Comments:

This whole damn problem of Spam could be eliminated if all ISPs and/or computers had an effecient blocker. There is no way that any CAN-SPAM act can define what is spam and what is not. What is SPAM to one person may be an important message to another. Let the receiver of the email determine if it's SPAM or not and if it is, let them block it or have their ISP block it. Passing an anti-spam act will do nothing but cause untold misery for everyone concerned including those who are doing their best to control and define spam. Blocking tecnology is available so the simple solution is to make it available through all ISPs and/or install it in every new computer and make it downloadable for computers that don't have it built in. No one can define what is spam and what isn't. If I send an email to my family members and include a link to a website that has a bargain on Walla Walla Sweet Onions, that could be considered SPAM. By definition, I would be violating the CAN-SPAM act and so would the owners of the website who sell the onions. The CAN-SPAM act, though well intended, will add more problems than it will solve. It will do little to Can Spam but it will result in much confusion and many law suits. The very idea of having to check each email address against an anti spam list is ludicrous. Requiring every email to have a link or manual means of opting out makes sense. If the request is not honored by the sender, then the receiver has a legitimate complaint but if he/she had blocking it's a simple matter of a couple of clicks and no more spam from that sender. A central location to forward spam such as pornography should be established so the proper authorities can deal with the offenders.