K. C. "Khan" Smith, a native of Tennessee, is responsible for a debt of $24 million to the internet service provider EarthLink. According to CNN, in August of 2001, he was served with a lawsuit that accused him of violating multiple state and federal laws, including the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1984, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, and a number of other state statutes. The lawsuit was filed against him. On July 19, 2002, the judge issued a ruling that went against him because he had failed to appear in court. One may call Mr. Smith a spammer.
A provider of e-mail filters and anti-spam software called Brightmail issued a warning that there were about 5 million "attacks" or "bursts" of spam in the month of June 2002, and that the volume of spam has increased by 450 percent from June 2001. This rate remained consistent all the way up to the beginning of 2004, when spam filters first started having an impact. PC World agrees with you.
Between fifty percent and seventy five percent of all e-mail messages are considered to be spam or UCE, which stands for "Unsolicited Commercial Email." These messages are unsolicited and intrusive commercial ads, most of which are concerned with sex, scams, get rich quick schemes, financial services and products, and health articles of questionable origin. Spoofed email addresses, also known as phony email addresses, are being used to send the messages. In order to transmit their messages covertly, some spammers break into unprotected servers, most often those located in China and Korea.
Beginning in 2003, hackers with malicious intent started using spam as a method for installing malware (including viruses, adware, spyware, and Trojan horses) on the unprotected personal computers of people with less technical expertise. They do this by turning the computers into "zombies," organizing them into spam-spewing "bots" (networks), and then selling access to those zombies to criminals on message boards and discussion forums located all over the Internet.
There is a market for spam. Mass e-mailers keep lists of e-mail addresses, which are often "harvested" by spamware bots, which are specialized computer software, from websites. These addresses are then used to send spam. These lists are either leased out to marketers that use bulk mail services or sold to those marketers. They are inexpensive, costing around $100 for a batch of 10 million addresses. Servers and bandwidth are provided by bulk mailers, who charge around $300 per million mails transmitted in exchange for their services.
As receivers of spam get more used to it, Internet service providers become less tolerant of it, and both become more litigious, spammers increase their efforts in order to maintain the same response rate. Spam works. It is not generally undesirable, which makes it difficult to restrict it for that reason. Depending on the message, it evokes between 0.1 and 1 percent favorable follow ups from the target audience. These days, many communications incorporate code in the forms of HTML, JavaScript, and ActiveX, and as a result, they mimic viruses and Trojan horses and may even contain them.
Jupiter Media Matrix predicted in 2001 that the number of spam messages that an average Internet user would receive annually would double to 1400, and that spending on legitimate e-mail marketing would reach $9.4 billion by 2006, compared to just $1 billion in 2001. This was an increase from the $1 billion that was spent on legitimate e-mail marketing in 2001. According to Forrester Research, the amount was $4.8 billion in the year 2003.
Every day, more than 2.3–5 billion mails are considered to be spam. According to eMarketer, the number of messages sent in 2002 was far smaller, at 76 billion. According to the Radicati Group, everyday spam volume will skyrocket to over 15 billion messages by 2006. Jupiter anticipates a much lower number of yearly communications, coming in about 268 billion for this year (2005). The spammer spends around 0.00032 cents on each message they send out.
According to PC Globe, the European Union estimated that the bandwidth costs of spam throughout the world in 2002 amounted to between $8 and $10 billion yearly. Other losses include server outages, time spent deleting undesirable messages, decreased productivity, and higher costs associated with gaining access to the internet.
An anti-spam business has no choice but to emerge as a natural consequence of the spam industry. According to a research by the Radicati Group titled "Anti-virus, anti-spam, and content filtering market trends 2002-2006," anti-spam revenues were anticipated to surpass $88 million in 2002, and to more than double by the year 2006. There has been an explosion in the number of list blockers, report and complaint generators, advocacy organizations, registries of known spammers, and spam filters. According to an article that was published in the Wall Street Journal on June 25, 2002, there has been a recent uptick in the number of anti-spam firms that are receiving funding from eager venture capital.
ISPs are removing the accounts of spammers as part of their commitment to combating abuse, which is reported by victims. However, the latter simply change their Internet service providers or join up for free email services such as Hotmail or Yahoo! As the price of hardware, software, and communications continues to fall, the threshold for entrance into a market is gradually being lowered.
E-mail and internet access through broadband connections are gaining popularity among the general public. As a result of the bursting of the dot-com bubble that occurred five years ago, the market has seen an influx of hundreds of thousands of technologically skilled operators. However, Steve Linford of Spamhaus.org in the UK maintains that about 80 big operators are responsible for the majority of spam.
Now, Internet service providers (ISPs) and portals are reportedly on the verge of beginning to charge marketers using a tiered system that comes complete with premium services, as reported by Jupiter Media. In a letter he sent in 1998, Bill Gates outlined a proposal that Esther Dyson, the chairwoman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, also advocated for:
"I anticipate that, in the not too distant future, you will finally be compensated to read unwanted e-mail, as I originally envisioned the possibility in my book titled "The Road Ahead," which was published in 1995. You will instruct your e-mail application to delete any unwanted communications that do not offer a sum of money that you choose if the message does not include a request from you. If you open a purchased message and learn that it was sent to you by a long-lost friend or someone else who has a valid purpose to contact you, you will have the option to cancel the payment for the message. In any other case, the value of your time will be compensated."
It's possible that subscribers aren't going to like collaborative ventures between gatekeepers and inbox clutterers very much. In addition, leading internet service providers (ISPs) like AT&T and PSINet have been accused of working knowingly with spammers on many occasions. ISPs are dependent on the data traffic that is generated by spam in order to earn income in an increasingly competitive marketplace.
The argument that WorldCom does not control content led the Financial Times and others to highlight how WorldCom is unwilling to prohibit the selling of spamware across its network. WorldCom claims that it does not regulate content. When "pink" contracts, which are the hue of prepared spam, came to light, the accused Internet service providers (ISPs) blamed the whole incident on rogue staff.
PC World is not of this opinion:
"According to Ronnie Scelson, a self-described spammer who signed such a contract with PSInet, backbone providers are more than glad to do business with bulk e-mailers. This statement was made by Ronnie Scelson. Scelson claims, "I've signed up with the largest 50 carriers two or three times." [Case in point] .. The spammer from Louisiana claims that he is capable of sending 84 million commercial e-mail messages every day using his three DS3 lines operating at 45 megabits per second each. Scelson poses the following question to the individual: "If you were collecting $40,000 a month for each circuit," he adds, "would you want to shut me down?""
Every day, the line that divides spam e-mail from email marketing that is permission-based or "opt-in" becomes more blurry. Some list resellers provide an assurance that their products are obtained via voluntary participation. The principles of the Direct Marketing Association, as stated by PC World, state that failing to react to an unwanted e-mail constitutes "opting in," which is the opposite of the marketing tactic known as "opting out." The vast majority of specialists, however, advise strongly that spam victims should not react to spammers, since this might result in the victim's email address being verified.
However, spam is exceeding previously known technical limits. Japan has passed a law to combat spam sent over wireless SMS and directed at unsuspecting users of mobile phones. A significant number of states in the United States as well as the European Parliament have done the same thing. There has been some discussion about the possibility of creating a "do not spam" list, analogous to the "do not call" list used in telemarketing. Users of mobile phones will submit their phone numbers to be included to the list in order to prevent getting UCE (spam). As a result of the CAN-Spam Act of 2003, email users are eligible to reap the advantages of a comparable list.
Mobile phone spam and spim, which is short for spam distributed over instant messaging, are especially annoying since mobile phone connections are expensive and sluggish. According to Britain's Mobile Channel, a mobile advertising business reported by "The Economist," SMS advertising, which is still relatively new, generates a response rate of 10-20 percent, which is much higher than the response rate of 1-3 percent for direct mail.
Internet identity systems, such as Microsoft's Passport and the one that is being suggested by Liberty Alliance, would make it far simpler for marketers to zero in on potential customers.
Mass panic is the only term that adequately captures the response to spam. It has become a popular activity for vindictive, self-appointed, vigilante "cyber-cops" to falsely accuse another person of being a spammer, even though that person is not a spammer. Businesses and discussion forums that are entirely above board and engage in opt-in email marketing often discover that they have been included to one or more black lists, which results in the destruction of both their reputation and their revenue stream.
Yesmail, which is owned by CMGI, was successful in obtaining a temporary restraining order in January 2002 against MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System), which prevented MAPS from including the respected e-mail marketer on its Real-time Blackhole list. The dispute was resolved amicably without going to court.
Large online opinion polling business Harris Interactive filed a lawsuit against MAPS as well as the Internet service providers (ISPs) who banned its email communications when the company discovered it was included in MAPS' Blackhole. Their chief executive officer pointed the finger of blame at one of their rivals for the claims that led to Harris' placement on the list.
When combined with other harmful occurrences, such as viruses, Trojan horses, and spyware, the Internet's basic basis as a pleasant and generally risk-free medium of communication and data collection is under jeopardy as a result.
It has come to light that spammers operate under their very own organizations. The National Organization of Internet Commerce (NOIC) made the threat that it will publish on its website the e-mail addresses of millions of users of America Online. AOL has very stringent procedures in place to combat spam. The president of NOIC, Damien Melle, claimed to CNET that AOL is restricting bulk email because it wants the advertising profits for itself (by selling pop-up advertisements). "AOL is blocking bulk email because it wants the advertising revenues for itself," Melle said.
The issue of spam is an example of the traditional "free rider" dilemma. When weighed against the potential advantages, the expense of preventing a spammer almost always comes out on top. It is more convenient and less expensive to just tap the "delete" key. Therefore, individuals choose to let others perform the task and enjoy the result, which is the public benefit of having an internet that is free of spam. They cannot be excluded from the advantages of an outcome of such a kind since "non-excludable" is the defining characteristic of public goods. A rising number of users who are not competitors does not make a public product any less valuable.
A scenario like this is comparable to a failed market and necessitates the involvement of the government in the form of regulation and enforcement. More than one hundred spammers have been subjected to legal action by the Federal Trade Commission of the United States (FTC), which was taken in response to the spammers' promotion of fraudulent products and services.
The anti-spam initiative known as "Project Mailbox" is a joint effort involving several law enforcement agencies in the United States and the commercial sector. Both non-governmental organizations and lobbying groups, such as CAUCE, the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail, have waded into the conflict to voice their opinions on the matter.
However, despite a few recent anti-spam and anti-spyware Acts, Congress remains oddly unwilling to establish strict rules against spam. This is despite the fact that spam is a growing problem. The protection of free expression, the limitation of official powers to control commerce, the prevention of unjust limitations on trade, and the interests of small businesses are some of the reasons given. The courts are also inconsistent in their rulings. In a few instances, such as Missouri vs. American Blast Fax, the courts in the United States came to the conclusion "that the rule forbidding the mailing of unsolicited ads is unconstitutional." [Citation needed]
According to Spamlaws.com, for example, the 107th Congress considered passing the following laws, although they were never actually passed into law:
The "CAN SPAM" Act of 2001 (H.R. 3146), the "Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Act of 2001" (H.R. 95), the "Wireless Telephone Spam Protection Act" (H.R. 113), the "Anti-Spamming Act of 2001" (H.R. 718), the "Who Is E-Mailing Our Kids Act" (H.R. 1846), the "Protect Children From E-Mail Smut Act of 2001 (S. 630).
The 106th Congress did not do much better in its efforts to pass anti-spam regulations. A few of the states have stepped forward to take responsibility for the situation. The following states have been added to the list: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
On the other side of the water, things aren't much better. In 2001, the European Parliament made the decision to let each member nation to establish its own spam rules. This allowed them to circumvent the need for a continent-wide regulation and put the communications ministers of the union in an uncomfortable position. Paradoxically, in March of 2002, it was also determined to place restrictions on SMS spam. It is very evident that chaos prevails. Finally, in May of 2002, as part of a Directive on Data Protection, it established stringent anti-spam rules.
As a result of the adverse regulatory climate, spammers are moving their operations to developing nations like Malaysia, Nepal, and Nigeria. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued a warning about these nations in a report that was published in May of 2005. The report stated that these nations lack the technical know-how as well as the financial resources (let alone the will) to combat spam. Their customers, who are denied of bandwidth in any case, have to put up with a less stable service and sporadic access to the internet as a direct consequence of this;
"Spam is a much more serious issue in developing countries...as it is a heavy drain on resources that are scarcer and costlier in developing countries than elsewhere," writes Suresh Ramasubramanian, the author of the report and an OECD advisor as well as the postmaster for Outblaze.com. Ramasubramanian is also the postmaster for Outblaze.com.
ISPs, spam monitoring services, and governments in rich industrialized countries react by placing entire countries on black lists and, as a result, denying access to their users collectively. Examples of countries currently on black lists include Macedonia and Costa Rica.
There is a growing trend toward international cooperation in the fight against criminal organizations' impending destruction of the internet. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had just made the announcement that it will collaborate with its counterparts in other countries to remove zombie computers from the network. A positive step, albeit one that is about three years late. Spammers all over the world continue to be six steps ahead of everyone else and have the upper hand.