Here's the Canadian jurisdiction against SPAM: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-1.6/index.html
> An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Competition Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act (S.C. 2010, c. 23)
> Unsolicited electronic messages 6 (1) It is prohibited to send or cause or permit to be sent to an electronic address a commercial electronic message unless
> (a) the person to whom the message is sent has consented to receiving it, whether the consent is express or implied; and
> (b) the message complies with subsection (2).
And here's the European jurisdiction against SPAM: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...
> Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications)
> Unsolicited communications 1. The use of automated calling systems without human intervention (automatic calling machines), facsimile machines (fax) or electronic mail for the purposes of direct marketing may only be allowed in respect of subscribers who have given their prior consent.
Almost none of them in competent jurisdictions even attempt to define spam with an eye towards balancing against free speech.
Mobile phones utilize IP networks (VoLTE or voice over data networks), so dialtone 2.0 becomes an easy option with domestic network protocols as well.
ESIM is about to change dynamics as well, so any use of a phone number/SMS/2FA for identity verification is rendered null with the current system in place.
https://consumer.ftc.gov/consumer-alerts/2019/10/sim-swap-sc...
Domestic networking protocols and dialtone 2.0 easily address most ransomware, malware, SPAM, etc much easier than trying to police 3rd world countries.
That severe limitation of regulating 3rd world countries is also the same argument with climate change. The can continue to regulate their own soverign borders.