Fax: Technology That Refuses to Die Under Attack 281
securitas writes "The BBC Magazine's Paul Rubens reports on the ever-growing popularity of the fax machine, despite the widespread availability of e-mail and digital document/photo scanners. Why is fax still so popular? Partly because it is a mature technology that has legal weight and because of the emergence of Internet and Web e-mail-to-fax and fax-to-e-mail gateways, not to mention the relative lack of spam faxes. But that is changing. The New York Times Technology's Lisa Napoli reports that Infoseek founder Steve Kirsch is waging a battle against purveyors of illegal junk faxes (IHT) like Fax.com, which Kirsch has sued for $2.2 trillion, detailed at junkfax.org. Also joining the fight are lawyer and Telephone Consumer Protection Act co-author Gerard Waldron - he won $2.25 million from Fax.com. Finally consumer advocate Robert Braver's junkfaxes.org has 36 lawsuits pending against the junk fax industry. More evidence that spammers are among the lowest forms of life on Earth."
They still sell well... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:They still sell well... (Score:2)
I am suprised to hear that people are actually using faxmodems for faxes. I myself much prefer not to have a separate fax machine, but until recently that meant dealing with really awful fax software. Also, people seem to resist the idea of folding fax functions into related devices. I've never worked in office that didn't
Re:They still sell well... (Score:2)
Windows 2000 makes sending a fax as easy as sending it to the printer. Receiving faxes through the modem takes a bit more effort.
Re:They still sell well... (Score:5, Interesting)
My father is a realator and one of the things he had to do was fax house listings to customers. He used to do it by printing them out, faxing them, then throwing them away. Besides the obvious environmental impact, he was using an inkjet printer at the time which meant it was a very slow process that also consumed a lot of expensive ink.
When I found out this was how he was sending faxes, I purchased a new-in-box USRobotics Courrier 56k V.Everything external modem on eBay for about $20 (no, I didn't forget any 0's) and set him up with Winfax Pro. I remember those modems costing a fortune back in the days of BBSing... The Courrier was a good workhorse of a modem back in its day and being used for sending/receiving faxes in this age of broadband gives it a new lease on life. And hey, anything that saves paper and keeps electronics out of the landfill is a good thing.
A HA! (Score:4, Funny)
Let's hope he doesn't any movie reviews!
Simple.... (Score:5, Insightful)
There is certainly a lot of FAX spam, but it's still quite useful today. Not everyone has a scanner handy, and it's often easier to sketch something up or jot a note on paper than it is to scan/crop/edit/add stuff electronically. If you happen to be discussing something static that you have a picture or a PDF of, fine, that's easy to email - but dynamic data has really yet to become widespread and easy to use. I know that there are some new PDF features for markup and such, but they're still not nearly as quick and easy to use as a pen.
Re:Simple.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, they can be useful, but my pet peeve is people using faxes as a way to avoid learning to use e-mail. I can't recall how many times I've seen someone:
It happens every single day in Corporate America.
We recieve stuff almost as bad (Score:2)
However, even the legit fax spam is annoying. We get tons of offers for certifications courses (since we are IT), lots of home mortgage offers that are worse than the one I have now, and advertisments for cruises.
Re:Simple.... (Score:2)
Since they allow quick entry of data via a pen-based interface, they should allow for the same level of 'ease of use'.
Technology for technology's sake (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess I'm getting too old! I say, if it works well enough for what you need it for then there's no need for a mad rush to replace something. Bah!
Re:Technology for technology's sake (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing about analogue lines is their authenticity. It is very difficult to hijack someone's phone number and pretend you are that person. We all know how easy it is to spoof an IP.
Faxes are considered legal documents in many cases, and they are used to transmit official documents, signitures and alike. This is based solely on the fact that they are transmitted over analogue lines an thus offer significant proof of authenticity.
Then again, IP telephony would see the end of a lot of telemarketing because you could never trust anyone to be who they say they are and the chances of someone intercepting the call and garnering your private data would be far, far, FAR higher.
Re:Technology for technology's sake (Score:2)
Re:Technology for technology's sake (Score:2)
You're kidding, right?
Give me a phone number to call you at, and tell me what phone number you want me to appear to be calling from. It will take me about as long to set the outbound caller ID up as it takes to actually dial the number.
Re:Technology for technology's sake (Score:2)
Network scanners have been around for at least 10 years now. Ethernet on a scanner is very, very old news.
Re:Technology for technology's sake (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Technology for technology's sake (Score:2)
That's why telex was such a good option, but never really caught on. Probably because of the much higher costs and the lack of ease-of-use.
Maybe.. (Score:5, Insightful)
But most importantly, hey do one thing and do it well.
Re:Maybe.. (Score:2)
One thing and one thing well is it. We have a fax-email gateway at work. I've only used it once and it was a pain in the ass. And useless if I need to send a fax out, unless I have a scanner.
Re:Maybe.. (Score:2)
Well, call me crazy, but a fax-email gateway isn't really doing just *one* thing, now is it?
Re:Maybe.. (Score:2)
Nope. Just a numberpad and a send button. Or at least that's all the old one I used years ago had.
Re:Maybe.. (Score:2)
Blame Microsoft. (Score:2)
The easiest to dispell things you say are:
Re:Blame Microsoft. (Score:2)
With all due respect: bollocks.
Fax is still popular because:
- It's 'always-on' and easy to use. No need to wait for booting, start the software, select options and whatnot. Just stick the paper in, dial the number and press 'send'. Compare that to any fax software on any OS.
- It's reasonably idiot-proof, and even idiots can see if something's wrong with the machine, and often they ca
you don't get it do you? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:you don't get it do you? (Score:2)
Re:you don't get it do you? (Score:2)
As Slashdotters, let's put our money where our mouth is and write this great software.
We would formulate a fantastic user interface design,structure a robust and error proof algorythm, and produce an elegant, well-documented piece of code.
And transport it to all popular operating systems and important business languages.
Re:Maybe.. (Score:2)
um, yeah....
then tell me why I have to scrape white out off the imaging platter weekly because some idiot put fresh white out on a document and then FAXED IT!
then they wonder why there are stripes on all documents after that.
Re:Maybe.. (Score:2)
Of course the occational faxer only sending a fax every month or so might go in to the old trap of fucking up the paper, but the nice lady in the reception will be able to use the faxmachine even though her fingernails are approaching infinity.
Stick her by the computer and get her to email and you'll be sure to end up with misspelled addresses, wrong
Legal Documents (Score:5, Insightful)
Many companies reply on Fax to get signatures, or approval for a project and etc.
Faxed documents are used as practical legal documents in Canada, AFAIK. Companies rely on Fax to get their work done, which should keep Fax around for a long long time.
One question though, isn't it about time to move up from 14,400 baud Fax transmission?!
Re:Legal Documents (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Legal Documents (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
The cheapo GBP50 thermal machines tend to be 14.4k.
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
Aside from the fact that there are already 33.6k Fax machines, I wonder how much of a difference it could really make. The major limit on the fax machine is its print speed. I think that increasing the speed of transmission beyond 33.6k or even 14.4k would make any noticable difference to the end user.
Color faxes might need an increase in speed but I have a feeling these wont become ubiquitous for a long time.
Finally,
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
Most people would be able to (with the assistance of a manual perhaps) to change the "number" and "name" that's printed on the top of the sheets when sending faxes. With the pixelation on signatures it shouldn't be too hard to make a signature that looks real and it's comming from the "correct" fax-number.
I'm willing to bet there are more people able to do this than to make an fake-emai
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
Probably not. Faxes are used extensively in the developing world, where phone connections are often not so clear.
There's no reason you couldn't make a fax machine that also handled faster transmission rates and/or higher resolution, but you wouldn't want to make that the default. Plus you would have to convince your fax machine manufacturers that people would actually use it instead of scanning/e-mail when time or resolution is of the e
Re:Legal Documents (Score:2)
Baud rate is a measure of the number of signal changes per second. Alas, POTS phone lines are generally spec'd to only 3 KHz. Therefore, they're incapable of anything more than 3,000 signal changes per second, or 3,000 baud.
To get anything faster than that, you use a modem to get more bits per signal change. But even then, it's still going to be running at less than 3,000 baud.
"Baud" is a passable measure of speed for a
junk faxes not new (Score:2, Insightful)
There are very specific laws against this, b/c unlike e-mail, it's easily proved that the junk mailer wasted your resources (paper/toner/phone line).
My idea of a good anti-spam bill would just extend the current anti-junk-fax laws to include any form of electronic communication, but that doesn't look like it's going to happen.
-bZj
Email2Fax (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Email2Fax (Score:4, Funny)
I'm sure that it would have brought in a pretty penny on ebay.
LK
Re:Email2Fax (Score:3, Interesting)
Hey, the Nigerian Scam was making the rounds years ago, before email became popular. I remember first seeing it over 10 years ago when I was a temp worker at the university.
And that's nothing, according to Snopes, the first varient of this scam was in the 1920's [snopes.com].
Re:Email2Fax (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Email2Fax (Score:3, Funny)
Hi! How are you?
I send you this file in order to have your advice
See you later. Thanks
Daniel
Still near universal (Score:5, Interesting)
Since then we have come to realize that everyone has access to a fax of some sort, even people that lack or don't understand e-mail and more advanced technology. If nothing else they can walk down to the corner store and fax us something.
The other realization is that fax maintains the design or layout of what you're sending without relying on HTML e-mail, attachments, or the sometimes slim odds of your recipient having the same software that you do.
Aside from that, any piece of paper, even fax peper, holds more weight and seems more legitimate than an e-mail.
Fax on and on (Score:4, Interesting)
That's why the fax continues to be used: it's familiar, intuitive technology. Actually, that's the reason it even exists. When cheap fax machines started to appear in the 80s, a lot of us didn't take them seriously -- we purely digital media as the wave of the future. What we didn't take into account was the severe difficult of converting all those legacy print documents into some easily manipulated online. Tools for creating online documents have improved a lot since then, but they still don't tackle a lot of basic problems, and many (Word, Acrobat) are still biased towards creating hard copy.
my fax is unhooked (Score:2)
Because it is a direct connection (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Because it is a direct connection (Score:2)
Re:Because it is a direct connection (Score:2)
You can't verify the sender.
You can't verify the recipient.
You can't verify whether the contents of the message has been tampered with.
You can't verify whether the fax got there intact.
You can't verify that it has been read.
Well sure it's not bad, and I can probably come up with more problems with faxing if I spend more than a minute thinking about it. Faxes are as secure as postcards, if you wanna bet your companysecrets on a non-encrypted unsigned service, be my guest.
point and click (Score:5, Insightful)
Scanning in a document, attaching it to email, and then sending it requires more time, expertise, as well as less reliability. The time issue is the most important.
I use a fax program but only becuase I hardly ever need to send faxes and I don't want to allocate space for a fax machine. The complexity of me sending a fax from my computer, even if it is a document I create on the computer, is significantly more complex than using a fax machine. I also have used email-to-fax services, but these were only benificial for out-of-area faxes, in which I saved toll charges.
I see it similiar to Advantix camera. The advantix is probably of lower quality than even a simple 35 mm point and shoot. However, for most people is very much simpler, and therefore the quality issue is compensated for.
Re:point and click (Score:3, Interesting)
With PDAs, computers and electronic documents, you'd think people would be asking why the use of the several millennia old idea of pen and paper hasn't been eliminated.
For so long as there is a practical use for a technology, it won't completely go away.
Still a usefull technology (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Still a usefull technology (Score:2)
Sending them via email would've saved a lot of paper and ink, and so on.
Let's not forget about all those hours spent typing forms (received via fax) into various databases. What if these forms were received via email, it would save a lot pages (the actual form * 2 + receipts at both ends).
Faxes won't die because (Score:2)
Re:Faxes won't die because (Score:2, Informative)
Guess you've never sent faxes to offices where they have one common fax machine shared by lots and lots of people.
IMHO QoS is a non-issue when it comes to fax-like things. Unlike voice, a fax doesn't have to be real-time. A few seconds delay is perfectly acceptible. I think the real problem is that e-mail offers no usable confirmation of delivery. I'm sure there are softwares out there that can do this but no standard.
With always-on connectio
Re:Faxes won't die because (Score:2)
Have you ever sent a fax somewhere in Indonesia?
I fax Bali quite often, and it usually takes three or four tries to get a *legible* copy across.
In the US or EU, sure, not an issue. But in developing countries, it certainly *is* an issue.
Why Fax Machines Are Popular (Score:5, Insightful)
When is the last time you just typed up an email address on the computer, slapped your document on the scanner, pushed a button, and everything worked flawlessly without any intervention.
Fax machines are incredibly easy to use and just seem to work, end of story. They have a user interface that just about everyone is already familiar with (the telephone) where as computers and scanners are just plain over complicated in really stupid ways. There's issues with drivers, non-standard UIs for scanning, and I have yet to see "one button" features work on any scanner on any platform.
It's a shame not more devices work as easily as fax machines and telephones.
Re:Why Fax Machines Are Popular (Score:2)
The problem isn't my end... it's the other side typicaly. Using the lastest all in one units under the microsoft platform... I can indeed do 3 step scan to e-mail without problem. In my case I press "scan" to PC... pull down the sento "e-mail" and it gets sent off NO problem. You can for example have a really cool scan
Re:Why Fax Machines Are Popular (Score:2)
It's proprietary, but wouldn't PDF fit your description?
Re:Why Fax Machines Are Popular (Score:2)
I have a DVD full of old hardware and software manuals that we
jerk city. (Score:2)
That would be the last time I had to print something out for some retard who refused to join the 21st century. Lacking a fax machine, I generally have to snail mail it, or drive to some place that charges to send faxes.
How do they get your fax number? (Score:2)
Re:How do they get your fax number? (Score:4, Insightful)
Because it's easy and fast (Score:3, Interesting)
If you scan and mail it takes sometime:
- turn the computer (if it's off)
- wait the scanner to heat (if you didn't use it less than 5 minutes ago)
- pre-scan (to mark the region will be scanned, it's usually automatic can't jump that phase)
- choose the right configuration (color and depth) or the result can be a mess and full the mailbox
- scan (time depends of the choosen configuration)
- final edition (ajust size, compression)
- pdf (if it's more than few pages)
- attach and mail
Someone may say you can configure that before, but some scanners demand you check the values on every step (and page) and also someone that used the scanner before can have changed the configuration.
There's also another point that is difficult to share a scanner in a work enviroment while with fax it's easier
Fax has its limits.. (Score:3, Funny)
Fax Machines and Fax Modems (Score:2)
Re:Fax Machines and Fax Modems (Score:2)
New egg [newegg.com] selling v92 intel chip pci modems for $9
Remember how Samford Wallace got started (Score:3, Interesting)
(However e-mail spam dose predate fax spam that's annother issue)
Before the famous greencard spam some companys engadged in fax spam. Including SCO.
Samford Walace was one of those people. But when fax spam was outlawed he switched to e-mail. However thsi method of marketting had already receaved a bad reputation from the green card spam and worse.
Samford however didn't care if he pissed people off.
If you complainned to Samford directly about his spam he'd put you on a specal mailing list where he'd send a message ever hour on the hour and then every 30 minuts with the express purpous of flooding your e-mail box.
What samford did was harrasment.. in fax and later in e-mail. He set the standards for the spam and junk fax industrys even if he started nither. Chances are good if he had chousen a diffrent field (one he maybe knows something about as he never got that harrasing your target market is very stupid marketting) we'd probably not need laws banning junk fax or e-mail and the industry standards would actually respect the target markets fealings by implamenting and enforcing it's own industry standards that come short of banning.
Such as no harvesting of e-mail addresses, no illegal products, no deceptive advertsing, honnor unsubscribe requests, always offer unsubscription forms, never sell unsubscriptions (as confermed spam lists).. or even spam lists (as there'd be no way to get off them if you sold the list)
Re:Remember how Samford Wallace got started (Score:2)
I wouldn't bet on it. There's an endless supply of jerks in the world.
SCO Connection (Score:3, Interesting)
From the junk fax FAQ on tort law. Does anyone know if this could apply to the SCO case?
Q. Can you go after the individuals involved as well as the corporation?
A. Yes.
The "general rule," discussed in 3A Fletcher, Fletcher Cyclopedia of the Law of Private Corporations (perm. ed. rev. vol. 2002), sets forth as follows:
"An individual is personally liable for all torts which that individual committed, notwithstanding the person may have acted as an agent or under directions of another. This rule applies to torts committed by those acting in their official capacities as officers or agents of a corporation. It is immaterial that the corporation may also be liable. Under the responsible corporate officer doctrine, if a corporate officer participates in the wrongful conduct, or knowingly approves the conduct, the officer, as well as the corporation, is liable for the penalties. The person injured may hold either liable, and generally the injured person may hold both as joint tort-feasors.
"Corporate officers are liable for their torts, although committed when acting officially, even though the acts were performed for the benefit of the corporation and without profit to the officer personally. Corporate officers, charged in law with affirmative official responsibility in the management and control of the corporate business, cannot avoid personal liability for wrongs committed by claiming that they did not authorize and direct that which was done in the regular course of that business, with their knowledge and with their consent or approval, or such acquiescence on their part as warrants inferring such consent or approval. However, more than mere knowledge may be required in order to hold an officer liable. The plaintiff must show some form of participation by the officer in the tort, or at least show that the officer directed, controlled, approved, or ratified the decision which led to the plaintiff's injury. . . . A corporate officer or director may not seek shelter from liability in the defense that he or she was only following orders. Personal liability attaches, regardless of whether the breach was accomplished through malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance."
Id. at 1135.
In addition, an important distinction should be noted: "[p]ersonal liability for the torts of officers does not depend on the same grounds as 'piercing the corporate veil,' that is inadequate capitalization, use of the corporate form for fraudulent purposes, or failure to comply with the formalities of corporate organization. The true basis of liability is the officer's violation of some duty owed to the third person which injures such third person." Id.
Fax is not easy, apparently (Score:5, Funny)
Sure ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmmm... Sure o'that ? I reckon' that if you have a look at the faxes firmware, some security holes would appear, at least in some machines. Enough to let you remotely print a fake fax, with wrong number id, or send faxes to other people. A fax virus would be perhaps possible, although unlikely due to the many different brands of firmware out there. Diversity and single-purposedness of faxes is what protects them.
Fax Revenge (Score:5, Funny)
A piece of blackpaper
Sellotape
Place the blackpaper into the fax machine and sellotape to make a tube.
Enter the number and hit send
All the other end will receieve it page after page of black printout. It might be an urban legend but apparently there was one type of fax machine that would overheat and catch fire if this was done to it
Rus
Re:Fax Revenge (Score:2)
I'm not sure if this is an urban legend.... or took place in reality.
I'm thinking the old thermal paper fax machines where the paper came on a roll, and physicaly cut when it reached the end of page.
I'm not sure if any of those units are left in service.... the last one I know of was when a friend of mi
Re:Fax Revenge (Score:2)
Those were the days, indeed.
Who can remember 50bps Telex (Score:2, Informative)
The two big things that telex had over a fax is that
1. A telex message was a legel document a copy of the telex message was keeped a both ends.
2. A telex would work here faxes could not (bad phone systems, old exchanges, ship to shore)
Telex is not dead yet, just almost.
Re:Who can remember 50bps Telex (Score:2, Informative)
Fax-Spam already illegal here (Score:3, Interesting)
It was passed long ago, since the person receiving the fax has to pay for it...
( much as we have to do for e-spam too , i know THEY are not paying for my bandwidth or storage or time.. )
Why I use fax (Score:3, Insightful)
It is much harder to ignore a fax sitting on your desk than it is to pretend that the email got lost in the spam filter, or the letter got lost in the post, or to sit for hours waiting for them to answer the voice telephone.
Fax spam can be a problem in the UK. Fortunately, my home fax machine isn't on any of the spammers lists, but at work we get about 15 spams per day, even although they are illegal.
If work was a Ltd company rather than a partnership then it would be legal to send them unless you put your number on the "do not fax" list (Fax Preference Service). A lot of spammers will stop if you put it on that list, but there are others who use the FPS as a list of confirmed working fax machines, and spam their own "Do not fax" services to that list. They generally want about GBP5.00 for you to be placed on the list.
If you try complaining about it, nobody wants to know.
Calculators are another example... (Score:4, Interesting)
I use several different versions of Windows at work (XP, Win2K, NT 4.0, and 98) and I can pull the calculator out of my desk drawer in less time than it takes to figure out where in the start menu they've put the calculator in THIS version of Windows.
In the old Mac OS the calculator was under the Apple menu, but it isn't any more and if I'm away from my own Mac it takes less time to pull out a calculator than to bring up a new Finder window, select Applications, select Utilities, discover that the Calculator isn't a Utility, find it in Applications, drag it to the taskbar--oops, excuse me, Dock so I can find it again...
And the real-world calculator always has the buttons in the right places (regardless of what keyboard I'm using or whether NumLock is on)--and is, as far as I know, free from arithmetic or roundoff bugs.
Oh, and it doesn't take any time to boot. And it runs for YEARS and YEARS on a watch battery (my PDA only gets six months on a set of AA's).
Re:Calculators are another example... (Score:2)
Re:Calculators are another example... (Score:2)
I agree though, real calculators are nifty for regular math.
Urgh.. (Score:2, Informative)
Win-R -> calc.
Being that you don't play games at work (right?
hylafax and whfc (Score:2, Interesting)
You all seem to be overlooking something (Score:3, Interesting)
The reason people like fax machines isn't because they don't get junk faxes. It's not because fax machines are easy to use, either (though they are -- but with a little computer literacy, email is too).
You can sum up fax's popularity in one word: Paper.
Think about it.
My bank ... (Score:2)
But they will accept a fax as an instruction do to something
(Actually this is quite useful. If something needs to be done with my wife's bank account whilst she's in the US on a jolly, I've got her signature on disk and can just send a fax to her bank. (I usually remember to email
Re:My bank ... (Score:2)
easy (Score:2)
Third world faxes (Score:3, Informative)
Plus, with languages like chinese, japanese etc., it's always been easier to write something out by hand and send a fax than fight with a computer. In major metro centers, sure, it's changing, but fax will have a place there for a good long time.
residential problem too (Score:2)
The worst junk faxes (Score:2)
The reason this is so much worse than typical junk faxes is
Fax produces hard copies (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it works (Score:3, Insightful)
Here is why fax won't die (Score:2, Funny)
Step 1: Lift cover of scanner and insert document face down with the letterhead toward the hinge of the cover
Step 2: Import the document into $MS_PRODUCT
Step 3: Select File -> Print
Step 4: Select the "Fax" Printer
Step 5: Press Print, enter Fax Number when Prompted, then click OK
Troubleshooting: If document fails to scan, follow the "Scanner Troubleshooting" section of your 2000 page user manual. If document fails to fax, follow the "Microsoft Printer Subsystem" troubleshooting sec
Re:Lack of spam faxes? (Score:5, Interesting)
2K? (Score:4, Interesting)
Look at the source and start filtering the domains that the e-mails link to. For an image and/or for the link people are supposed to click on.
For example:
I've gotten two e-bay spams that have
http://www.ertdfg.biz/index.php?id=3D173&affid=
I block ertdfg.biz and I block 100% of spam from them no matter what forged domain sends the e-mail. And no legitimate e-mail will ever be filtered out.
Spammers can't obfuscate the domains for the links or the images (aside from character codes but that's the only one and it's 100% unique) so blocking them is highly effective.
Blocking words doesn't work nearly as well because words get used a lot for many purposes so a program can't really be sure. ertdfg.biz has exactly one purpose.
I don't know if baysian filters take image domains and linked domains into consideration but they should. It blocks the company and not the spammer. Filters should give the user a complete list of the domains found in e-mails and allow the EU to decide which ones are spam (and how much of the link is spam: i.e. www.geocities.com/bigboobies you wouldn't want to filter geocities.com but you would want to filter that subfolder) and then the filter should add them to the expression watch and delete on sight.
Ben
Bigger problem than fax spam... (Score:2)
Re:Lack of spam faxes? (Score:2)
only a person that doesnt have a fax machine says this....
I recently put a fax machine on line at work for a new department... it was on a line that has NEVER been used as a fax line.
it took 2 weeks for the autodialers to find it and start spamming it...
at least 30% of all faxes recieved are spam faxes, and fax spam is more costly than email spam.
Luckily most fax spammers can be fooled with the telezapper trick.
also, if you ever get a fax spam with a fax
Re:Lack of spam faxes? (Score:4, Interesting)