Spam is theft, not free speech

by James Simpson
Daily Journal
Tuesday, June 3, 2003

     Gov. Mark R. Warner recently signed new anti-spam legislation into law in Virginia. Unfortunately, this will do little to curb the ever-rising tide of junk e-mail.
    Even if (and more likely when) a federal law is enacted, spam will continue to flow. The reason is that many spammers operate outside of the United States, and when a federal law is passed, spammers who don't already operate overseas almost certainly will move their operations offshore.
    Unsolicited bulk e-mail, otherwise known as spam, has become such a nuisance that pressure from consumers has spilled over from companies to the government. Like many of my friends and family, more than half my daily e-mail consists of spam.
    The reason spam is so prevalent is twofold. First of all, it is very inexpensive for the spammer to generate.
    And secondly, it works. If no one ever read the solicitations sent to them, occasionally patronizing the services advertised, spammers would not make any money. It would be a waste of their time to participate in a venture that offered no return, so they simply would move on to some other scam.
    People hate spam for myriad of reasons. Not only is it unsolicited, but spammers send e-mail indiscriminately. It usually is misleading and quite often contains material that is objectionable to its recipients.
    Unlike those who send junk mail, spammers use various tricks to conceal the source of their e-mails, also called ``masking," which prevents an individual from being able to reply to the sender.
    Frequently, when a spammer includes a link or e-mail address to be used by a recipient for removal from future e-mails, it's just a way for the spammer to confirm that the e-mail address is legitimate and move it into a higher (i.e., more aggressive) spamming category.
    Spammers find e-mail addresses from various sources and add them to their databases. Many of the e-mail addresses in these databases have been obtained from Web sites through the use of a ``spider" program, which scans Web pages recording anything identified as an e-mail address.
    They also search for members of AOL who have created a user profile, then copy those screen names into their database. If you post on a message board, create a Web site, or request information from certain Web sites, you are at risk of getting hit with an enormous amount of unwanted and annoying e-mail.
    As a Libertarian, my first inclination is to say, ``Hey ... this is just free market advertising like junk mail or telemarketing, so leave it alone." I even have heard some arguments that spam should be protected by the First Amendment as free speech.
    However, the real issue here is not free speech, but theft. There are some significant differences between junk mail and spam e-mail that cannot be ignored.
    With junk mail - and its annoying twin, telemarketing - the majority of the cost burden is placed on the company doing the advertising. While one could argue that some of the costs are transferred to the consumer, such as a portion of their trash bill for all the junk mail that is thrown away, these costs are negligible at best.
    Another annoying advertising technology, known as ``pop-up ads," are part of a company's sales revenue. The Web site or Internet Service Provider you patronize uses these to generate revenue, similar to TV commercials.
    You have the option of not supporting these businesses, and they have the choice and ability to limit their ads, or obtain revenue through other sources such as user fees.
    Spam, on the other hand, places a majority of the costs on the ISPs it is sent through, which lose members and are obliged to do what they can to meet customer demands. This costs businesses tons of money, much of it in man-hours spent to find ways to satisfy upset customers and the additional servers needed for e-mail.
    The cost for this time and effort has to come from somewhere. Ultimately, like the parasites it is modeled after, the costs are placed unduly on the backs of consumers.
    This is why as a Libertarian, I support anti-spam legislation. While it will have little effect on spam, it is heading in the right direction by trying to protect consumers from unapparent theft.
    For more information on spammers and the businesses that support them, go to http:/ www.spamhaus.org. This site tracks the world's worst spammers and has advisories and news updates.
   
James Simpson lives in Lake Ridge and welcomes reader feedback. His frequently spammed e-mail address is: JamesSimpson@aol.com.