Re: [anti-spam-wg@ripe.net] European Spam Laws are 'meaningless'

[Markus Stumpf <]

A few comments ...

On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 09:13:27PM +0100, Mally Mclane wrote:
> European laws on spam are "meaningless" finds a study by Dutch academics. 
> Researchers at the University of Amsterdam said the laws will provide
> no safeguard against spam because most of it originates outside the
> EU's borders.

1) "most" is a misleading term. 51% is also "most". But with statements
   like that the motivation to *really* do something is been kept small,
   "as it wouldn't change a thing anyway".
   I have not really numbers, but a lot of European IPs are abused to send
   spam, and IMHO not only the originators but also the spews must be
   held responsible.
   An excuse like "but they abused my computer" - that hasn't been updated
   for 5 years - must be annulled.
   Spews must also be liable for what happens.

> The EU Directive on Privacy and Electronic Communications passed in
> July 2002 set out guidelines for how direct marketing should and
> should not be done.

Which was "sponsored" by the industry that thinks direct marketing is
the best since the development of sliced bread. And because they all
- obviously - are the good guys, we don't want strong laws against UBE.

A "funny" example where all this mess leads to:
   A customer of ours (I have checked the logs, it were two emails
   this day in total) sent a business/cooperation proposal to another
   company, with real email address, real name, phone+fax, everything
   and told them about his ideas and that he is in their area and would
   like to meet them to discuss potential business/cooperations.
   We got a spam complaint the same day and when I sent bacl an email
   in the above style and dared to mention that I don't consider this
   spam, but that I will contact our customer and ask him to not send
   email to their company ever again, I got back an email along the lines
   of "we don't want to talk to assholes with your attitude" and our /16
   is now filtered at their border gateway.

> Statistics on spam gathered by mail filtering firm E-Mail Systems has
> found that 80% of the mail messages being sent to schools are spam.

What a big suprise ... 80% of all emails (and more) are spam.

> As a result the pan-Europe opt-in rule, which means spam only goes to
> those that choose to receive it, is rendered "meaningless" said the
> study.

No it is rendered meaningless by the fact that the laws based on this rule
1) do not really prosecute the senders (you get a admonition if at all)
2) the laws are not about you and me but about emails to companies.

I own 2 or 3 kinda popular domains and I get zillions of eMails from
"Newsletters" of German companies each day, that do neither opt-in,
nor bounce handling nor have unsubscribe information nor do they
act I email them.
Have those have logs of their double opt-in handshakes and make them pay
EUR 1000 to everyone they don't have the information and who received
their "Newsletter" and spam will be reduced at once.
Btw these domains receive about 80:20 german:internation spam.

> The rogue nations - Belgium, Germany, Greece, France, Luxembourg, the
> Netherlands, Portugal and Finland - have been threatened with legal
> action.

Germany has passed the bill last month. Individuals are not allowed
to take legal actions based on this bill against spammers, as there is
fear the German courts will not be able to handle the load, so spam is
only banned for violation of competition rules.

	\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet AG            | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0
Research & Development |       D-80807 Muenchen    | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299
"The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally
 proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin"