Louisiana Tries Anti-Spam Law

chompyZ writes "The legislative battle against SPAMMING heats-up as a new law became effective yesterday in Louisiana. According to KPLC, the new law requires senders of sexually explicit e-mail to include a note in the subject line, "adv-adult," to let unsuspecting internet users know ahead of time. The Olympian reports that Louisiana officials actually think this will be effective... leaves you wondering if "officials" have any clue how SPAMMERS operate..."

Great

[justsomebody (525308)]

Now subjetcs will be

adv-adult: Enlarge your penis

Way to go, I just don't know if this way leads somewhere:)

Re:Great

[EinarH (583836)]

I think think this is a *cough* really great idea. And this is *cough* very likely to work.

But if they had expanded it beyond only adv-adult it would have been so much better.
Then I could have deleted my scam-419 mail together with the adv-adult mail.

Re:Great

[orangesquid (79734)]

As much as I hate spam, it really bothers me to see any laws which restrict my behavior online. I consider the Internet to be something futuristic, where individuals are free to choose their own code of ethics, rather than having one dictated to them in a larger society, and individuals are free to interpret others' actions as they want and defend themselves as they want. I know that's not very realistic, but the quasi-anarchy "back in the good old days" before the Internet was Serious Business, before the Web was Important was something amazingly freeing and fulfilling. I do not want other people just discovering the realm of computers and global communication to be shoved into just another restrictive, judgemental society like the one in which we all participate in Real Life.

Spam ruins the online experience in the same way that mass-marketed commercialism does, and I hate to see the Internet become a thing of money and corporate power and not of freedom and individual power, but imposing restrictions doesn't seem to address the issue. However, maybe the problem will always be impossible to solve, because with freedom comes greed, and with freedom comes abuse...

But don't forget to try our new Suction Pump!!! Garanteed results!!! An inch every week!!! Girls will beg for you!!! Order from our website!!!

Re:Great

[maelstrom (638)]

Extremely unrealistic... The same case could be made for Slashdot itself. In the early days of /. there were no user accounts, there was no karma whoring because there wasn't a need for moderation at all. The "community" was small enough that you knew everyone and people could be trusted not to spoof other people. As /. grew, changes had to be made to the social structure in order to cope with scale.

This is true of any society. This is not anything new, as society changed from small family groups to tribes to cities to city states to nations, more laws and force had to be applied to keep things moving smoothly.

The challenge isn't keeping a state of "quasi-anarchy" at all costs, and whining about your rights. The challenge is taking responsibility and tutoring your elected officials on how law, technology and society intersect. Personally, I think there should be some regulation on unsolicited commercial email. Back in the good ole days I could actually use my email, now I get 20-25 spams a day vs about 1 or 2 actual useful e-mails. Personally, I find that a great restriction on my behavior and a burden to my resources.

Re:Great

[orangesquid (79734)]

I guess it's that my fear of organized justice as being something exploitable, unfair, and inhuman... I would rather have a vengeful vigilante on my heels than to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and weeks of my life fighting for myself in court just to end up wasting years in jail, because some big corporation has more money and power than me and disagreed with me about something.

(But, I am rather surprised to see how everyday-normal slashdotters are... there seem to be almost no anarchists, extremi

Re:Great

[McDutchie (151611)]

(But, I am rather surprised to see how everyday-normal slashdotters are... there seem to be almost no anarchists, extremists, or serious rebels here, which is unforunate because I hate it when cool places are filled with normality, decency, and everything that escapists and surrealists despise. Where am I supposed to find my fantasy world where I can escape from everything? If the Internet is not the place for small, free communities, then where *is* the right place? Or am I just not looking in the righ

Re:Great

[by Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, you're totally right. Spammers have a right to use up my mailbox space and my time. Is anyone crying over the illegality of junk faxes? Come on.

Making laws against spam is not censorship. Stop acting like it.

Re:Great

[EinarH (583836)]

Just to clarify, my post was ment as irony and should be modded Funny if anything.

But on the restriction/behavior controll vs. freedom subject, and without going too much into the commercialism debate; I do belive that this could have a _limited_ effect within LA. (without knowing much about LA)
But what I don't understand is why they allow spam (as in unsolicted advertising via smtp) anyway.

I have yet to see any good arguments why they can not ban sending out *thousands* of emails.
I don't really beli

Vigilante justice

[coyote-san (38515)]

You want to see an online community where we all live by our own code of ethics?....

Fine. Earlier today I caught some asshole trying to run his spam through my mail server. The headers also showed him forging email addresses in my own domain name.

My "own code of ethics" is to pound this guy into a bloody pulp, then pound him some more. I doubt that you'll find many people in this situation who disagree with this attitude - this jerk is trying to profit by abusing my good name! He doesn't care that his

Re:Great

[ibbey (27873)]

As much as I hate spam, it really bothers me to see any laws which restrict my behavior online.

Oh, come on. Does the requirement to honestly label the content of a -commercial- message really affect your freedom that much? Businesses -do not- deserve the same rights that private individuals do. As an individual, I believe I have a right to control what mail arrives in my mailbox. That right trumps your right to send me whatever spam you may wish to.

I think it's high time that more first-ammendment acivists (and I consider myself almost a first-ammendment radical) realize that along with freedom-of-speech comes an equally important right to "freedom not to be forced to listen to someone elses freedom of speech". Historically, there was no need for such a law, since you could always go elsewhere if someone was saying something you didn't chjose to listen to. As media becomes more & more closely intertwined with our lives, however, it's becoming impossible to ignore content that you want to. It's important to remember that the proposed law does not prevent you from sending me as much junk mail as you want, it just allows me to easily filter out any messages that I don't want to recieve before they reach my inbox. Laebling laws such as this one (along with adequately severe penalties to ensure compliance) are the ideal way of deailing with the problem. It allows your freedom-of-speech, and me my freedom-to-ignore.

Re:I AM a LA resident...

[justsomebody (525308)]

Nope, what it would lead to it would be something like that.

Predefined filter in newer mailers:
move all mssages where subjects contain adv-adult
to folder Personal Folders/Scientific matters against world extinction

and next advertising will be something like protect your self against mom raiding your computer. Use .X.X. mailer

At least it is a try...

[eaddict (148006)]

Though the paragraph is somewhat pessimistic the concept is a good one. Why not try? If it works, great, if not then tweak it till it does. I hope more states try something.

Re:At least it is a try...

[Arker (91948)]

It's not a step in the right direction at all. It's a step toward what the spammers want - a legal backdrop to claim that what they're doing is ok. A step in the right direction would be to stop spamming, not to label their spam so they can then claim it's legal for them to steal.

Re:At least it is a try...

[Pharmboy (216950)]

It's not a step in the right direction at all. It's a step toward what the spammers want - a legal backdrop to claim that what they're doing is ok. A step in the right direction would be to stop spamming, not to label their spam so they can then claim it's legal for them to steal.

One of the things it also may provide is a basis for prosecution. Most spammers will not comply because they know its easy to filter it out, and non-compliance is a reason to prosecute. Even though the prosecution may not be s

eh?

[DrSkwid (118965)]

Why is

"Great offer at Wal-Mart, 2 for 1 Washing powder"

more acceptable than

"Great offer at Sex-Mart, 2 for 1 Vibrators"

?

Re:At least it is a try...

[Arker (91948)]

Spammers don't make any attempt to obey the rules we already have, why do you think a bunch of confused legislation would change that?

The people backing the idea of legislation on spam include the really big spammers, and this is the danger. Any national legislation is going to have nice big holes for 'legitimate' corporate spammers to continue to spam, while attempting to put their more entrepeneurial, less established competitors out of business. This is not acceptable at all.

The only thing that will

IANA US resident

[imbaczek (690596)]

and so I don't know the law you have there, but won't it just cause spammers to move outside Louisiana?

Then we'd see...

[dapuk (603973)]

Subject: a<!--xkxiseig-->dv-4d<input type="hidden">ult

Body:
Fr33 g0at pr0n c!ick h3re!

donotspam.gov???

[winstarman (624536)]

I'm waiting to see how futile an http://donotspam.gov would be.

Re:donotspam.gov???

[sharkey (16670)]

D'oh! I read that as donutspam.gov, and thought it was a pretty good idea. How disappointing.

What about offshore spammers

[Chatmag (646500)]

Most every porn type email I get can be traced back to servers in China or The Netherlands. I doubt those Cajuns will be going overseas anytime soon to prosecute.

Hmm, just got a new porn email, from Pythonvideo, up in Canada. Hope those guys have a large travel budget.

Re:What about offshore spammers

[McDutchie (151611)]

Most every porn type email I get can be traced back to servers in China or The Netherlands. I doubt those Cajuns will be going overseas anytime soon to prosecute.

Unless the spam you get is actually in Chinese (etc.), in most cases these are actually American spammers buying offshore "bullet-proof" hosting at premium prices in an attempt to prevent being tracked down and to prevent their sites from being shut down. Offshore hosting does not make one immune from prosecution.

Tracking them down is actually

yeah

[dtfinch (661405)]

"adv-adult: Fill your prescriptions from Canada, save up to 80% !"

That would be really helpful if I not only didn't have a spam filter, but took the time to read every spam that didn't have a pornographic title.

Of course, this only applies to louisianans who send non-anonymous pornographic spam to other louisianans.

New Laws?

[heli0 (659560)]

Spammers are already breaking laws; highjacking mail servers, using trojans such as 'jeem' and 'proxy-guzu' to make others send spam, etc. I doubt this law is going to be the one that finally makes them operate ethically.

Perhaps they need to also make it a crime for an individual in the state to purchase a product or service from a spammer...

Just a hook

[SpacePunk (17960)]

It may be ineffective in getting spammers to stop their penis and lolita porn spams, but it does give the state a way of prosecuting spammers. Remember, going after a criminal is just a matter of technicality. After all, they got Al Capone for tax evasion of all things.

Re:Just a hook

[SpacePunk (17960)]

All spammers can be tracked down. Just because it was sent through an open relay doesnt' mean that he can't be found.

Re:Just a hook

[AndroidCat (229562)]

If the spammer wants your money, he's eventually going to have to give you a way to contact him. And any cheque or credit-card transaction will leave a paper-trail.

It might not work...but...

[Cat_Byte (621676)]

At least spammers operating inside the U.S. will be a little nervous when they get several notifications from lawyers after it was traced back to them. Bouncing emails off of or originating from foreign mail servers may be effective for not being able to do anything at the ISP level but if they are caught in their apartment standing in a room full of penis enlargement pill cases where the law can reach them at a business level..... They'll probably wish they hadn't sold it to all those prisoners who are winking & saying "you're my little puppy now".

How do they plan on enforcing this stupid law(s)?

[Dukeofshadows (607689)]

Most spammers operate out of other countries these days, as do telemarketers. If you ask one the next time one is on the phone, they usually call from another time zone or Canada (if the target is American). Most spammers operate from servers in Canada or small Pacific Rim countries that would prove immune from this law anyway. Note also that most of these sexually explicit e-mails are easily recognized by anyone literate as they tend to accumulate several consonants at the end of the e-mail title that form babble instead of coherent words. I find this an example of people saber-rattling in preparation for re-election campaigns, especially given that several other meaningless "vote-for-me" laws were modified or enacted at the same time. These include:

-no more execution of the mentally retarded (already mandated by the Supreme Court)

-allows telemarketers to call you if you "are referred to them by someone you know"

-increase penalties against drunk drivers who kill or seriously injure people while driving with over a 0.2 blood alcohol level (as if attempted/ murder is not serious enough to get life in prison anyway)

-no credit card company can give out anything of value to students unless they also get a brochure

Some of the new laws make sense, but again there are enough of weird and nonsensical laws that I wonder if such would make it to the legislative table, much less get passed, if not for the election coming up in about a year's time. Until then I await the first case of a spammer getting tried under this law if he/she/it/they are operating from another state or country.

Re:How do they plan on enforcing this stupid law(s

[BurritoWarrior (90481)]

Actually, many spammers operate from INSIDE the United States, they simply hire companies outside the United States to send/route the spam.

Good spam defence... no way to be correct

[ClarkEvans (102211)]

As each state and locality implement their own variant, some requiring "ADV:" in the subject line, some requiring "ADULT:" and this one requiring "adv-adult", all a spammer will have to do is claim that he can't possibly satisfy all of the constraints. Why can't we have a header which marks spam as spam, such as "Solicited: no"? Or just require that all spam use "Precedence: bulk"?

Not that any of this will be effective... but if they have to legislate something...

Re:Good spam defence... no way to be correct

[schon (31600)]

As each state and locality implement their own variant, some requiring "ADV:" in the subject line, some requiring "ADULT:" and this one requiring "adv-adult", all a spammer will have to do is claim that he can't possibly satisfy all of the constraints.

Not true.

Nobody is saying that "you must satisfy all constraints for all users" - they're saying that "for state X, you must use contstraint X, and for state Y, you must use constraint Y, etc.", which is not impossible at all.

The spammer just has to be car

adv-adult

[SeanTobin (138474)]

Check out my webcam! [goatse.cx]

You can't mod me down! I had adv-adult in the subject line!

White list

[Teun (17872)]

Handy for those with a spam filter, now you can save the only interesting spam from going to dev/null.

This sounds about right

[supersoftdrink (563614)]

coming from the state that brings you drive-through daquiri huts. There's a law in Louisiana that says you can't have an open container of liquor in your car. Somehow having a styrofoam cup with a lid and a straw is still a closed container. It's things like this that made me move away from that God-forsaken state. :)

how i blocked USA spam

[by Anonymous Coward]

as 99.9% of spam i recieve is usa based and iam not a USA resident or have any buisness there i managed to block it all simply by filtering the $ sign, works great and hasnt created a false positive in 2years of using this method :-)

Qui bono? Find & fine THEM!

[crovira (10242)]

Just gather spam and fine the spammer's client.

That'll make the clients go away and kill the spam industry. Let'em use another means of advertising because spamming will cost them tens of tousands of dollars a copy.

Re:Qui bono? Find & fine THEM!

[phantomlord (38815)]

Buy our new penis enlargement pills. Available only from crovira at http://www.softwareprototypes.com/

Now, I just need to sit back until my competition is fined out of existence. You didn't email it? Oh, well, you're the beneficiary, so we don't believe you.

As a Louisianan...

[Hayzeus (596826)]

I am proud of my legislature, and fully expect this to decrease the amount of spam coming into my mailbox.

By "decrease", of course, I mean "exponentially increase unabated just as it has been doing for the last several years".

Why is this different than snail mail?

[pmonje (588285)]

If I send unsolicited porn through the USPS I can be arrested, why is email any different? You don't hear to many people screaming that not allowing porno junk mail is a violation of freedom of speech.

Here's a novel idea

[mabu (178417)]

Let's pass a law that forces district attorneys to actually prosecute spammers that break the law.

Excuse me, I have a question...

[lightspawn (155347)]

As a law-abiding spammer, how am I supposed to send both spam complying with the Louisiana law (including "adv-adult") and the Michigan law [slashdot.org] (containing "ADV:" as the first four characters?)

It would seem to me that I have to do something like this:

Subject: ADV: enlarge your penis [adv-adult]

I hope no new state laws are introduced, these are making it really tough to stay profitable.

I wonder if it's still legal to send

Subject: ADV: adv-adultery webcams!

The 'adv' still looks nasty, but I can't think of any word that ends in 'adv'.

Re:Excuse me, I have a question...

[schon (31600)]

As a law-abiding spammer

I'm sorry, a what?!?!?! . There really is no such thing.

how am I supposed to send both spam complying with the Louisiana law (including "adv-adult") and the Michigan law (containing "ADV:" as the first four characters?)

Simple - you find out in which state the recipient lives, and use the appropriate subject.

Can't do that? then maybe you shouldn't be spamming.

I hope no new state laws are introduced, these are making it really tough to stay profitable.

I think that's the po

Incompetent Louisiana Officials

[mrbrown1602 (536940)]

As someone who spent a great many years living in Louisiana and following/participating in Louisiana politics, I know for a fact that the officials of the "great state of Louisiana" are quite incompetent. After all, we have the 2nd worst roads in the nation and the 2nd worst education system in the nation (thank god for Mississippi!).

The internet and the Law

[mordac2k (515516)]

>> leaves you wondering if "officials" have any clue how SPAMMERS operate..."

Actually it leaves me wondering if you have any idea how the law operates. As silly as this legislation may at first appear, you have to realize that (mostly) nothing is illegal unless there is a LAW to make it so. Yes, spam is already illegal in many states, but creating a law where spammers must insert adv-adult in their subject line is another point where would-be prosecutors can trip spammers up with, thus increasing penalties and even prison time. Its like when a murder is really heinous, prosecutors dont just try someone for murder 1, they get them on just about every count thats feasible to the case.

/dev/null

[segment (695309)]

What's to stop someone from say Africa, Taiwan or Korea from sending you advertisements? Absolutely nothing. While the concept is nice in theory, this law seems to be nothing more than someone doing something for possible future elections resume padding.

So let's say you limit those in the US from sending you spam, what are you going to do when they start relaying from borked out servers abroad... Better yet what can you do. Waste taxpayer money tracking down spammers abroad... Let's see $5000 to track them, another $1000 to bring them down here to face the music, $100,000k miminum for some sort of farce trial for something you could have taken care of with spamassassin.

Boy oh boy I don't know who is dumber the politician who passed this law or the spammer I hit d on using mutt.

so what are we gonna do?

[Lord_Dweomer (648696)]

"leaves you wondering if "officials" have any clue how SPAMMERS operate..." "

There is no wondering here, we all know they don't have a clue in the world. But whats being done about that? I don't see any huge initiatives to educate our law makers into how these things really work. So what can Slashdot do to educate these people as to how spam really works?

This law worked so well in California...

[geekotourist (80163)]

California has a law requiring the same sort of warning in the subject line. It became the law January 1, 1999.

In the first months after the law went into effect the percentage of spam attacks with "ADV" or ADV:Adult" in the subject line was a full 5% on average. This compared to the months before it became law, where only 1 out of 20 spam attacks contained these in the subject line.

This in the state with over 1/10th of the U.S.'s population.

what problem?

[twitter (104583)]

The problem is getting spammers to honor the law. First of all, I assume (the article did not say) that the law can only affect spammers who are based in Louisiana.

What? Why not everyone? Speed in LA, get a ticket. Thumb you nose at that ticket, go to jail. I don't see how spammers sending email to LA that breaks this law would be any different than violating a local speed limit. Spam me, get fined. Scofflaw the fine, go to jail. Seems easy enough, even if the vast majority of spammers get away wit

Re:Why is "SPAM" in caps?

[Hatta (162192)]

But spam is not SPAM. Hormel specifically asks that "SPAM" in all caps be reserved for referring to their product. They have been kind enough to not go nuts over trademark dilution, it would be nice if we could all use the colloquial "spam"