Okay, maybe I'm just kinda stupid, but … what does this mean? I know what a referrer log is and I know what spam is, but … what's referrer spam?

Ok, did you notice how they link to you guys on their site?

What's up with that?

JD, they are taking the referrer you linked to them from, and putting it in their footer. I linked to it from the Bloglines version of this entry, and the bloglines.com link was there.

Hell of job Kev

It doesn't look like the PayPall user agreement definition for spam covers URL gathering, just those activities pertaining to unsolicited e-mail. I think PayPall should update their agreement to cover this sort of behavior.

About that PayPal squeak around in the User Agreement, that also exists in the Privacy Policies of most webhosts and services and merchangs, etc.

Until it becomes more costly for Spammers to Spam and profitable for consumers to be Spammed, or some combination of those two, the problem is going to go on and on and on because the fact is that Spammers pay sources for lists of information (email addresses, customers, etc.) and what with free enterprise and all, people can and do make bucks from dealing information TO Spammers, one way or another. Until that changes (I don't see any plans soon for making it illegal for other businesses to receive money from Spammers, however), Spammers will continue to flourish and harass everyone else.

I had a gmail address that I'd saved and kept very private but after several interactions about the Weblog Awards, I now am being Spammed in that email address, dozens a day, worse than Yahoo. Yahoo only stopped the flow a bit after I continued to report the Spam to Spamcop for over a year and to their Email Abuse and probably finally got tired of my daily massive complaints about it, so have done something about the Spam (thanks for that, however I'd have considered it far more wonderful if Yahoo had never allowed so much Spam in the first place).

Now that China and Korea and Brazil and such have sold their server souls to Spammers...where does this problem ever end?

My solution, or at least a start, is that, as with telemarketing use of telephones, consumers be paid for the advertising that Spammers/advertisers want to engage in using someone else's utility(ies). With Spam, however, you can't deny it (not like not answering the phone) and it takes a huge amount of time to contend with it on each and every work day and weekends to-boot. If it costs Spammers money to have their email opened, then they'll have to reconcile themselves to the amount of money it costs everyone else to delete all their crud. I say, charge Spammers money to have their emails downloaded from a server or opened by a consumer, and there will be progress made.