Bulk message identification

• US 8,706,823 B2
• Filed: 03/04/2011
• Issued: 04/22/2014
• Est. Priority Date: 10/07/2002
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Google LLC (Alphabet Inc.)
• Original Assignee: Bright Sun Technologies, Series 42 of Allied Security Trust I (Allied Security Trust)
• Inventors: Ben-Yoseph, Roy, Koschier, Sylvia M.
• Primary Examiner(s): CHRISTENSEN, SCOTT B
• Application Number:
  US13/041,250
• Publication Number:
  US 20110213849A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,145 Days
• Field of Search: None
• US Class Current: 709/206
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/107 Computer-aided management of electronic mailing [e-mailing]
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 51/212 using filtering or selective blocking

Abstract

Distinctively treating digital communications sent by bulk message senders includes providing a set of bulk sender behavior policies and monitoring compliance by a bulk message sender with the set of policies. Based on compliance by the bulk message sender with the set of policies, digital communications sent by the bulk message sender are distinctively treated.

Claims

1. A method of processing electronic messages sent by at least one of a plurality of bulk message senders, the method comprising:

receiving a plurality of electronic messages sent by at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders;

for each electronic message of the plurality of electronic messages, determining whether the sender of the electronic message is included in one or more of a plurality of tiers, wherein inclusion in one or more of the plurality of tiers is based on sender compliance information, including;

information associated with the historical sending of emails of the sender; and

information indicating whether the sender complies with a first set of bulk message policies;

applying a first distinctive treatment to a first set of electronic messages of the plurality of electronic messages in response to one or more senders of the first set of electronic messages being included in a first tier of the plurality of tiers, wherein inclusion in the first tier requires a sender to meet the first set of bulk mail polices at least once, and wherein the first distinctive treatment is preferential to a second set of electronic messages that have one or more senders not included in any of the plurality of tiers; and

applying a second distinctive treatment to a third set of electronic messages of the plurality of electronic messages in response to one or more senders of the third set of electronic messages being included in a second tier of the plurality of tiers, wherein inclusion in the second tier requires a sender to have a history of compliance with a second set of bulk mail policies, and wherein the second distinctive treatment is preferential to the first distinctive treatment.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the second distinctive treatment is associated with a process of associating an electronic message of the third set of electronic messages with a graphical element to differentiate it from electronic messages of the second set.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the second distinctive treatment is associated with a process of routing an electronic message of the third set of electronic messages to a different folder than the folder to which electronic messages of the second set are routed.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the second distinctive treatment is associated with a process of bypassing a spam filtering process.

5. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether the at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders is capable of complying with the first set of bulk message policies.

6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

monitoring the compliance of a first sender with the second set of bulk message policies;

determining whether the compliance of the first sender falls below a threshold level of compliance; and

denying, based on the compliance falling below the threshold level of compliance, the second of distinctive treatment to a fourth set of electronic messages from the first bulk message sender.

7. The method of claim 6, further comprising sending a noncompliance report to the first sender.

8. The method of claim 6, further comprising denying the first distinctive treatment to the fourth set of electronic messages.

9. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

monitoring the compliance of a first sender with the second set of bulk message policies;

determining whether the compliance of the first sender has exceeded a threshold level of compliance for a predetermined period of time; and

providing a third distinctive treatment to a fifth set of electronic messages from the third bulk message sender based on the compliance exceeding the threshold level of compliance for the predetermined period of time.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the information associated with the at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders historical sending of emails comprises an indication of how many electronic messages sent by the at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders have been undeliverable.

11. A computer-based system for processing electronic messages sent by at least one of a plurality of bulk message senders, comprising one or more processors and one or more storage media storing a plurality of instructions, the plurality of instructions being executable by at least one processor for:

receiving a plurality of electronic messages sent by at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders;

for each electronic message of the plurality of electronic messages, determining whether the sender of the electronic message is included in one or more of a plurality of tiers, wherein inclusion in one or more of the plurality of tiers is based on sender compliance information, including;

information associated with the historical sending of emails of the sender; and

information indicating whether the sender complies with a first set of bulk message policies;

applying a first distinctive treatment to a first set of electronic messages of the plurality of electronic messages in response to one or more senders of the first set of electronic messages being included in a first tier of the plurality of tiers, wherein inclusion in the first tier requires a sender to meet the first set of bulk mail polices at least once, and wherein the first distinctive treatment is preferential to a second set of electronic messages that have one or more senders not included in any of the plurality of tiers; and

applying a second distinctive treatment to a third set of electronic messages of the plurality of electronic messages in response to one or more senders of the third set of electronic messages being included in a second tier of the plurality of tiers, wherein inclusion in the second tier requires a sender to have a history of compliance with a second set of bulk mail policies, and wherein the second distinctive treatment is preferential to the first distinctive treatment.

12. The computer-based system of claim 11, wherein the second distinctive treatment is associated with a process of associating an electronic message of the third set of electronic messages with a graphical element to differentiate it from electronic messages of the second set.

13. The computer-based system of claim 11, wherein the second distinctive treatment is associated with a process of routing an electronic message of the third set of electronic messages to a different folder than the folder to which electronic messages of the second set are routed.

14. The computer-based system of claim 11, wherein the second distinctive treatment is associated with a process of bypassing a spam filtering process.

15. The computer-based system of claim 11, further comprising determining whether the at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders is capable of complying with the first set of bulk message policies.

16. The computer-based system of claim 11, further comprising:

monitoring the compliance of a first sender with the second set of bulk message policies;

determining whether the compliance of the first sender falls below a threshold level of compliance; and

denying, based on the compliance falling below the threshold level of compliance, the second distinctive treatment to a fourth set of electronic messages from the first bulk message sender.

17. The computer-based system of claim 16, further comprising sending a noncompliance report to the first sender.

18. The computer-based system of claim 16, further comprising denying the first of distinctive treatment to the fourth set of electronic messages.

19. The computer-based system of claim 11, further comprising:

monitoring the compliance of a first sender with the second set of bulk message policies;

determining whether the compliance of the first sender has exceeded a threshold level of compliance for a predetermined period of time; and

providing a third distinctive treatment to a fifth set of electronic messages from the third bulk message sender based on the compliance exceeding the threshold level of compliance for the predetermined period of time.

20. The computer-based system of claim 11, wherein the information associated with the at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders historical sending of emails comprises an indication of how many electronic messages sent by the at least one of the plurality of bulk message senders have been undeliverable.