When the CAN SPAM bill was first signed into law in the US, it seemed pretty clear that it had little to do with actually stopping spam, and plenty to do with letting some politicians pat themselves on the back for stopping spam. Plenty of people wondered, if the real purpose was to try to stop spam, what was the backup plan should CAN SPAM fail? In the business world, you tend to have things like backup plans -- but that doesn't actually happen in politics, where you simply name a bill after what you hope will happen, and then assume that once it's passed, it's as good as happening. While there has been some progress in the fight against spam, it's mostly come from improving filter technology. In the meantime, however, CAN SPAM's continued uselessness is highlighted in this new report showing that the amount of spam that "complies" with CAN SPAM disclosure rules is at an all-time low of 0.27 percent. But, it's not like politicians care because they can successfully claim that they "fought spam."
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Declassified Opinion On Bulk Email Collection Details More Abuse By The NSA
- FBI Uses Invitation To Investigate One Email As An Excuse To Dig Through Multiple Email Accounts
- Lavabit To Release Code As Open Source, As It Creates Dark Mail Alliance To Create Even More Secure Email
- How Is Consumer Watchdog 'Helping' When It's Trying To Destroy Services Consumers Find Useful
- Mayor Bloomberg Uses Private Email To Avoid FOI Requests; Has No Plans To Retain Archive Of Office, NYPD Emails