Spamcop– Go to hell.

So, America’s Debate is now listed in SpamCop because someone is sending spam using our domain as a return address. That means that anyone using their blacklist is blocking our email.

According to SpamCop: listed in (

Causes of listing
* System has sent mail to SpamCop spam traps in the past week (spam traps are secret, no reports or evidence are provided by SpamCop)

You know, I wonder what sort of research these folks do before they blacklist a business (America’s Debate is a business). Since their listing shows “No evidence are (is) provided by SpamCop,” I wonder how much evidence they would have if taken into court. They have obviously been sued before, since they have a big “Donate to SpamCop’s Legal Defense fund” button on their homepage.

The simple fact of the matter is that if it was the forged email header spam that triggered our IP address to be listed in the SpamCop database, one of two things has happened:

1. SpamCop has failed to review the email to determine the true source of the email, and instead has relied on the easily-and-often forged email header instead of the sending IP address, or

2. SpamCop has done no investigation of the supposed spam and instead has instantly blacklisted and therefore caused damage to our ability top conduct business, as well as exercised vigilante justice without just cause, or a good faith attempt to contact the “source,” and without any sort of verifiable evidence.

So, in summary:

SpamCop is a terrible service that utilizes vigilante justice combined with a poor grasp of the email system in order to harm legitimate businesses at the fault of poorly-designed international email protocols.

SpamCop go to hell.


5 thoughts on “Spamcop– Go to hell.

  1. In doing research, SpamCop might have a problem.

    According to the dictionary, one of the definitions of ‘cop’ is: a police officer.

    According to several officially recommended SpamCop Faqs, SpamCop utilizes “deputies.”

    According to a whois lookup, SpamCop is located in California, across state lines from our location in Georgia.

    According to the SpamCop website, there is no disclaimer stating that SpamCop is not a law enforcement agency.

    I’ll be sending a letter to Thurbert E. Baker, my state’s attorney general, asking that they investigate SpamCop for impersonating law enforcement.

    We’ll see how it goes.

  2. Hah. The Google alerts for my blog are coming in on this post, mostly from the SpamCop forum.

    Hi SpamCop people. I don’t like services like yours.

    Just as those who spam offer no legitimate means by which an end recipient can cause the spam to cease, SpamCop offers no legitimate means by which an end (and potentially unintended) target of their vigilantism can cause the blacklisting to cease.

    The false feeling of power that must result from incorrectly blacklisting legitimate websites must make it all worth it.

    I cannot wait until something better comes along to replace the current email system, and for spam blacklist sites to dry up.

    I would be just as content to see some degree of accountability introduced into these blacklisting systems so that websites on shared hosting are able to correct inaccurate blacklist entries.

  3. Mike,
    I just googled the phone number and got the exact same call today. I immediately asked what it was about and the woman said, “time share”. Nice try people!

  4. Blaming Spamcop for your woes is retarded. You are correct in that the email protocols in use today are terrible and easily hacked/spoofed. That’s not Spamcop’s problem. I realize this post of yours is several years old, but it was stupid then and it’s still stupid now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>