OT - US House Passes Anti-Spam Bill

Page 1 of 2  
Some good news.... from CNNmoney
http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/22/technology/house_spam.reut/index.htm
It's a step in the right direction.
Bob S.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob S writes:

I hope. Given the possibility of simply moving operations out of the US, I'm inclined to wonder. As it is, my most consistent SPAMmer is the Nigerian scam. I get at least 5 of these a week, and am reaching the stage where I'm giving careful consideration to setting up a robot "F... you, scum sucker" reply. Though with my luck, it would go out to a couple of my best editors instead.
But, seriously, an awful lot of this crap is already offshore and out of the jurisdiction of US entities.
Charlie Self
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." H. L. Mencken
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don't do it Charlie. In fact, never respond to spam for any reason. When you do, your email address goes from the list that it is being sold on to the "proven active" email address lists that are sold. That means you will get massive more amounts of email.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Frank Ketchum writes:

AOL allows 7 e-mail addresses. I guess I could fire back from one of those, then dump the name. But it really isn't worth the effort. Just erase and go. AOL's vaunted spam fight is mostly BS: it took me just a couple months to fill the filters.
Charlie Self
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." H. L. Mencken
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 25 Nov 2003 10:46:55 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.comnotforme (Charlie Self) wrote:

email boxes. all the spam goes to the primary address. i use a secondary box for myself and yet another secondary for SWMBO. We never ever check the primary box. i only get maybe 3-5 pieces of spam a week. i also NEVER use my real name or email on usenet.if i need to post an address here i use a hot mail address with spam filter on it.been doing this for over a year now and it seems to be working good. before i would use all the correct info i was getting 100 + junk mails a day. when your primary box fills up the spam gets kicked back and eventually you are removed from the list and termed to be INACTIVE. works fer me. skeez

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@home.com wrote:

I also have Road Runner.
I never use the primary address on the web. Not only is it my actual name but it's the 'administrator' account.
I have my web site and it's mail accounts I use for allot of online activity. It has a true killfile and a spam killer. And I get very little garbage.
--
Mark

N.E. Ohio
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
will let exactly 3 messages come through and then it evaporates. Great stuff!
Chris
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! This gets my vote for Wreck Tip of the Month.
Art

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.comnotforme says...

filters working right) is from an overseas ISP and references an overseas website.
The bill is just another political grandstanding exersize.
--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nah. No teeth in it at all.
From the article:

Simply allowing individuals to go after spammers like they can junk faxers would put an end to the problem. $500 per spam, and it would go away in less than a day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. The bill regulates spam, rather than prohibiting it. It preemtps state laws (like CA) that do prohibit spam--thyus legalizing spam throughout the US.
This was NOT necessary to protect legitimate email marketers because legitimate email marketers do not send unsolicited bulk email. It is an attempt to legitimize Unsolicited Bulk Email.
It would have been a step in the right direction 5 years ago but today it is a step back.
--

FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@spamcop.net (Fred the Red Shirt) wrote in

there are legitimage bulk email marketers?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually, nope. It's a step backwards since the penalties it provides for and it's definitions of spam are WEAKER than provided in many of the laws introduced by states....and it OVERRIDES state law.
There is some suspicion that it was actually bankrolled and pushed by spammers......
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

*DEBATABLE*, for a number of reasons.
just for starters:
1) It pre-empts all _stronger_ state-level legislation
2) There is *no* 'right of private action'. i.e. *you* CANNOT go after the b*stard that's flooding your inbox. the State ATTY GENERAL has to prosecute. Wanna bet on the odds of -that- happening?
3) "by definition" under this statute, it's only spam *after* you tell them to stop mailing you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
All your points are moot.....if you live in a state that has no laws against spam. So while you may not think its any good, it's better than what we had - which was zip. We must start someplace and after 6 years of froggin around, it is a step in the right direction. I didn't say it was good, better or best but at least now we have something to throw darts at.
Bob S.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Despite the vigilante tactics of SPEW, and the rbl's, spam continues to increase. The acid test of any anti-spam measure is how much less UCE ends up in your inbox ... my bet is that this bill won't make one whit of difference.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Vent On
Guess we have a bunch of defeatist here....nothing will ever make a difference or ever get started to them but they sure can bitch and complain cause the gov't didn't do something for them.
Damn right it won't make a difference unless you help make it happen. Since when is it totally up to the gov't to do everything? Remember that little motto, "We the people...". Not to put to fine point on it but if you're not part of the solution then you must be part of the problem.
Vent Off,
Bob S.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob S. responds:

And what is the solution, Bob? If I knew, I might be able to be part of it, but to date, I've yet to hear of a thing in which I can, or would, participate.
Charlie Self
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." H. L. Mencken
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.comnotforme (Charlie Self) writes:

Couple things. 1: never send a "click here to remove" button. it just verifies your address to them and they can resell it as a "verified" address. 2: never click on any links in the message. some of those will also verify your email. 3: run your email in a restricted zone and have it not parse html. If i include an image called: "charliediy.gif" in html and i see that that image was accessed in the web logs, i know your email address is valid. 3a: use a Filter on your mail. if you do, you worry less about 1-3. 4: never buy anything from them. people spam because it gets results. even a small responce is worth it, because for the most part, spam is free to send so the ROI can happen with few responces. 5: if the new bill has reporting procedures, use them. (to report the spammer to the authority) 6: If the spammer is advertising a third party product, inform that third party about it and pressure them to do something about it. (cut off the supply of goods to the spammer, etc) 7: track the spammer down by looking at the "Received" headers of the message. http://www.arin.net/abuse.htmlcan help here. Report them to their ISP. (although you'll find huge amounts come from overseas.)
ok... so that's more than a couple. hope it helps.
--
be safe.
flip
Verso l'esterno! Verso l'esterno! Deamons di ignoranza.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Philip Lewis writes:

I've been doing all those for some time, except tracking spammers: unfortunately, I have to spend some time having a life. It helps, a graet deal more than I expect the government intervention to help, but all of it only reduces a problem that seems to be increasing almost daily.
Charlie Self
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." H. L. Mencken
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.