What you are proposing is that a company be allowed to commit denial of service attacks on other companies. While the suggestion that this power would only be used for 'good' is charming, it is also pathetically naive. Companies would soon be committing these attacks against competitors. And in the end, we would be asking the courts to determine what products, services, reviews, information, and opinions we are allowed to see and are not allowed to see based on what a given judge wishes to be called 'spam' and therefore allowing opposers of that organisation to bring down the web presence of the offending organisation.
email is cheap to send, and easy to delete. most people get credit card offers in the mail they did not request. It would be absurd to tell a company they may block some other company's loading docks for sending out a mass mailing.
Advertising is a simple matter of market pressures. It will only sustain so long as the cost is less than the perceived benefit. Therein lies the only genuine solution to 'spam'.
In short, if you want someone else to edit and filter everything coming into your mailbox, consider China as a residential choice. There are also certain ISPs which will provide that service to you. But allowing unfair censorship between companies opens a pandora's box wherein the only victim will ultimately be the consumer and taxpayer.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/282/29447#29447