Staff Edit: The fight against spam

Spam has never been something easy for the government to control. A bill passed three years ago in the U.S. Congress, dubbed the CAN-SPAM Act, which imposes penalties on individuals discovered to be sending out unsolicited mail to people’s private email inboxes, was hard to enforce from the start, and has done little to alleviate unwanted messages.

But after a Massachusetts judge ordered a ruling against three major spammers in Boston last week, people will likely be less inclined to send unsolicited mail, which already only attracts few and overly gullible consumers.

The court’s decision to fine one individual $37 million for sending out massive amounts of spam is likely to frighten other major spammers and encourage them to stop sending unsolicited mail, and the attorney general, Tom Reilly, should continue to crack down on local spammers, imposing severe penalties to discourage the illegal and unwanted activity. Spammers often use false and deceiving advertising in promoting their already illegal practice, and no internet spammer is likely to offer free mortgage rates or the enhancing of private parts if a legitimate organization doesn’t already. It’s mind-boggling to think why spammers would commit such an atrocious act when, from a financial point of view, it just is not worth it.

Internet programs such as America Online and Gmail have created spam filters that prevent large amounts of spam from making its way into inboxes, but these systems are far from perfect. Sometimes regular mail is filtered as spam, causing further headaches and inefficiency to email users.

The problem with smaller-scale spammers, and spammers overseas, seems unlikely to be solved, at least for now. But by cracking down on egregious spammers locally, Massachusetts is doing its part to ensure that private individuals are less burdened by unnecessary and illegal junk.