Again, I respect the opinion being posited here. You and I can go back in forth about whether spoofing is wrong or immoral, and I may even agree that certain forms of deceptive orders may be ethically justifiable, but the regulatory agencies and exchanges (CME as far as I'm concerned) are firmly in agreement that it is illegal.
Do I believe that relatively insignificant entities should disgorge millions or spend time in jail...no. I don't even really so much care about spoofing being allowed...I'll adapt to whatever market conditions prevail; what I am very adamant about is CME and regulatory agencies presenting objective and interpretable rules, which I think rule 575 achieves even if it is borderline impossible to enforce.
For what it's worth, the games spoofers play are pretty insignificant abuses in terms of absolute message volume and the aggregate illegitimately posted liquidity that HFTs both small and large were responsible for prior to about '08. Remember that CME only recently even started requiring FCMs to give unique Operator ID numbers to individual traders (tag 50). I don't really know how they intended to track down parties responsible for infractions before that. Furthermore, it's still pretty easy to get away with bluffing on CME, it just takes a marginally higher degree of sophistication.