Blacksheep
Most commercial users are charged for the e-mails they send.
Most Internet connection contracts are made on the basis of
bandwidth usage. The customer pays for all traffic, e-mail included.
So, if the spammers are already paying a small amount, increasing
the cost by 100% or 200% wouldn't be a deterrent to spammers, and
would also be unfair to those who are legitimate users.
As for the solution being in the hands of the ISPs, it isn't so.
E-mail traffic looks all the same.
Humans are capable of detecting SPAM, but to be able to do that
with a computer and software is a very complex problem (as it is
evident by the rates of false negatives and false positives you
get on anti-spam software).
The main problem is the e-mail infra-structure itself. It was
created when the Internet was a “gentleman's club”. Most of
these gentlemen (and ladies) where academics, and trusted
each-other.
This caused the e-mail system to be completely open as there
was no need to check the credentials of the users who sent
e-mail messages (and this wasn't exclusive to e-mails, some
other protocols were based on trust).
In order to get the spam problem under control I think it
would be necessary to re-think and re-implement the technical
infra-structure and policies that support e-mail traffic.
It would be necessary to implement technical and administrative
infra-structures for user-authentication (making sure the senders
are who they say they are), verification (in order to handle
requests of recipients who wish to verify that a certain e-mail
was sent by the sender) and some way to enforce rules in a
efficient and fair manner. (to deal with users and providers
who have abused their privileges and infringed on mail recipients'
rights)
Meanwhile, the burden is mostly on the user, as it is the user who
has the means to detect the spam that arrives on his inbox, and also
must exercise care as to whom and where the user supplies his e-mail
address.
Views, critique and discussion welcome.
Regards
CS-DNA