> or how about this,.. you wait until the supposed law goes into effect
> arising out of Bill 602P which will permit the Federal Government to charge
> 5-cent surcharge on every e-mail delivered, by billing Internet Service
> Providers at source. The consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP.
Even though S602P is an urban legend, IMHO it contains the kernel of a
Long time list members here may remember that 3-4 years ago I proposed
the idea of a transfer of payments system to charge senders of unsolicited
e-mail for the privilege. This revenue would be shared by the backbones
transporting the message and the receiving ISP/recipient. For _solicited_
e-mail it would be the recipient who was charged, with the sender then
sharing in the revenue pool.
Would I pay something like $0.01 for each message I receive from List
Managers? Yes, I think I would, because I value the messages I receive
from this list and from the other lists I'm on.
At a penny a message, this list would have cost me under a dollar a
month so far this year.
Now consider the spammer. The reason spam is multiplying is that it is
virtually cost free. But if it were to cost the sender $10,000 to send
out a million messages, I think we'd see a whole lot less spam.
And if that cost were charged to the 'originating' ISP instead of to the
hacker who used an open mail relay port to insert e-mail with a forged
address, wouldn't that create a major incentive for ISP's to FINALLY make
their mail systems secure?
I'm not the expert, but I think that some kind of public/private key
encryption system would make it reasonably easy to 'tag' every solicited
e-mail message. (I'd go one step further and revise the SMTP protocol
to verify that both the sending and recipient addresses are valid
before sending the body of the message, though I'm not sure how relaying
would work under this.)
I know I'm not 'important enough' in the net world to work towards
a serious consideration of this idea by myself, but maybe it is time
to establish a group who can.
I've been working on a letter to my Senators regarding S630, I may have
to revise it to include this idea.