Lawmakers push anti-spam bills
By The Associated Press
07.22.02
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Virginia congressman is among several representatives trying to slow the flow of spam — that irritating Internet junk mail that clogs computer users' time and e-mail.
Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., is sponsoring the Anti-Spamming Act of 2001, which was originally scheduled to be heard on the floor of Congress Sept. 12, but was delayed because of the Sept. 11 attacks. The Senate is about to debate a spam bill, so the interest in a House spam bill has been renewed.
Despite the nearly universal dislike of this daily annoyance, legislators have not been able to pass legislation that will meaningfully reduce the amounts of spam or at least reign in some of the deceitfulness of many of the spammers.
Goodlatte's legislation would keep e-mail marketers from using other people's addresses to send the mail, a technique frequently used by spammers who want to avoid responses from the people they target with the messages. The technique also allows spammers to bypass filtering software that keeps the spam from getting through.
"We're talking about the really bad guys that are stealing other people's identities," said Goodlatte.
Goodlatte is trying to make his bill compatible with the Unsolicited Commercial Mail Act of 2001, introduced by Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M. Both bills have gone through committees, and there's no schedule to bring them to the floor for debate yet.
The unsolicited mail act would give consumers, the Federal Trade Commission and state attorney generals the ability to sue spammers who violate these rules for $500 per e-mail. Goodlatte's bill allows Internet Service Providers to sue spammers who falsify their address on behalf of the ISP's customers.
Goodlatte doesn't believe it's a good idea to allow consumer lawsuits because doing so could further clog courts.
But not everyone thinks new laws are needed to deal with spam. Direct marketers and some business groups think it's unfair to lump legitimate businesses that use e-mail marketing with the shady spam operators, and they say they have a First Amendment right to make their pitches. They also argue that filtering software is available that will sort out spam.
Many of these groups support Goodlatte's legislation because they think it will create hardship for shady operators, but not for legitimate companies.
Jim Conway, the vice president of government relations for the Direct Marketing Association, said the association supports Goodlatte's bill, but is strongly against the Wilson bill provision of identifying the e-mail as a solicitation. The requirement doesn't exist for regular mail, and it shouldn't for e-mail either, he said.
"You have a medium that's an open medium and now you have Congress saying you have to label legitimate offers," said Conway.
The most ardent spam opponents, like the Coalition Against Unwanted Commercial E-mail, don't think any of the bills go far enough. They believe marketers should only be allowed to send e-mails to people who have an existing business relationship with the companies or choose to "opt-in," similar to rules governing fax transmissions.
Conway said the marketing industry is young and still figuring out best practices and self-regulation, and pointed out that the Direct Marketing Association has a place for consumers to opt-out of the association members' mailing lists.