New weapon for spam: bounty

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
Reply-To: dewayne () warpspeed com
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 16:52:54 -0700
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] New weapon for spam: bounty

[Note:  I don't know why, but this story brought to my mind the old
50's TV series, "Have Gun, Will Travel".  I guess under Lessig's
plan, the 21st century equivalent will be "Have Computer, Will
Travel".  <g>  DLH]

Posted on Sat, Apr. 26, 2003

New weapon for spam: bounty

By Michael Bazeley
Mercury News
<http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/5725404.htm>

Spammers beware. Larry Lessig wants to put a price on your head.

The Stanford law professor will team with Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San
Jose, on Monday to unveil a bill that would require unsolicited
commercial e-mails to be identified as advertising -- and then put a
bounty on anyone who breaks that law.

If the law passes, citizens could be eligible for rewards of
thousands of dollars or more if they're the first to provide the
government with proof and the identity of offending spammers.

``It's like bounty hunters in the old West,'' said Lessig, who most
recently argued a landmark copyright protection case before the U.S.
Supreme Court. ``You bring 'em in and get the bounty.''

Lessig is so sold on his idea, he's offering a guarantee: He'll quit
his Stanford job if the bill becomes law and ``does not substantially
reduce the level of spam.''

Lessig's idea is only the latest in a long list of efforts to combat
what has become the scourge of the Information Age.

Despite myriad technological and legal efforts to curb spam, Internet
users are getting more unsolicited e-mail come-ons than ever,
accounting for about 40 percent of all e-mail traffic.

Lessig said his idea, which he first proposed more than two years
ago, is better than many of the technological ploys used to combat
spam, such as blacklisting e-mail servers allegedly used to send spam.

The first piece of his plan, labeling, is a common approach to the
problem. Any unsolicited commercial e-mail would have to include the
tag ``ADV'' in the subject line, clearly identifying it as an
advertisement. The label would allow Internet service providers or
individual users to filter out -- or filter in -- messages before
viewing them.

In the past, labeling efforts haven't worked.

California passed a law in 1998 that required senders of unsolicited
e-mail advertisements to add ``ADV:'' or ``ADV:ADLT'' to the subject
lines of their messages. Violators are guilty of a misdemeanor and
subject to a $500 fine.

Since then, almost no one has been prosecuted under the law, chiefly
due to a lack of consumer complaints and the difficulty in tracking
down the spammers.

``Just labeling alone has been demonstrated not to be effective,''
said Ray Everett-Church, chief privacy officer of the ePrivacy Group
in Philadelphia. ``There are many spammers ignoring it.''

That's why, Lessig and Lofgren said, lawmakers need to back up the
labeling requirement with strong enforcement. Despite its best
efforts, the government doesn't have the resources to hunt down and
prosecute every illicit spammer. Hence, the citizen spam cop,
motivated by a reward.

``This gives a tool for people to fight back,'' Lofgren said. ``And
it gives a disincentive to spammers to continue.''

Lessig predicted that plenty of ``technically qualified and eager
people'' -- college students, perhaps -- would jump at the chance to
track down spammers for the right price.

The bounty hunters would need to trace the offending e-mail to its
source, identify the sender and provide proof to the Federal Trade
Commission. The FTC would investigate and fine the offender, if
appropriate. The bounty hunter would get 20 percent of the fine.

``You have to be a little private investigator,'' Lessig said.

Lofgren's bill, which will be introduced next week, would also
require commercial e-mails to include a way for recipients to opt out
of future mailings. Companies or individuals that send e-mail to
people who opted out would face penalties.

It will have competition in Congress. Another bill would outlaw
e-mails that have deceptive subject lines and hide the senders'
identity. California lawmakers, meanwhile, are considering a bill
that would allow Internet users to sue e-mail marketing firms for
$500 for each piece of unsolicited advertising.

Contact Michael Bazeley at mbazeley () mercurynews com or (408) 920-5642.

Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/