1st spam ‘code of practice’
p2p news / p2pnet: The world’s first legislative code of practice for internet and email service providers has been registered by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).
Under it, ISPs could face huge fines if they fail to offer spam filtering, impose email sending limits and give subscribers a system for handling complaints, says the Australian Associated Press.
"ACMA anti-spam team manager Bruce Matthews said the watchdog could seek penalties in the Federal Court of up to $10 million for a breach of an industry code," it states.
Spammers would also face penalties of up to $1 million under the Spam Act.
"The code will come into effect on July 16, after which ACMA plans to conduct compliance checks of the country’s 700 ISPs," adds the AAP.
Also See:
Australian Associated Press – World-first code to crackdown on spam, March 28, 2006
March 28th, 2006 at 7:40 pm
Why should regular net users be penalized for the stupidity of those who refuse to secure their computers (Let their computers be used to send spam). There are also some list servers where solicited email is sent out in huge quantities.
Email filters catch legitimate messages. Filtering reduces the chance of a legitimate message getting through. I receive email from a customer which is constantly branded as spam. I have even lost some business because emails did not make it past the spam filter.
Why not give people immunity for attacking the networks of known spammers?
Attacking the websites advertised in spam will cause the cost of doing business to be greater than the profit margin. A list of known websites advertised in spam can be distributed to mailservers. When a mailserver gets a message containing the URL of one of these sites, it should at least visit the site (and maybe submit a fake order).
There are other options available as well:
http://www.plaza1.net/SpammerSlapper
http://www.plaza1.net/SpamFryer.jar
http://www.plaza1.net/spammerslammer.cgi
All of these present different ways to attack spammer where it counts… their bottom line.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:50 pm
I agree, the ISP’s should not be the focus of anti spam legislation, the spammers should be. That legislation is like punishing a landlord because the lock was not good enough and your apartment got robbed.
March 28th, 2006 at 11:31 pm
I agree with both of you but wanted to point out that the ISPs just have to provide the filtering option – its up to the user as to whether they use it or not.
cheers