This List Tells You Who Is Advertising in Spam - 2,303 Views, 1 Comment
|
Previous Article « FTC Says “No” to Do Not Email List, “Yes” to Sender Authentication
Read Next Article » Gmail for GIs
Well, those of you who agree with Aunty (and really, shouldn’t you all?) will appreciate this list which Spamcop has thoughtfully provided for us; it’s a realtime list of the URLs which are contained within the spam received by Spamcop’s spam reporters. In other words, a list of the advertisers, or those closely related thereto. The list is available here, and really, it’s pretty nifty. Aunty says “Check it out.” Kissy kissy, Aunty
Follow Anne on Twitter
Friend Anne on Facebook
Aunty is a big fan of that section of CAN-SPAM which allows for prosecution of the people who are advertising in spam, in addition to those who are sending the spam. Aunty has long said that going after the advertisers makes a lot of sense, and is one of the quickest (and legally easiest) ways to make a dent in the spam problem.
This List Tells You Who Is Advertising in Spam
Twitter Explained in Plain English
Previous Article « FTC Says “No” to Do Not Email List, “Yes” to Sender Authentication
Read Next Article » Gmail for GIs
Read more:
» Most Hated Spam? Survey Says…”Business Relationship” Spam!
» One bad apple… (AOL’s Jason Smathers Arrested for Stealing Email Addresses)
» Dear Aunty Spam: Best Way to Beat Spam with Outlook 2003?
For additional similar stories check out our archives on Good Guys, Internet Marketing, Spam Blockers
NOTE: We never, ever, ever will recommend any product or service on this site that we have not regularly used ourselves and do not wholeheartedly believe in. That said, in some cases after being very pleased with a product or service, we may enter into a relationship with the provider of that product or service such that if someone purchases that product or service based on our recommendation, we may get a small payment. Such payments go towards the upkeep of the Internet Patrol.

crazy old spam, when will they ever learn..
Comment by get crunk — 6/21/2004 @ 8:41 am