|Received:||8/16/2004 5:49:59 PM|
|Agency:||Federal Trade Commission|
|Rule:||Definitions, Implementation, and Reporting Requirements Under the CAN-SPAM Act (NPRM)|
Comments:Firstly, I wish to state that the CAN-SPAM legislation as written is fundamentally and irretrevably flawed, unable to make a serious dent in the scourge of spam. That being said, I think that any rules governing the definiton of spam include verbiage defining spam as that which contains a subject line that an average citizen would find misleading. This could be interpreted as a subject that has little relation to the body of the message. Another commonality of spam is the deliberate mis-spelling of words in an effort (again, decided by the "average citizen" model,) to pass circumvent anti-spam software. Yet another defining technique is the addition of unrelated words with no grammatical structure, so placed to circumvent anti-spam measures.