h1

March 1, 2007

Does anybody else see a bit of a contradictory argumentation in this article? Sweden’s anti-spam laws are proclaimed to be useless, in the first paragraph. There have been no successful prosecution of a spammer in the three years thew law has been in effect. But in the second-to-last paragraph, the Consumer Agency’s spokesman says that “Swedish companies contacted by the agency after sending unsolicited email usually agree to stop sending”. So clearly there is an effect. It’s likely, surely, that one reason companies stop doing it when they are thwapped by the CA is that the practice is in fact illegal. It is also likely that the CA wouldn’t have the resources and powers to thwap spamming companies, if there wasn’t a law that needed to be enforced.

So it seems to me that the law has, in fact, worked. Of course it doesn’t work against foreign spam, but we knew that before the law was ever drafted.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: