No end in sight for spam
The most hated aspect of life online, junk email, thrived in 1997 despite widespread hatred of it and various strategies to get rid of it.
Spam. Junk email. Unsolicited bulk email. Whatever you call it, without a doubt it is the most reviled, shunned, hated, low-down-dirty-rotten-detestable stuff on the Internet.
And yet, it survives. Maybe even thrives.
That's because those who send it, despite the tide against them, still make money. Spam is almost free to send. Generally, it requires a dial-up connection for around $20 and maybe some software, usually under $100. If just a handful of people respond to a mass email campaign advertising a product, get-rich-quick scheme, or pornography, the bulk emailer stands to make money.
In 1997, spam went mainstream and managed to alienate and anger a good bulk of Internet users by its proliferation, its content, and its mere existence. In 1998, lawmakers will try to rein in the practice. Whether they succeed, of course, remains to be seen.
As last year began, spam to most Netizens was an annoyance--but generally not something about which they were willing to do much more than complain.
Back then, the battle largely was being fought by a few of the bigger online services, such as America Online, Prodigy, and CompuServe, along with a cadre of people who communicated through newsgroups and private email and took it upon themselves to do everything they could to eradicate spam.
To some, spam might just be about junk email. To antispam activists, it's war.
Their weapons include technological tricks, antispam campaigns waged against Internet service providers that give access to spammers, public relations battles, and more.
To them, junk email amounts to theft because unlike physical junk mail, the end user (either the person who owns the mailbox to which it is destined or his service provider) winds up footing the bill for spam, paying the network costs for carrying it.
As spamming this year grew in popularity, antispammers' prophesies about the Internet buckling underneath the weight of millions of pieces of junk email, often misdirected and stuffed into errant email boxes, appeared to be coming true, at least on the small scale.
Individuals and companies were starting to get taken down by spam. Systems clogged and came to a grinding halt. Over Christmas, for instance, GTE blamed spam for the shutdown of one of its mail servers. Several individuals also complained over the year that they were personally shut down after spammers used the individuals' email addresses as forged return addresses.
They hired employees specifically to protect their members from spam. They booted spammers.
Many, such as AOL and free email service Juno, took spammers to court. Most often, the spammers lost and ISPs won.
But no matter, the junk email has not stopped.
However, so-called legitimate spammers were hit hard.
Backbone Internet provider AGIS in the spring had made a go at trying to set up rules for spam. Phil Lawlor, chief executive of AGIS, said he would try to legitimize spam by giving it a home on AGIS's network and then making rules by which spammers would have to live.
Meanwhile, Wallace announced imminent plans to form a new ISP just for spammers.