and wondering if the battle between spammers and anti-spammers will help push the state of artificial intelligence forward. Specifically, the writer focuses on what he considers the "irony" of spam that advertises anti-spam filters. Of course, many of us don't consider that "irony," but "a scam." Still, he wonders if this battle by companies claiming to offer anti-spam filters, and the real anti-spam filters trying to filter it out, will lead to smarter technology that better understands how humans want to use email -- including what kind of spam people won't mind reading.

Spammers Use Spyware To Trick You Into
Opening Spam

Spammers Use Spyware To Trick You Into
Opening Spam 06/22/2004 12:09 PM
The war over spam keeps escalating, and it's pretty obvious that the spammers have been winning in many cases. Once they figured out how to get Trojans onto computer, creating their own virtual spamming super computer, spammers have adopted this method for most of the spam they send out. However, they're now adopting another net.annoyance to piss everyone off. They're usi ng spyware to get personal details about you that they can then use to get you to open their spam messages. In other words, they're doing some keylogging, not necessarily to get your credit card and bank account info (not that they wouldn't mind that info, of course), but to put the name of your children or your dog into the subject line, making it much more likely that you'll open the spam message. Of course, it seems they didn't consider the next step, which is that it also makes it much less likely that someone will actually buy. By tricking them into opening such a message, spammers will tend to both creep people out and piss them off. That's usually not the best sales combination.

Spammers using random words to stop spam

Spammers using random words to stop spam 01/16/2004 10:58 AM
Any administrators worth their salt is going to go after spam on many fronts. As I have stated 2-3 times...

Spammers exploit anti-spam trap

Spammers exploit anti-spam trap 09/07/2004 03:37 AM
Spammers have become enthusiastic adopters of technology designed to spot and stop them.
Grok Description matches for Email Marketers Struggling With Can Spam, Spammers Doing Just Fine
GrokA matches for Email Marketers Struggling With Can Spam, Spammers Doing Just Fine

Email Marketers Struggling With Can Spam, Spammers Doing Just Fine

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: