bent
not broken
Premium
join:2004-10-04
Loveland, CO
clubs:
 ·Comcast Formerly ..
| Let me ask this...
So it has been established that the only people that spammers REALLY hurt is the ISPs that have their bandwidth chewed. With the huge fines being imposed on spammers, is one red dime of that going to the ISPs? To the victims of the spam? No. I'll tell you where it's going. Into the coffers of the states that are passing these ridiculous laws.
State Senator #1: Hey Joe Jack these "spammers" are making a ton of money, and we aren't getting our cut.
State Senator #2: Well, that's an unacceptable state of affairs, now ain't it. Just what do you suggest we do about it?
State Senator #1: Lets make it illegal and charge fines of $50,000 a day. That should offset some of the pork we've been blowing our budgets on.
State Senator #2: I like it! Lets do it!
--
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. |
|
fantomposter
Phantom Poster
Premium
join:2002-09-21
Independence, OH
1 edit | said by bent  :So it has been established that the only people that spammers REALLY hurt is the ISPs that have their bandwidth chewed. No, that has not been established. Not even close. In fact common sense tells you just the opposite is true.
We pay for our bandwidth, we pay for the HD's that the spam sits on in the inboxes. We lose productivity of employees as the sort through the stuff. We spend money and IT personel time stopping as much as we can.
And for the record, your ISP does not have an unlimited amount of free bandwidth laying around. YOU pay for the incoming spam costs they incur in your monthly fee.
MY small local ISP went from 6 total email servers to 13, just to handle the increase in spam over the last few years. Those servers are not free.
Edit: Oh, and it was the FBI that went after him, under federal law. This has nothing to do with State Senators. |
|
bent
not broken
Premium
join:2004-10-04
Loveland, CO
clubs:
·Comcast Formerly ..
| I was really referring to the Oklahoma case of a few weeks ago where the spamer was fined $10M. So far, I haven't seen any evidence that spam is more than an annoyance to anyone but ISPs. Sure, it costs the ISPs a few dollars more for the extra bandwidth and servers. If they want to stay in business, they will pass that along to the customer. Big deal. My already over-priced internet connection costs a dollar or two more. Really, the most vocal people against spam are the small ISPs who want to be able to increase their margin so they can make a few extra bucks.
You know what? If you want to stop spam, make it a crime to respond to it.
--
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. |
|
