Spam Rules Require Effective Spam Police

Grok Headline matches for Spam Rules Require Effective Spam Police

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.

Why Online Newspapers Require
Registration: Spam

Why Online Newspapers Require
Registration: Spam 09/20/2004 01:24 PM
Last week we wrote about John C. Dvorak's belief that newspapers are adding registration to make themselves believe that their paper business isn't really threatened by the web, and Rich Skrenta at Topix has picked up on this idea and explained the two big reasons why newspapers require registration. The first one agrees with Dvorak, suggesting a typical Innovator's Dilemma response (basically, subconsciously denying that this new medium could be a threat, and acting in ways that make the new medium look worse to themselves, rather than thinking about ways to embrace it). The second, however, is the main reason most sites require registration: spam. Direct mail marketing companies are offering ridiculous ($300 CPM) fees for email lists of registered newspaper readers for spam purposes. Never mind the fact that many of those email addresses are bogus dirty data, the newspapers see cash from spam. This isn't, as they claim, about having more detailed demographic info to "more accurately target advertising," but about having your email address to sell to spammers. Once again, BugMeNot becomes a useful anti-spam tool. It seems hard to believe selling email addresses to spammers could be a successful long-term business strategy.

CAN-SPAM not seen to be effective

CAN-SPAM not seen to be effective 12/27/2004 10:43 AM
A year after the U.S. Congress passed the first federal antispam law, observers see no evidence that it has cut the amount of unwanted commercial e-mail arriving in U.S. residents' inboxes

Dreaded Spam Still Effective

Dreaded Spam Still Effective 06/29/2004 09:48 PM
CBS News Jun 30 2004 1:35AM GMT

Finance Spam Passing Drug Spam While
Porn Spam Is Washed Up

Finance Spam Passing Drug Spam While
Porn Spam Is Washed Up 05/24/2004 05:37 PM
The latest study on spam trends appears to show that financial spam is outpacing pharmaceutical spam - though, honestly, so much of both is coming out that it's really hard to imagine that this matters at all. Meanwhile, it seems that porn spam is increasingly less interesting to spammers as the numbers have been on a noticeable decline for quite some time. No matter what, though, it appears that CAN-SPAM has done absolutely nothing to slow down the amount of spam sent.

Netriplex Opens Fifth Data Center for
its 100% Effective Anti-Spam Solution

Netriplex Opens Fifth Data Center for
its 100% Effective Anti-Spam Solution 06/14/2004 02:07 AM
Netriplex announced today that due to increased demand for its 100% effective anti-spam solution, it has completed implementation of its Seattle data center. The Seattle location brings the total number of data centers to five. [PRWEB Jun 14, 2004]

From spam drops to spam spray to spam
stream

From spam drops to spam spray to spam
stream 06/05/2004 07:31 PM
I am now getting 2,000+ spams a day. There are 1,440 minutes in a day The rate of incoming spams is therefore getting close to the interval it takes me to check my email and dispose of a single spam: By the time I'm done checking, more spam has arrived. That is the point at which the spam droplets form a continuous stream. And that is the point at which no interval of my life will ever be spam-free again....

New rules fail to can spam

New rules fail to can spam 01/05/2004 12:20 PM
Manchester Online Jan 5 2004 10:50AM ET

FTC rules sex spam must be labeled

FTC rules sex spam must be labeled 05/19/2004 05:51 PM

U.S. judge rules against AOL in spam
suit

U.S. judge rules against AOL in spam
suit 01/01/2004 10:58 PM
ZDNet Australia Jan 1 2004 9:34PM ET

FTC Rules Internet Spam Must Carry Label

FTC Rules Internet Spam Must Carry Label 05/19/2004 05:43 PM
AP via Baltimore Sun May 19 2004 9:21PM GMT

More Rules On How To Spam... This Time
For Porn Spammers

More Rules On How To Spam... This Time
For Porn Spammers 01/29/2004 02:49 AM
Wait just a second. A month ago, we were hearing stories from our elected officials about how spam was supposed to be dead dead dead by now, thanks to the "CAN SPAM" law which would make it illegal to spam. Of course, as we all know, the law wasn't really intended to stop spam at all, but rather to give instructions on how you can spam. Further evidence of that comes today as the FTC is actually releasing new rules for porn spammers on how to spam. They're telling them they need to include a special label. In other words, they can just keep on spamming - as long as they include that one little label. Great way to "stop" spam, huh?

FTC Rules Internet Spam Must Carry Label
(AP)

FTC Rules Internet Spam Must Carry Label
(AP) 05/19/2004 04:15 PM
AP - Sexually explicit Internet spam must now carry a warning label.

Tomorrow's Menu: Spam, Spam, Spam

Tomorrow's Menu: Spam, Spam, Spam 12/11/2003 06:15 AM
Congress overwhelmingly passes a bill to fight the online scourge, but critics say the unwanted e-mail will increase because the law will actually legitimize spam. By Amit Asaravala.

Police Cruisers Get Spam Pop Ups

Police Cruisers Get Spam Pop Ups 12/23/2003 12:56 PM
Police cruisers these days come equipped with computers, that often have wireless connections back to various databases to make the whole "fighting crime" thing more efficient. Of course, some of those wireless connections are standard internet connections that have been set up specifically for the police - but could be used to access the internet if configured incorrectly. Over in Philadelphia, it appears that's what happened, as someone accidentally ended up with some sort of adware downloaded into the system that started sending bogus Viagra pop-up ads onto the screens of officers around the city. The police department blamed Verizon for leaving the system open to the internet, but insist that the system is not open to hackers and that this didn't impact police response times in any way. In fact, they claim that most officers thought it was an amusing joke being played on them.

Police hit in iPlod spam attack

Police hit in iPlod spam attack 12/05/2003 05:32 PM
Personal Computer World Dec 5 2003 4:19PM ET

Anti-Spam Technical Alliance Publishes
Industry Recommendations to Help Stop
Spam

Anti-Spam Technical Alliance Publishes
Industry Recommendations to Help Stop
Spam 06/22/2004 09:17 AM
The Anti-Spam Technical Alliance (ASTA), whose participants include Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft Corp., EarthLink and America Online Inc., today unveiled the result of more than a year of close collaboration by presenting a host of detailed best practices and technical recommendations for the entire industry in an effort to fight the scourge of spam.

Review: Advanced Spam Manager Attacks
Viruses, Spam For Exchange, Notes

Review: Advanced Spam Manager Attacks
Viruses, Spam For Exchange, Notes 03/27/2005 12:35 PM
Information Week Mar 27 2005 3:25PM GMT

Symantec Brightmail Anti-Spam v6.0
delivers next-generation spam-fighting
power, control to enterprises

Symantec Brightmail Anti-Spam v6.0
delivers next-generation spam-fighting
power, control to enterprises 07/01/2004 10:20 PM
Sunday Times South Africa Jul 2 2004 2:42AM GMT

Spammer Complies With CAN-SPAM, Claims
ISPs Should Not Filter His Spam

Spammer Complies With CAN-SPAM, Claims
ISPs Should Not Filter His Spam 05/20/2004 07:05 PM
Ronnie Scelson is one of the shortlist of spammers who just seems to love publicity. While many spammers like to hide away, Scelson's always willing to talk. He testified before the Senate Commerce Committee today, claiming that he is now compl ying with CAN-SPAM, but threatened to ignore the law if not enough of his spam messages were getting through filters. He actually has the audacity to complain that now that CAN-SPAM is in effect, ISPs should be required to let his mail through. Maybe the filters are a little to thick around his head and the message isn't getting through to him: the reason his spam is filtered is because people don't want it.

CAN SPAM Designed To Make Congressmen
Look Good - Not Stop Spam

CAN SPAM Designed To Make Congressmen
Look Good - Not Stop Spam 01/07/2004 06:36 PM
We all know now that the CAN SPAM law is a disaster and is unlikely to do anything useful in the battle against spam. It's also becoming clear that the entire point of the bill was never to stop spam, but to make a few folks in Congress look good (which seems to be the entire point of most politics these days). First, Business Week spends some time comparing the mostly effective federal "Do Not Call" list with CAN SPAM. The DNC list was planned out carefully by the FTC and the FCC, and, while it upset many telemarketers, it was designed in a way to be effective. There was also enough time, and enough publicity given to the list that people knew about it and had the opportunity to sign up for it - while marketers had the ability to prepare on their end as well. With CAN SPAM, however, it was rushed through Congress with little thought towards whether or not it would actually do anything and without any money to actually deal with any of these cases. Meanwhile, the NY Times reports that the sponsors of the bill asked the FTC to sue a spammer the very first week the bill was in effect in order to make a big "splash" so they could pat themselves on the back - even as the spam levels continued to increase. FTC Chair Timothy Muris (who has spoken out against this spam law) apparently laughed them off and pointed out it was impossible to do such a thing. First of all, in order to violate the law, the spammers have to ignore an opt-out request. Then, the FTC would have to track down who the actual spammer was - with no additional funds, because the law didn't provide for them.

Anti-spam activists targets of
spam-spawning virus

Anti-spam activists targets of
spam-spawning virus 12/06/2003 09:45 AM
Canadian Press Dec 6 2003 9:11AM ET

New zombie spam technique may send spam
levels through the roof

New zombie spam technique may send spam
levels through the roof 02/05/2005 09:36 PM
Warnings abound about a change in tactics on the part of zombie PC network operators. As a result, spam levels could rise to nearly 95% of all e-mails sent.

AOL Falls In Love With The Wrong Spam
Stats -- Says Spam Decreased

AOL Falls In Love With The Wrong Spam
Stats -- Says Spam Decreased 12/27/2004 01:32 PM
AOL is claiming that their new spam filter has greatly reduced spam, creating nice looking headlines about less spam. Of course, you could question their findings. The details show that what was reduced was spam complaints. This might be a proxy for the amount of spam that got through to inboxes, or it might just show that AOL subscribers have wised up and realized that reporting spam to AOL doesn't seem to do a bit of good -- and they've just given up on it.

Spam king Secure your home PC or you
could be helping send spam

Spam king Secure your home PC or you
could be helping send spam 08/03/2004 07:21 AM
BBC Aug 3 2004 11:45AM GMT

California Spam Law: Won't Stop Spam,
Will Make It Harder To Do Business

California Spam Law: Won't Stop Spam,
Will Make It Harder To Do Business 11/03/2003 11:40 PM
I get inundated with more and more spam every day, and it's frustrating as anything. I want it to stop. However, if politicians insist on passing bad legislation in their attempts to stop spam, that's not going to do any good. I've already complained about the new California legislation and it looks like I'm not alone. A guy who runs a consulting firm and writes for Business Week points out why California's anti-spam law won't do a thing about spam, but will make life more difficult for legitimate small businesses. He describes a situation where he did a very targeted mailing for a company. It's probably up to your definition of spam as to whether or not you consider his mailing spam. I tend to draw the line on whether or not the mailing was "bulk" - which it sounds like his was. I believe that if the email is truly targeted and personalized about a potential business relationship, then it's hard to call it spam. The California law disagrees. In fact, the sponsor of the bill claims that any email contact between two companies is not legitimate if it hasn't been initiated under some other form. That's simply ridiculous. As I've said before, plenty of "commercial" websites contact Techdirt every day about the possibility of partnerships or links. Under California's anti-spam law, I could charge them with spam. I recently heard from a major technology magazine, asking if I would add them to my Quicklinks box. Should I sue them for spam? According to the law, I could.

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]

CORRECTED: AOL Spam Down 75 Pct; Net
Spam Trends Reverse (Reuters)

CORRECTED: AOL Spam Down 75 Pct; Net
Spam Trends Reverse (Reuters) 12/27/2004 11:21 AM
Reuters - You've got less spam, according to America Online, the world's largest online service.

Mobile SMS spam surpasses email spam in
Korea

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

California Spam Law: Won't Stop Spam,
Will Increase Lawsuits

California Spam Law: Won't Stop Spam,
Will Increase Lawsuits 11/14/2003 07:29 PM
I hate spam and would like nothing better than to see an effective anti-spam law put on the books. However, as I've said before, the California anti-spam law is not the right law. Plenty of others seem to agree, and everyone believes that the law won't stand up if tested in court. The problem is what do people do until it's been tested? The other question is who is going to take on this law. Luckily, it won't be the Direct Marketing Association, who I don't trust in the slightest. They say they've burned up all their resources fighting the "Do Not Call" list. At a conference among email marketers, some were suggesting that they should file their own lawsuits under the bill in order to purposely clog the court system with such lawsuits. This seems like typical bad marketing thinking that overburdening a system somehow gets extra attention. The right response is that someone who gets sued for doing something that clearly is not spam is going to have to go to court and get the law overturned. Maybe (and this would be the best) it happens to someone who is not associated with an "email marketing" company, but just someone who sends a perfectly reasonable email and gets hit with a lawsuit.

Microsoft calls for outbound spam
filtering against spam

Microsoft calls for outbound spam
filtering against spam 06/04/2004 10:42 AM
Computer Weekly Jun 4 2004 2:14PM GMT

Anti-Spam Legislation Makes Spam More
Malicious

Anti-Spam Legislation Makes Spam More
Malicious 04/29/2004 01:28 PM
Aren't unintended consequences wonderful? Now that anti-spam legislation is becoming popular, one result is that spammers aren't wasting time with just spamming mortgage offers and ways to buy Viagra. Instead, now that they realize they're definitely on illegal ground, they're moving more towards malicious attack spam, including phishing attacks and trojan horse attacks. In other words, if they're going to break the law with spam, they figure they might as well go all out.

Report from the spam/anti-spam summit

Report from the spam/anti-spam summit 04/09/2004 04:05 PM
Danny O'Brien has written up one of the first summits between spammers and spam-fighters for the Guardian. It's a great piece.

Surprisingly, no such shootings occur. It's oddly intimate, watching the spammers and the anti-spammers mill around each other like this. It feels like a temporary ceasefire in a vicious war that to most of us seems to be a stalemate...

Over the past year, though, a series of meetings arranged by a trusted figure in the American anti-spam community, Anne Mitchell, have been slowly bringing the two sides together. These mini-conferences, held under the banner of the Institute for Spam and Internet Public Policy, have mostly been between the highest-ranking ISPs - MSN, AOL - and commercial email marketers of the most squeaky clean kind. Initially in secret, these days the meetings are more public.

Link (via Oblomovka)

New Spam-Scanning Technology Finds Spam

New Spam-Scanning Technology Finds Spam 04/02/2005 02:50 AM
Slashdot Apr 2 2005 5:43AM GMT

Spam fighters infiltrate spam clubs

Spam fighters infiltrate spam clubs 05/14/2004 10:32 AM
Tales from the underground

Offbeat News: Spam, SPAM and Saddam

Offbeat News: Spam, SPAM and Saddam 12/18/2003 03:24 AM

IBM Believes In Spam For A Spam
Vigilante Revenge

IBM Believes In Spam For A Spam
Vigilante Revenge 03/22/2005 05:03 PM
It seems that larger companies are really getting pissed off at spammers these days. While going out and attacking spammers used to be more limited to net.vigilantes, some well known companies have been taking stronger approaches to fighting spam lately. A few months back there was Lycos ' plan to let anyone download a screensaver that would launch distributed denial of service attacks on spammers. While Lycos claimed it wouldn't take anyone offline, it wasn't long before that was proven false. Next up on the list is IBM, whose latest anti-spam offering will send data right back at spamming machines in an effort to slow them down. It's not quite a distributed denial of service attack -- it's more like a centralized one. It's sort of one step up beyond greyl isting which just slows down the spam. Instead, this tries to slow down the computer sending the spam. Again, this leaves IBM open to charges of hitting back too hard -- especially if innocent sites get taken offline in the process. Still, when large companies like IBM start offering products like this, you know that people are getting fed up.

spam egg spam spam bacon and spam

spam egg spam spam bacon and spam 06/05/2005 10:54 PM
I hate unsolicited e-mail, of any kind. Period. I don't care about whatever alleged virus warning you heard about from...

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?

Grok Description matches for Spam Rules Require Effective Spam Police
GrokA matches for Spam Rules Require Effective Spam Police

Spam Rules Require Effective Spam Police

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