1. “We Can Stop the Spam” By: Jack P. McHugh Power Point Presented by: Ian Carey

2. Introduction What is Spam: Definition. What is the Problem: Facts. Michigan’s Legislation. Problems with Michigan’s Legislation. Solutions.

3. What is Spam? Spam by definition is: Unsolicited e- mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail. (www.dictionary.com) www.dictionary.com

4. What is the Problem? Spending on commercial e-mail will balloon to $7.3 billion in 2005 from $164 million in 1999. In 1999, the average consumer received 40 pieces of spam. By 2005, the total is likely to soar to 1,600. The increases in marketing messages are outpacing the growth in personal e-mail. By 2005, expect to get about one marketing e-mail for every two or three personal messages. Most ISPs estimate the extra cost due to spam as $2 to $3 per month per user, and longer connection times, which can be costly for rural users who have to dial long distance to connect to the Internet. (http://www.emailias.com/learning/spam_facts.php) http://www.emailias.com/learning/spam_facts.php

5. Michigan’s active legislation Considering forcing commercial e-mailers to use “ADV” as the subject line in unsolicited e-mails. Creating Anti-Spam lists. Federal Trade Commission is preparing to launch a national “do not spam” list. Like the Michigan proposal, this would allow citizens to register for the list, and penalize spammers who e-mail to them anyway.

6. Problems with Michigan’s legislation Most experts agree they are unlikely to make much difference, as spammers will quickly discover ways to avoid them. Hearings on the Michigan legislation revealed that up to 37 states have passed some kind of anti-spam laws, yet there have been few if any successful prosecutions. Spamming through overseas e-mail addresses is cited as the most likely avoidance technique.

7. Problems Continued Maintaining a state “do not spam” list would also be expensive. Individuals and businesses would have to pay to be on the list, and extra costs would be imposed on conscientious marketers who seek to comply with consumer desires.

8. Effects of Spamming News reports indicate that the volume of unsolicited e-mails is growing by 50 percent per month. Spam is reported to cost some $10 billion a year in lost productivity. The Michigan Manufacturers Association estimates that each spam message a worker has to delete costs his or her company between 70 cents and one dollar in lost productivity.

9. Solutions “Subject: Join the anti-spam boycott! Message: Effective immediately, I refuse to purchase any product or service marketed through spam unless the first three characters of the message subject line are “ADV.” The “ADV” alerts me that this is spam. It makes it easy for me to delete these messages if I choose, or for my ISP to delete them if I so request. This does not apply to vendors with whom I have a pre-existing relationship. Spammers who include the ADV will get my consideration if they are selling something I want. Please join the boycott, and pass this message to your friends, urging them to really do it! WE can stop the spam, by taking the profits from disrespectful spammers.” Anyone reading this has my permission to borrow the text above. There is nothing to stop us from pasting this into an e-mail and sending it to everyone they know. We can stop the spam! –Jack P. McHugh

10. More Solutions. Anti-Spam software is another possibility however like most other technology the question is how long will it take for this anti-spam software to become obsolete. (http://www.spambutcher.com/anti- spam-software/) http://www.spambutcher.com/anti- spam-software/http://www.spambutcher.com/anti- spam-software/ (http://www.anti-spam-software.com/) http://www.anti-spam-software.com/ Many websites out there that rate and produce many products to help control spam.

11. Conclusion Many Problems have arised because of spam. However, the Internet is still in its fragile youth, and we should be wary of any heavy handed government interference that could stunt its growth.