Spam rules: will they mean less--or more?

Have you checked your e-mail today? Are you afraid to look at your in box, fearing that you'll have even more spam today than you had yesterday. You're not alone. At a recent Federal Trade Commission hearing it was estimated that spam represents 40-75 percent of all e-mail traffic.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Complaints about spam are now getting the attention of Congress. Lawmakers seem poised to pass anti-spam legislation this year, but some consumer advocacy groups fear that current proposals are likely to lead to more spam--not less. The general consensus among these groups is that the congressional proposals being considered aren't tough enough on spam.

"At present, none of the legislative proposals currently being considered in Congress contain the measures we recommend; rather, they repeat many of the legislative mistakes that have exacerbated the unsolicited commercial e-mail problem, permitting it to grow to the epidemic proportions it has reached today." This statement comes from a letter signed by leaders of Junkbusters, the Consumer Federation of America, the National Consumers League and others.

Many of the bills under consideration allow unsolicited commercial e-mail until a recipient opts out of getting more. Thus, these laws define acceptable criteria for sending unsolicited bulk commercial e-mail.

Most of the current bills create a level of legitimacy for senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail, because spamming would be legal until a consumer ops out, according to Ray Everett-Church, counsel for the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUCE).

In most cases, consumers must separately contact each spam operation. "You essentially are sanctioned by law, you get legal protection for sending unwanted e-mail," Everett-Church said. "That will result in more spam, not less."

Most of the anti-spam legislation now before Congress doesn't allow individuals to file lawsuits against spammers. Anti-spam advocacy groups express concern that federal legislation could preempt stronger state laws, such as a felony spam law recently passed in Virginia.

A major problem with creating federal anti-spam legislation is that many people can't agree on what spam is. Eytan Urbas, vice president of Mailsell, a company that markets antispam software, recently revealed interesting results from a survey of Mailsell customers.

* 97 percent of respondents agreed that spam was random commercial e-mail promoting pornography or unwanted business opportunities.

* 53 percent said any unwanted e-mail from companies the recipient had a prior relationship with is also spam.

* 8 percent of respondents admit to purchasing a product promoted to them through spam.

Congress faces a dilemma. Should it take more time to consider all of the factors involved and work toward developing better anti-spam legislation, or should it enact legislation immediately to quiet spam critics? Whatever Congress decides, federal legislation will not solve the problem by itself, but it could be an important part of a comprehensive attack that includes anti-spam technology and standards endorsed by the e-mail marketing industry.

RELATED ARTICLE: Tip:white listing

With an average of 18 spam messages arriving in the world's 746 million in boxes each day, spam is becoming a huge problem. Unfortunately anti-spam legislation hasn't proven to be very effective thus far.

Many new spam blockers use a method called white listing, which means that you must grant permission for e-mail to enter your in box by pre-approving specific senders. If a sender is not on your list, the sender receives a "challenge e-mail" from you that asks them to reply back. Once a sender replies back, he or she is added to your white list. Here are some of the benefits of white listing:

* Stops automated spammers -- By requiring a response, automated spamming systems, which are incapable of sending outgoing replies, get locked out of your in box.

* Won't block vital messages -- Any contact can reach you if they are either entered onto your white list manually or if they add themselves by responding to your spam blocker.

* Low-maintenance solution -- Spam blocking doesn't eat up server resources and some services are almost completely transparent to the end user.

To give it a try, check out services like Mailblocks at http://about .mailblocks.com/and ChoiceMail at www.digiportal.com/ choicemail.html

RELATED ARTICLE: More on spam

To see a list of pending legislation: www.spamlaws.com/ federal/summ108.html

To track bills by number: http://thomas.loc.gov

For tips from the federal government for fighting spam: www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/ pubs/online/inbox.htm

RELATED ARTICLE: Spam: The Chamber's position

The Detroit Regional Chamber supports anti-spam legislation that is consistent with current direct mailing and telemarketing rules. The Chamber believes legislation should have an interstate or national basis to maintain consistency throughout the states. Additionally, any legislation should have decisive language to dictate either legal enforcement or yielding consequential action to Internet service providers. For more information, contact Melissa Roy at [e-mail].

Gwen Ferguson is an application specialist at the Detroit Regional chamber. Portions of this article were excerpted from a report by Grant Gross at IDG News Service at www.pcworld.com.