However, it fails to introduce an individual right of action, instead relying upon ISPs, the Federal Trade Commission and other federal agencies to initiate actions. The Federal Trade Commission will initiate enforcement if the public interest requires it. Therefore, the FTC is not under a duty to prosecute a case and thus, is a rather subjective enforcement mechanism.

The system is a mix of public and private action. The enforcement of anti-spam laws is a protracted and resource intensive exercise. The bounty approach is welcome but only rewards a single person. Schwartz has suggested a multi-institutional approach however this would risk dilution of the impact on consumer awareness. Consumers could be confused as to which body has overall responsibility for enforcement.
 
Legislative Response: The European Union

The European response culminated in the E-privacy directive 2002.  The Directive is designed to harmonise the levels of protection afforded to consumers in a technology-neutral manner. To this end, the Directive extends controls on unsolicited direct marketing to all forms of electronic communications including unsolicited commercial e-mail (UCE or Spam) and SMS to mobile telephones. The directive was given legal effect in the United King英语论文网 【http://www.51lunwen.org】dom by virtue of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003,  which came into force on the 11th December 2003.

The overarching principle of the E-privacy directive is that UCE will only be lawful where express prior consent is given, that is an opt-in system has been adopted. Consent is defined as any appropriate method which enables the user to freely give specific and informed indication of his wishes. The definition is wide enough to encompass the ticking of a box on a website. The EU Article 29 Working Party on Data Protection  considers that companies who simply ask individuals if they would wish to receive marketing e-mails will fall foul of the consent requirement of Directive 2002/58 since the purpose of the marketing e-mail must be made explicitly clear to the recipient and must also be specific.  This is eminently sensible since to hold otherwise would render the opt-in system ineffectual. The Working Party also condemns the use of pre-ticked boxes on websites because they are not true indicators of informed consent.    

The Article 13(4) of the Directive prohibits the sending of unsolicited direct marketing e-mail where the sender’s identity is disguised or concealed or where no valid return address is provided. This provision was given legal effect in the United Kingdom via Regulation 23 of the Privacy Regulations.  This regu 本文来自：英语论文网 【http://www.51lunwen.org】