(Up to: Spam And Freedoms Laws Vs Communication )

Spam is currently anonymous because it is hated by many, liked by a few. But it works. Would making it illegal have the same effect as criminalising cannabis? i.e. that people would still do it, but we would have even less control over it.

Perhaps what is needed (maybe in addition) is a legal alternative to the current spam infrastructure, some kind of network to allow "spam" (the name would have to be changed) to be sent legally, by people that want to do so. This could provide a global platform to achieve what current spammers are after, yet be more regulatable.

Naturally, problems arise with this at first.
The point of spamming as it stands is that it reaches as many people as possible - whether they want it or not. As a business, this amounts to increased sales. Thus, a legal solution would need to take into account this lust for blanket coverage, but also take into account people's opt-in/out preferences. This would also naturally lead to personal interest groupings, much of which is already catered for by "partnerships" by e-mail providers.

Does the inherent regulatability of a legal solution mean that "traditional" networks would still be dominant?

Need to think about this when I get a clear, straight run at it...