The Federal Trade Commission is recommending a system rewarding certain Netizens for tracking down spammers, provided that the system generates information the commission thinks will make a key difference in anti-spam probes.
The system, the FTC said in a report to Congress, should make it easier to identify and locate spammers, facilitate the gathering of evidence to prove a suspect is legally responsible for sending the spam in question, and help in obtaining monetary rewards.
And before you let pictures of vigilante Netizens hunting bounty like the Wild West dance across your mind's frontier, be advised that the report specifically calls for limiting bounty rewards to those classified as insiders: Netizens who work with spammers, have worked with spammers in the past, or know spammers reasonably well enough to be able to make educated calls on what spammers are doing.
The Direct Marketing Association isn't exactly sure such a bounty system is the right way to go just yet. The DMA said in response to the FTC report that it would be better to let law enforcement and laws like the federal CAN-SPAM Act – which took effect in January, and included a requirement for the FTC to study a bounty system to catch spammers – have more time to work properly.
One problem, many critics would say, is that CAN-SPAM was ill-conceived. Purported to be a tough federal measure against spam, the act came under fire even before Congress passed and President Bush signed the law, especially because it lacked an opt-in mechanism, using instead an opt-out which still allows spammers to flush millions of messages into inboxes on a sort-of first time freebie before recipients can tell them no more.
But the FTC report said that if a reward system for catching spammers can get past the three hurdles noted earlier, CAN-SPAM's effectiveness might be improved. And, the commission said, reward amounts should be high enough to encourage insiders – those who actually work with or know spammers closely enough – to provide high-value information. Figures suggested in the report ranged in six figures, from about $100,000 to $200,000.
"It is difficult to determine the reward amount that would be high enough to encourage insiders to provide high-value information," the report said. "There currently is much 'lore' about spammers, but little in the way of reliable data.Consequently, little is known about who the illegal spammers are, how much money spammers make from their activities, how much risk an informant would assume in informing on a spammer, and how much monetary [or other] incentive informants need to come forward."
But a bounty system should tie reward eligibility to the imposition of a final court order against a spammer instead of collection of civil penalties; fund rewards by way of appropriations instead of civil penalties; and, restrict eligibility to insiders with high-value information.
A spam bounty system would also have to account formally and be enforceable against fraud, the FTC report added. "Several [in the Internet industry] expressed concern about the risk that informants could fabricate evidence or otherwise submit disinformation," the report said. "While all reward schemes carry a risk of receiving false or bad information, the particular difficulties of detecting fabricated evidence by technologically sophisticated persons in the case of spam is reason for heightened concern."
The report recommended imposing civil penalties on anyone giving false information about spam or spammers.
