# Is Spam Really "Illegal" now? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 17, 2003, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649 "2003-12-17T23:27:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Ice97531](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bb73d2/32.png) [@Ice97531](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ice97531)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2003, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/1 "2003-12-17T23:27:57Z")
I recently saw on the news that SPAM was going to be made illegal and violators could actually faces charges. Do you think that this will stop spam or will they just work their way around the law? Also, anyone else have any more information on the new law? ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2003, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/2 "2003-12-17T23:39:33Z")
Another important question is, will we see spammers arrested on COPS? That would be cool. ---
**Author:** ![Eleusis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Eleusis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eleusis)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2003, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/3 "2003-12-17T23:40:58Z")
It’s not being made illegal. It’s just being regulated at the federal level. This preempts, in many cases, stricter state laws. So in some states, this is a green light for _more_ spam. ---
**Author:** ![Ice97531](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bb73d2/32.png) [@Ice97531](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ice97531)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2003, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/4 "2003-12-17T23:41:29Z")
lol! No…don’t take Billy! He just play computer games! ---
**Author:** ![Ice97531](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bb73d2/32.png) [@Ice97531](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ice97531)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2003, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/5 "2003-12-17T23:42:44Z")
Have you guys seen the news yet of Bush signing the documents? I thought that was for NO SPAM ---
**Author:** ![Eleusis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Eleusis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eleusis)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2003, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/6 "2003-12-17T23:45:11Z")
> [@](#): > > The bill requires senders of commercial e-mail to include an enforceable opt-out mechanism, prohibits false and deceptive headers and subject lines, increases monetary damages imposed on spammers who engage in particularly nefarious spamming techniques, and includes strong, multi-pronged enforcement by the FTC, state attorneys general, and Internet service providers (ISPs) with the potential for multi-million dollar judgments. > > Additional criminal provisions in the bill create several tiers of penalties, ranging up to 5 years in prison, for several common spamming practices. [http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2003/Dec/1022197.htm](http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2003/Dec/1022197.htm) I think it’s more accurate to say that they’ve made up new rules for spamming. So, if you follow the rules, it’s in essence now legal. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/7 "2003-12-18T00:42:02Z")
> [@](#): > > The bill requires senders of commercial e-mail to include an enforceable opt-out mechanism Does this mean that, from now on, those “If you don’t want any more E-mails from us, click HERE” buttons will actually work, rather than simply confirm that yours is an active E-mail address? ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/8 "2003-12-18T01:37:28Z")
Note that the bill was heavily re-worded at the behest of the direct emailer’s lobby. (The equivalent of a “legitimate businessmen’s club”.) It isn’t going to do anything good. In fact, it calls for the setting of an opt out list. Such list will be available to spammers, etc. In general, when states start passing laws the feds should be passing, the feds step in and overrule them. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/9 "2003-12-18T03:00:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ftg \* > \*\*In general, when states start passing laws the feds should be passing, the feds step in and overrule them. \*\* Only very recently, since the Bush administration, has this become a general rule. In other words, when the people who long argued the states know more than the Federal government get into power . . . ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/10 "2003-12-18T03:47:53Z")
Spam will now come from off shore, where US law can’t touch it. That is all. ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/11 "2003-12-18T03:54:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* > \*\*Does this mean that, from now on, those “If you don’t want any more E-mails from us, click HERE” buttons will actually work, rather than simply confirm that yours is an active E-mail address? \*\* The original mailer will be legally obligated to remove you from his list, but he may sell your address to anyone he likes, as it has been confirmed as active. ---
**Author:** ![Early\_Out](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Early\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Early_Out)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/12 "2003-12-18T04:05:56Z")
Pay careful attention to what **Princhester** posted. The spam will continue to come, but more of it will come from outside the U.S. So, the “unsubscribe” links should probably still be avoided, for the same reason one should avoid them now: replying in any way, shape, or form just confirms to the spammer that there’s a live person at that particular email address. Also note that, under the Federal law, an individual may not pursue legal action against a spammer who he believes has violated the law. Only the government can go after the alleged violator. ---
**Author:** ![Manduck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manduck/32/256_2.png) [@Manduck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manduck)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/13 "2003-12-18T04:10:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ice97531 \* > **Have you guys seen the news yet of Bush signing the documents?** As long as he didn’t sign with his real email address he should be fine. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/14 "2003-12-18T05:36:37Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* Does this mean that, from now on, those “If you don’t want any more E-mails from us, click HERE” buttons will actually work, rather than simply confirm that yours is an active E-mail address?/QUOTE] Yes, in the same way that mailing your keys to every potential car-theif will prevent them from busting your window when they steal your car. ---
**Author:** ![Rayne\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df705f/32.png) [@Rayne\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rayne_Man)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/15 "2003-12-18T08:27:56Z")
In theory Spam is now illegal on this side of the pond but I do not know what affect this law will have. Full story here :- [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3308989.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3308989.stm) ---
**Author:** ![LateComer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b5ac83/32.png) [@LateComer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LateComer)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/16 "2003-12-18T13:28:25Z")
Are other salted meat products going to be affected? Salami? Summer Sausage? ---
**Author:** ![SirRay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@SirRay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirRay)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2003, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-spam-really-illegal-now/219649/17 "2003-12-18T14:19:37Z")
This legislation is not known as the “Can Spam” act for nothing. In reality, it doesn’t do much of anything, except requiring a questionable “opt-out” requirement. The few key provisions that may have helped, such as requiring a identifier in the subject line (e.g. “ADV: Print cartridges refills…”) were removed, or will be ineffective (such as the requirement that the FTC study a “Do Not Spam” list: > [@](#): > > Under the law, the Federal Trade Commission is required to study the idea of setting up a do-not-spam registry modeled after the national do-not-call list of people who don’t want to get telephone solicitations. The FTC, which must deliver a plan to Congress within six months, has expressed doubts that a registry is feasible, but lawmakers, including Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., are adamant about getting one established. ) Some spammers are even under the impression that this legislation prohibits ISPs from blocking Spam! (It does nothing of the sort, but unfortunately I can’t find the article anymore - anyway this misconception is bound to cause trouble). About the only really useful item is that spammers cannot (legally) use false header information, although it remains to be seen how effective this will be. Interesting note: in the [TheRegister.co.uk](http://TheRegister.co.uk), a British IT on-line newsletter (they also have an American version), the general consensus was that this US law will allow so US spammers much latitude that the UK will be swamped by US spam, rendering the new UK anti-spam laws ineffective…