New York Times article (free viewing with registration while the story is new): It's not fair to blame ALL of the increase in spam on this bill. The increase would have happened anyway. But could anyone be surprised by the law's lack of positive effect? I think opt-out laws are useless, since you can't use opt-out links unless you trust the sender, and you can't trust spam senders. Opt-in laws would make more sense, but I don't have much hope that they can be enforced, especially since spam is a worldwide problem. And e-mail taxes are unlikely to get off the ground either. The best solution to spam that I see is the use of technology to verify senders and a personally-run opt-in system. I think that in the long term we will all be seeing personal e-mail only from those we specifically enable, and we'll have a way to check if the sender is the one claimed.