Re: spam

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I'd like propose a theory reguarding the success of the junk fax law which
would provide a reason that similar laws reguarding junk email might not
be successful:

There are significant costs associated with the origination of junk faxes
in the the sender must tie up a phone line for the duration of the
transmission and in many/most cases will be originating the fax from a
commercial measured rate phone so that even local calls will cost real
money. A wide area junk fax transmission would include long distance costs
or many remote offices.

On that basis, my theory is that the junk fax law, with the potential for
fines, etc., tipped the economics for the sender sufficiently that the
problem was resolved.

Junk email on the other hand has an extremely low cost of transmission in
the current economic model. Adding laws which establish penalties for
sending junk email will probably send the offenders outside of the reach
of the enforcement authorities. In the US, we already have major
corporations moving shell headquarters offshore to friendly taxing
authorities to avoid MAJOR tax bills and can't even fix the problem when
there are serious economic consequences to the government. Based on that
example and many others, I have no faith that enforcement based penalties
will make a significant difference because the perceived change to the
economics will be minimal.

Dave Morris



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]