I've been the guy at the ISP who investigates the spam complaints. Sure, it was a smallish ISP by comparison (only a few thousand customers), but we had our share. I, personally, abhor spam. I had an account once (in the days before SpamCop) that averaged about 1 MB per day at its peak. I reported every one that I could trace, and complained to the postmasters of machines that forwarded messages without proper logging.
No. This isn't the answer.
The ISPs do have an obligation to protect their customers' privacy, even if the customers are jerks. I hate to rely on the slippery slope here, but what happens when something else gets considered a nuisance? People who surf for pr0n really annoy that sector of society that feels it's important to control everyone's morality; since ISPs route the traffic, could they figure it out and give out (or charge for) the list? Should I have access to the personal information of Napster users because they clog up the bandwidth pipes I'm trying to use to do schoolwork (going through 2 college networks--oy, vey!)? Should the RIAA?
For the most part, spammers are simply uneducated about the ways of the net; a nastygram from the system administrator often gets them back into line. Why does this kind of spam keep happening? Because there are more newbies every day.
Granted, that doesn't get rid of the career spammers. Ask Sanford Wallace or Canter and Siegel if giving out their real names, addresses, and phone numbers deterred them. If anything, I think they like the attention. And the lowlifes who go trolling newsgroups and web sites for email addresses are probably not dumb enough to send the spam themselves anyway; they make more money selling their lists to others.
Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men. —MLK
$email =~ s/0/o/; # The K5 cabal is out to get you.