In a word, no. Experts hardly expect the act to stop, or even slow the flow of spam, and evidence indicates that its not having much impact. For example, Vircom, a maker of security seoftware, examined more than half a million pieces of spam originating in the U.S. (and so covered by the law) and found that only 71 messages complied with the act. Another study, by the anti-spam vendor Commtouch, found that only 10% of all spam originating in the U.S. complies with the act. The law itself has variety of requirements, including that spammers must use their true return addresses and that they must include opt-out instructions in every mail. But the law pertains only to the U.S. and many spammers have simply moved offshore or started sending spam from servers in other countries. In addition, there’s no way that any government agency can possibly keep track of, much less prosecute, all spammers who violate the law.
Still, some of the big ISPs and various law enforcement agencies are using law to go after spammers. In March 2004, America Online, EarthLink, Microsoft, and Yahoo! filed civil actions under the law against hundreds of spammers. A month later, the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Attorney’s Office if the Eastern District of Michigan announced they were prosecuting four spammers.
But lets face it, the law is flawed. It doesn’t prosecute those who benefit the most of spam, the companies that sell the products being advertised. After all, If McDonald’s paid someone who paid someone to plaster private property with McDonald’s posters, the company would be liable. But for some peculiar reason, anti-spam laws haven’t taken this tack. Could this be yet one more example of Congress passing law so it can tell voters its done something about a problem, even if the problem remains ? Look in your email inbox tomorrow morning then you decide.
