Slamming Spam - Business Week

ht= tp://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_19/b3832037.htm

MAY 12, 2003

NEWS: ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY=

Slamming Spam

Enough already, says America – and regulators are cracki= ng down

Last fall, the server at Cincinnati's Bluespring Software Inc. crashed. E-m= ail was down for three hours, and CEO Robert B. Daly missed three meetings beca= use his appointment files had vanished. Says Daly: "It makes you look ridiculous."

The culprit? Spam -- the fast-rising flood of unsolicited junk mail that is crashing computer systems and provoking howls of outrage from Internet users coast to coast. Fully half of all e-mail is now spam, according to Brightma= il Inc., the San Francisco maker of spam-blocking software. Moreover, the junk e-mail increasingly emanates from shady sources using false identities, flogging everything from Viagra and other drugs to pornography and dubious investments. Of 11 million spam messages collected by the Federal Trade Commission, 44% came from phony addresses.

Little surprise, then, that the wave of unwanted e-mail has the business and tech communities ratcheting up the war on spam. They've launched a multi-pronged campaign: developing technological weapons against spam, taki= ng spammers to court, and lobbying for anti-spam legislation. On Apr. 28, Yaho= o! (YHOO ), AOL (AOL ), and MSN (MSFT ) announced a joi= nt anti-spam offensive that will combine technological and legal measures. Two days later, the FTC convened a brainstorming session in Washington to drum = up other anti-spam measures. Politicians, too, are getting into the act. On Ap= r. 29, Virginia enacted a law that calls for jail time for spammers who hide t= heir identity or send 10,000 copies of one e-mail message, and a flurry of anti-= spam bills have been introduced in Congress.

Why the big move now? Spam's impact on business and consumers cannot be overstated. Dealing with all that junk e-mail is costing U.S. organizations= $10 billion a year, according to Ferris Research in San Francisco. Internet ser= vice providers are being inundated with complaints from subscribers about junk m= ail. And retailers and others who rely on direct marketing worry that e-mail wil= l be sullied as a legitimate sales tool. "Long term, if the industry cannot deal with spam," says Joe Barrett, AOL's senior vice-president for net= work operation, "it's going to destroy e-mail."

Of course, this isn't the first attempt to solve the spam problem. Both AOL= and MSN launched upgrades of their Web portals in recent months, vowing that new spam-blocking software would help stem the flood. But while AOL and MSN cla= im they are blocking billions of spam a day, plenty more is still getting thro= ugh. As a result, says MSN Vice-President Brian Arbogast, "we're seeing an amazing backlash from folks who realize that e-mail is no longer a dependab= le means of communication because their messages are treated like spam."<= br>
The overarching goal of the AOL-MSN-Yahoo alliance is to make spam uneconom= ical by using technology to make it tougher for senders of junk e-mail to gain access to servers or reach individual in-boxes, and by filing more lawsuits against the worst violators. "Everything we do will add to the cost of spammers," Arbogast says.

Still, those efforts are likely to achieve only moderate success without stronger federal laws regulating spam. One recently introduced bill propose= d by Senators Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) would make it a crim= e to send unsolicited commercial e-mail with false or misleading headers or retu= rn addresses. The bill, which goes before the Senate Commerce Committee this month, also would allow state attorneys general and the FTC to impose stiff criminal or civil fines.

The mounting crackdown has legitimate business spooked, especially direct marketers who count on e-mail to push their products. "There's a lot of money involved for us," says H. Robert Wientzen, president of the Dire= ct Marketing Assn. (DMA), whose members include everyone from the Home Shopping Network to AT&T (T= ). That's why the DMA is teaming up with the FBI and Secret Service to go after mailers responsible for the most egregious spam.

Clearly, spammers have attracted powerful enemies. No single front will put= all bogus junk mailers out of business. But the coordinated effort at least rai= ses hopes that the tide will be stemmed, if not reversed.

By Lorraine Woellert, with Stephen H. Wildstrom and Catherine Yang, in Washington and with Robert Berner in Chicago