Who Is Responsible for Spam?

You get the spam selling Viagra. No, it's not from Pfizer. They probably aren't even selling real Viagra. At best it's a generic knock-off. At worst it's a sugar pill, or maybe even something else.

That spam selling Windows XP for $12 is definitely not from Microsoft. Same goes for the spam from Symantec selling anti-virus or junk e-mail blocker software. They're pitching pirated software. Legally it's about the same as selling stolen goods.

Behind a lot of spam emails are 'legitimate' companies - selling real goods. Presumably real companies exist behind the spam pitching low mortgage rates. I've historically gotten a lot of spam trying to get me to subscribe to the New York Times.

SpamButcher is available from www.spambutcher.com as a free spam software download. The trial version runs for 21-days before requiring registration. Support and updates to the product are then without charge. SpamButcher can be used as spam software for Outlook or used with many other popular email programs.

Usually these companies don't dirty their hands directly. They'll hire a middle-man who handles some 'online marketing' for them. Maybe they'll even outsource to a fourth party who does the actual spamming.

Commonly an affiliate model is used. Company A pays Company B for leads. No questions asked.

This brings up a major question of responsibility. A lot of this spam is illegal in someway or another. If I pay someone for a new Rolex - knowing they are going to go steal it from someone - am I guilty of a crime?

This suggest some possible new actions on the anti-spam mail front. I'm not a legal expert - but I'm pretty sure knowingly receiving stolen goods is illegal. If these sales leads are somehow stolen goods - they're might be grounds for taking legal action against companies who are funding spam indirectly.

Back