Question

Microsoft filed a lawsuit against people who sent spam (junk email) and a website owner who hosted spam services. A spokesman for Microsoft said that Microsoft was "trying to change the economics of spam" by increasing the cost of being a spammer. An economist most likely would agree with which statement about Microsoft's actions?

A. A more effective approach would be to educate spammers about the costs they impose on others.

B. A more effective approach would be to appeal to the morals of the spammers and tell them to follow the Golden Rule.

C. Microsoft's approach of trying to change the costs of spamming is the most efficient way to change behavior.

D. Microsoft should not be involved because spamming is just part of the invisible hand at work and should be left alone.

Answer 1

Answer :(C)

C.micro soft's approach of trying to change the cost of spamming is the most efficient way to change behavior.

Explanation:

The economist most likely would agree with this statement about Microsoft because in reality many of spammers costs(such as access,bandwidth, labour,hardware,development ways to avoid filtering etc..)so when the spammers cost increasing they do reduce the spam.

A receiver pay pricing works by less the incentive of the receivers of spam message to open them and sender pays pricing works by increase the spammer's cost,filtering alone is unlikely to offer a viable solution to the spam problem if spammers counteract it by sending multiple variants of message to each consumer so only the economist are agree with Microsoft way of change behavior cost of spammers.