Spam Summit: Laws flawed from outset - but still a step in the right direction?

The UK government today launched its first major offensive on the problem of unsolicited email with the All Party Internet Group's first Spam Summit, aimed at raising awareness of the problem of spam email.

The event brought together the worlds of high-tech industry, the media and politics in an attempt to launch a three-pronged attack and will run in parallel to the drafting of legislation aimed at combating the problem of spam.

However, Stephen Timms, minister for ecommerce, who delivered the keynote speech, admitted from the outset that the problem is not going to be solved by changes in legislation, which are tabled for this October.

"This isn't a problem which will be solved by legislation alone," he said.

"If you ask: 'Will spam vanish from our inboxes [as a result of this legislation]?' then realistically, the answer has to be 'No'," he added.

He also conceded that any EU Directive would only "control intra-EU spam" and will do little to combat the influx of spam from outside the EU, typically from Africa, the Far East and North America, where spam has become a growth industry.

The consensus among speakers was that it will be a combination of factors which helps to defeat the menace of spam email.

Enrique Salem, CEO of anti-spam vendor Brightmail, who sponsored the event, said: "A combination of technology companies, ISPs, direct marketers and legislation will help us to beat this problem over the next four years."

In particular Salem singled out the part to be played by the ISPs who he believes must bear the financial burden of beating spam.

"ISPs all see spam as a major problem - it is one of the largest customer satisfaction issues," he said. "There is an opportunity to maximise customer satisfaction and cut costs," he added, pointing out that ISPs who fight will win back bandwidth which is currently taken up by the incessant traffic of spam.

The commercial imperative is also clear and compelling. Salem warned ISPs that if they do not fight spam on their service, then users will quickly defect to a rival ISP who does.

The one dissenting voice was Steve Linford from Spamhaus who raised serious concerns about the effectiveness of legislation in the fight against spam - warning that US legislation in particular is fundamentally flawed on the grounds that it requires a spammer-friendly opt-out.

Spamhaus tracks down known spammers and produces a blacklist which companies are able to reference in their own efforts to crackdown on spam.

Linford believes the people he encounters are going to be unmoved by any changes in legislation.

"These people are convicted criminals, with criminal records as long as your arm and they have no intention of stopping regardless of what changes are made in the law."

"A lot of these spammers are already on the run from the FTC" - they base themselves off-shore and away from US jurisdiction so as to avoid prosecution. "One hundred of America's top spammers are based in the suburbs of Beijing," he said, adding that many he's dealt with have made it clear that changes to the law will just drive everybody out to safe-havens such as China and South America.

Linford's testimony revealed the full extent of the spam problem, revealing the criminal inclination of the individuals concerned.

"After we block them, they're on the phone threatening to kill us and telling us they're going to slit our throats," he said, painting a picture of criminals who are highly unlikely to care about new laws governing their activities.

"These guys have a lot riding on this. They have invested a lot of money in their spam operations and they are not going to give up, whatever the law says."