After years of growing public concern about spam, President Bush signed into law the Can-Spam Act of 2003 (the Act) that went into effect on January 1, 2004. Unfortunately, a recent survey suggests that spam is even more widespread today than before the effective date of the Act. Is spam, thus, a necessary evil of life in the Internet age?
The CAN-Spam Act
Under the regime created by the Act, email senders are prohibited from falsifying or disguising their true identities, using misleading subject lines, improperly harvesting email addresses, or taking advantage of automated systems for generating electronic addresses by combining names, letters and numbers.
Additionally, businesses are not permitted to market themselves through false or misleading emails, and a true return email and postal address must be provided, along with a means to opt-out of receipt of further emails.
There also must be conspicuous notice that an email is an solicitation or advertisement, and sexually oriented materials must be plainly labeled as such.
More spam
The Act is well and good on its face, but simply having this law on the books does not mean the end of spam. Effective enforcement of the law can be a real problem, as spammers frequently are located offshore, making legal action and prosecution difficult. Plus, spammers are creative in covering their tracks on the Internet, causing nightmares in identifying the true sends of spam.
A recent survey conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project between February 3 and March 1, 2004 (the study) shows that, if anything, spam still is a growing, not shrinking, nuisance.
In terms of emails received on personal email accounts, 24% of respondents are receiving more spam than before January 1, 53% have not noticed a change, 3% do not know, and only 20% report that they are receiving less spam.
With respect to work-related email accounts, 19% of respondents say that they are receiving more spam, 53% have not noticed a change, 18% do not know, and only 11% state that they are receiving less spam.
The survey shows an overall increase email users who have reduced their use of email because of spam from 25% last June to 29% now. While last June 52% of users said that they are less trusting of email because of spam, that percentage now has jumped to 63%.
Moreover, the percentage of users who report that spam has made being online unpleasant and annoying has jumped from 70% last June to 77% now. At this point, 86% of email users report some level of distress caused by spam.
Where do we go?
The foregoing statistics are not heartening. Of course, it is possible that the spam problem would be even worse right now without the enactment of the Can Spam Act. Also, it may take more time for full effect of the Act's teeth to be felt; indeed, right now ISP's are just initiating legal action against alleged spammers under the Act.
Still, when all is said and done, it is safe to assume that at least some level of spam will be with us for the foreseeable future. If this is a serious problem for you, you should consider technological methods for blocking spam, such as spam filters, and the potential retention of legal counsel skilled in this area.
This article first appeared on Law.com.
Eric Sinrod is a partner in the San Francisco office of Duane Morris (www.duanemorris.com), where he focuses on litigation matters of various types, including information technology disputes. His column appears Thursdays at USATODAY.com. His Web site is www.sinrodlaw.com, and he can be reached at ejsinrod@duanemorris.com. To receive a weekly e-mail link to Mr. Sinrod's columns, please send an e-mail with the word Subscribe in the Subject line to ejsinrod@duanemorris.com.