Internet users who can still claim that they have never received spam are rare. These unexpected emails fill up, and sometimes blow up your mailbox. The reception of spam follows the same manner as other correspondence exchange, whether in paper or digital format. It is dependant on the knowledge of future recipients' contact information. In order to realize their operation, spammers must possess some private information, in particular email addresses. The economic issue attached to this private information puts them inevitably at increased risk of illegal collection. To think about the means of protection against spam invites us to reason at two levels : at the time of information collection to prevent illegal capture of private information and at the time of “sending” itself to protect recipients from receiving these undesirable messages. Antispam technology has quickly shown its limits. In light of this situation, the fight against spamming has turned towards legislative tools, which will be put to severe tests as well. At the national level, the answers provided by special laws seem to be incomplete, and even inefficient. In addition, the intrinsically international nature of spamming requires knowledge of foreign laws. Having no international consensus, the deep divergences between national legislations, in particular between France and United States, which is the first Spam-relaying country, risk jeopardizing their efficiency to protect spam victims. Thus, the partial failure of special laws leads us to seek recourse using the solutions provided by common law in preparation of engaging civil and criminal liability of spammers. If seen from a national point of view, the suggestions can demonstrate that they are capable of making up for some of insufficiency of special legislation, the antiSpam fight will necessarily involve a study at international scale.
