SPAM COSTS

Most of the costs of SPAM are paid for by the recipient or the ISPs rather than by the sender. It is not always apparent, but there are many different places along the process of transmitting and delivering e-mail where costs are incurred.

For example, an ISP's cost includes:

Processing Resources: Processor capacity (time and storage) is a precious commodity and processor performance is a critical issue for ISPs. When their processors are tied up with spam, it creates a drag on all e-mail processing and storage -- wanted and unwanted alike. This is also a problem with "filtering" schemes; filtering e-mail consumes vast amounts of CPU time and is the primary reason most ISPs cannot implement it as a strategy for eliminating junk e-mail. Innocent clients suffer degradation of their service due to system performance slowdowns due to handling SPAM.

Bandwidth: ISPs purchase bandwidth (their connection to the Internet), and bandwidth usage is metered, or ordered in relation to their user needs. For most small to midsize ISPs, bandwidth costs are the greatest portion of their operating budget. SPAM greatly increases bandwidth requirements, costing ISPs more money.

Staff: Cost also includes the staff costs in dealing with junk mail related problems. Most large ISPs are required to have a dedicated "abuse" staff on call.

The expenditures by ISPs to defend themselves from unsolicited e-mail and to keep their systems properly functioning amid the onslaught is substantial... and the costs are passed on to their clients.

When SPAM consumes an ISP's resources, the ISP has few choices: 1) let the paying customers cope with slower Internet access, 2) eat the costs of increasing bandwidth or processing capacity, or 3) raise rates. In short, the recipients are still forced to bear costs that the SPAMMER has avoided.

SPAM also costs users money directly out-of-pocket when they receive it. Many people have metered Internet service. They read or receive their mail while the meter is running. SPAM costs them additional money for on-line time to download and process spam.

ICServices believes that the cost for UCE or SPAM needs to be the burden of the sender, not the recipient or the ISP. Until laws are changed for electronic mail, we feel there is some guidance to be found in the words of the U.S. Supreme Court in their decision in Rowan v. U.S. Post Office:

"Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or to view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit. . . We therefore categorically reject the argument that a vendor has the right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another. . . We repeat, the right of a mailer stops at the outer boundary of every person's domain."