Survey finds do-not-call list effective

Americans say a federal effort to limit unwanted telemarketing phone calls is working, but the effort to control another scourge of the electronic age -- unwanted "spam" e-mail messages -- has so far failed. And a federal regulator admitted that the antispam law probably never will make much of a dent in the problem.

A survey of 1,000 Americans conducted this week by the Associated Press and Ipsos Public Affairs found that the "do-not-call" registry established by the Federal Trade Commission is succeeding in its mission. Consumers have placed 57 million phone numbers in the registry since it was established in October, and telemarketers are forbidden from dialing these numbers. The poll found that 45 percent of those surveyed have signed up for the registry, and of these, 74 percent say they've gotten fewer marketing calls as a result.

The do-not-call registry has come under fierce legal assault from telemarketing firms who claim the law violates their free speech rights. But this week, a federal appeals court in Denver upheld the law.

The public is far less impressed with another new federal measure, the Can Spam Act. This law, which took effect at the start of the year, gives the FTC new legal tools for use against e-mail spammers, and adds criminal penalties for spammers. But 71 percent of those surveyed said they're receiving just as much spam now as they were before; an additional 10 percent said their spam problem had actually gotten worse.

Jennifer O'Shea, press secretary for Senator Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican and a sponsor of the antispam law, said the law will begin to work once the FTC starts suing spammers. "It does take time for cases to be taken up and for people to be prosecuted," O'Shea said.

But the FTC official in charge of enforcing the law took a much dimmer view. "This law provides some tools that we hope will be helpful," said Howard Beales, director of the FTC's bureau of consumer protection, "but it's not going to make a major difference."

For one thing, spammers use many tactics to conceal their identities, making it tough to find them and haul them into court. "What we frequently find is that it takes a series of 10 to 15 subpoenas to find somebody in the real world," Beales said. He knows this because the FTC has already filed about 60 fraud cases against spammers, or businesses that market their products using unsolicited bulk e-mail.

That reveals another problem -- many common spamming practices were already illegal. The new law adds a few more weapons to the FTC's arsenal, but even before it came about, there was plenty of legal authority to go after spammers. Beales said his agency will soon file another batch of antispam cases, based on investigations begun last year before the Can Spam Act took effect. He did not say how long it would be before the new law would be tested.

In any case, Beales doubts it will have much of an impact. "We brought 60 cases," he said. "It has not made a dent. I don't think the 61st case will be magic."

Antispam activists say they always expected the new law to fail. "It's done no good," said Jason Catlett, president of Junkbusters Corp., a maker of ad filtering software. "It's worse than that; it's actually done harm." Catlett noted that the federal law supersedes tougher antispam laws in a number of states, including a California law that would have let spam recipients sue spammers for damages. The federal law permits lawsuits by government agencies and Internet service providers, but blocks individuals from suing spammers. Catlett called this policy a "tremendous betrayal of consumer interests."

Hiawatha Bray can be reached at bray@globe.com.