> First question need to be raised is do we have to come up with an agreed definition
> on Spam globally?
Difficult indeed. But we could already start at the other end: refusing mail from all computers (the zombies/botnets) which are the main source and are not real mail servers. That's quite simple, but we need to agree on some naming conventions worldwide for that.
Yes, but I also think the definition should include "for commercial purposes" (although not all SPAM are necessarily for commercial purposes but most are) we could come up with a list of several characteristics of SPAM and put them in a "definition article" and then put the list characteristics in it. an email would not have to have all the characteristics to count as SPAM. for instance:
- generated by bots
- for commercial purposes
- unrequested by the recipient
- [insert more here]