Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 40161	2003-11-30 02:45:00	US Senate has approved CAN-SPAM	Mike (15)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
195806	2003-11-30 02:45:00	The U . S . Senate voted Tuesday for a historic antispam bill, capping more than six years of failed congressional attempts to enact a federal law restricting unsolicited commercial e-mail . President George W . Bush has indicated that he will sign the bill, called the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (CAN-SPAM), after he receives it in December . During a brief floor discussion before the voice vote, Democrats and Republicans alike hailed CAN-SPAM as a long-sought compromise that would curb Viagra advertisements and get-rich-quick propositions from clogging Americans' e-mail in-boxes . Sen . Ron Wyden, D-Ore . , said that "when this bill takes effect, the big-time spammers who up until now have faced virtually no penalties will suddenly be at risk of criminal prosecution, (Federal Trade Commission) prosecution and million-dollar lawsuits . " Sen . Conrad Burns, R-Mont . , said: "In cases where e-mail marketers don't comply with the CAN-SPAM bill, the penalties are very severe . . . Spammers are actually on the hook for (per e-mail) damages, with a cap of $2 million . " Tuesday's vote formalizes the third version of CAN-SPAM, which has been bouncing back and forth this fall between the two corners of Capitol Hill . The Senate voted for the first version in October, and the House of Representatives approved a second one early Saturday morning . The third measure cannot go to Bush for his signature until it is approved again by the House, which a congressional aide predicted would happen the week of Dec . 8 . All three versions of CAN-SPAM are similar, and all represent a compromise not as far-reaching as some antispam advocates had urged . They punish sending fraudulent commercial e-mail with criminal penalties but take an "opt out" approach that does not ban bulk, unsolicited e-mail advertisements . They permit but do not require the FTC to create a "do not spam" registry . America Online and technology trade associations have applauded CAN-SPAM, which, if enacted, would become the first federal law to regulate spam . "This is a critical new law that will help us turn the tide against spam in the online medium for good," AOL said in a statement Friday . The NetChoice coalition, which includes eBay, Orbitz and the Information Technology Association of America, called the congressional votes "very encouraging . " The latest version of CAN-SPAM, approved by the Senate, includes at least four changes: • Under the House bill, once commercial e-mail senders obtained "affirmative consent" from recipients, they would not have to follow certain rules such as providing an easy way to unsubscribe from future mailings . The Senate proposal eliminates that language . • State attorneys general would, according to the House bill, have a tougher time seeking injunctions against spammers engaged in header forgery or who bounced mail through networks "accessed without authorization . " The Senate bill makes it easier to stop them . The Senate bill also would make it easier for the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission to obtain cease-and-desist orders against header-forging or network-intruding spammers . • The House proposal gives federal judges more discretion in granting "reasonable attorney fees" to state attorneys general . The Senate version does not . • The Senate version broadens the definition of what qualifies as spam sent to mobile devices . All versions of CAN-SPAM would pre-empt more restrictive state laws, including an unusually regulatory statute California enacted in September that caused even legitimate online marketers to worry about frivolous lawsuits . With final passage of this bill, the core of California's opt-in law would never take effect . The Direct Marketing Association, which once opposed antispam laws and reversed its position a year ago, called CAN-SPAM a "positive development . " DMA public affairs director Louis Mastria said it is "imperative that we have a national standard for e-mail marketing, because it's at the very least a national marketplace . To have anything that's less than a federal standard would be No . 1 ineffective and No . 2 put a (damper) on the larger marketplace . " In addition, according to Spam Laws, compiled by law professor David Sorkin, at least 15 states currently require "ADV:" or a similar label on unsolicited commercial e-mail . If CAN-SPAM is enacted, those laws would become void, and spammers in those states would no longer be required to follow the labeling requirements . The list includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, Texas and Utah . Criticism of CAN-SPAM has not been limited to antispam advocacy groups . A letter The National Association of Attorneys General sent to Congress earlier this month bluntly warns: "The bill creates so many loopholes, exceptions, and high standards of proof, that it provides minimal consumer protections and creates too many burdens for effective enforcement . . . We respectfully request that you not move forward . . . " A House divided One reason it took so long for Congress to act is that the House has been deadlocked between competing bills--one backed largely by Democrats and one supported almost entirely by Republicans . In contrast to an early Republican proposal, the CAN-SPAM bill does not expressly prohibit class-action lawsuits, a favorite of trial lawyers whose deep pockets make them hugely valued contributors to the Democratic Party . Unlike other bills, CAN-SPAM would permit Internet service providers, but not individuals, to file lawsuits against spammers . Even as the Senate prepared to vote on CAN-SPAM, criticism grew from the antispam community, which points out that no federal law can be effective against overseas spammers . "From a consumer perspective, there's not a lot of good news there except the 'do not e-mail' list," said Ray Everett-Church, a lawyer at ePrivacy Group who follows spam laws . "You're talking about pre-empting laws that the Federal Trade Commission and attorneys general haven't been able to enforce . With the new law, they can be busy not enforcing a federal law . " Loren McDonald, a vice president at e-mail delivery firm EmailLabs, which sends mail on behalf of Nokia, NEC, Bell Canada and Texas Instruments, said of CAN-SPAM: "In many respects, it's pretty disappointing . It really just makes unsolicited commercial e-mail legal . It causes further problems for us, because it could increase the volume of what we consider to be (spam) e-mails . Those compete with our legitimate clients' e-mails . " CAN-SPAM's criminal penalties include outlawing e-mail header falsification, sending commercial e-mail with deceptive subject lines, and sending commercial e-mail that does not include "a functioning return" address or a link to a Web form capable of accepting unsubscribe requests . It also regulates sexually oriented e-mail and e-mail address harvesting . (From ZDNet) . Mike .	Mike (15)
195807	2003-11-30 03:18:00	That is good news but the rest of the world needs similar laws otherwise the spammers will just spam from elsewhere.	mikebartnz (21)
1