Senate approves anti-spam bill - GoFuckYourself.com

lEricPl · 10-23-2003, 08:26 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...eut/index.html

Senate approves anti-spam bill
Thursday, October 23, 2003 Posted: 4:18 AM EDT (0818 GMT)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The U.S. Senate voted Wednesday to outlaw deceptive "spam" e-mail, and set up a "do-not-spam" registry for those who do not want to receive unsolicited commercial e-mail.

Internet "spammers" who flood e-mail inboxes with pornography and get-rich-quick schemes could face jail time and million-dollar fines under the bill, which passed by a vote of 97 to 0.

The vote marks the first time the Senate has taken action against an online scourge that now accounts for 50 percent of all e-mail traffic, frustrating consumers and costing businesses bandwidth and productivity.

Similar legislation in the House of Representatives stalled as lawmakers try to hammer out differences between two competing bills. The Bush Administration said it supported the bill.

Senators noted that spam has become a top constituent concern and could overwhelm the Internet if left unchecked.

"Every day the Senate delays, big-time spammers [get] another opportunity to crank up their operations to even more dizzying levels of volume," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, a sponsor of the bill.

"I don't go to a town hall meeting, I don't meet a friend who doesn't say, 'Take care of that spam,"' said Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Montana, another bill sponsor.

The bill would not outlaw all unsolicited commercial e-mail, focusing instead on the fraudulent or deceptive messages estimated to make up two-thirds of all unsolicited commercial e-mail.

Marketers who falsify return addresses or routing information, hide their pitches behind misleading subject lines such as "Re: your request" or promote body-enhancement pills or other fraudulent products would face jail sentences of up to a year and fines of up to $1 million; repeat offenders could face jail terms of up to five years.

Marketers would have to label sexually explicit messages to allow users to filter them out.

The bill would also prohibit marketers from sending unsolicited messages to consumers who place their e-mail addresses on a "do-not-spam" registry, similar to the popular "do-not-call" anti-telemarketing measure launched earlier this month by the Federal Trade Commission .

Marketers could e-mail addresses not on the list until asked to stop.

Other common spammer tactics, such as hijacking users' identities, using multiple accounts to evade filters, and sending messages to millions of randomly generated e-mail addresses, would be outlawed as well.

State and federal law enforcers and Internet service providers such as EarthLink, Inc. would be allowed to pursue spammers, but individual users could not sue directly.

More than half of U.S. states have passed anti-spam bills of their own, many of which set tougher regulations for marketers.

The bill would preempt most state laws, but would allow states to set higher penalties for deceptive or fraudulent activity if they wished.

Eyes_Without_A_Face · 10-23-2003, 08:48 AM

Go for it George.

Rochard · 10-23-2003, 09:02 AM

Yes, and of course there will be two dozen loop holes.

I"m not an attorney, but from what I"ve read of anti spam laws passed on the state level there is always a clause along of the lines of "if you do business with a customer, then you legally have the right to send that customer promotional messages". In other words, I have the right to send email to anyone who ever signed up for one of our sites.

I think the Senate needs to understand this is not something that only affects people living within the US, but every where else in the world. I'm sure some spammer from Russia would love to get their hands on the "do not spam" list. And just what is the US going to do when someone from some third world county violates this law?

Rinaldo · 10-23-2003, 09:11 AM

WWW.SEXPROMOTE.COM
35 per free trial

try it and make money

- Jesus Christ - · 10-25-2003, 06:31 PM

CAHEK · 10-25-2003, 06:31 PM

SPAM is still alive

skitten · 10-25-2003, 07:03 PM

Correct me if I am wrong - but a similar law was recently passed in California. It states that sending unsolicited spam email to California residents could result in up to a $1,000 fine. I live in Los Angeles and I'm still receiving spam.

Also, look what happened to the "Do-Not-Call List".

10-23-2003, 08:26 AM	#1
lEricPl Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: FL Posts: 1,062	Senate approves anti-spam bill http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...eut/index.html Senate approves anti-spam bill Thursday, October 23, 2003 Posted: 4:18 AM EDT (0818 GMT) WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The U.S. Senate voted Wednesday to outlaw deceptive "spam" e-mail, and set up a "do-not-spam" registry for those who do not want to receive unsolicited commercial e-mail. Internet "spammers" who flood e-mail inboxes with pornography and get-rich-quick schemes could face jail time and million-dollar fines under the bill, which passed by a vote of 97 to 0. The vote marks the first time the Senate has taken action against an online scourge that now accounts for 50 percent of all e-mail traffic, frustrating consumers and costing businesses bandwidth and productivity. Similar legislation in the House of Representatives stalled as lawmakers try to hammer out differences between two competing bills. The Bush Administration said it supported the bill. Senators noted that spam has become a top constituent concern and could overwhelm the Internet if left unchecked. "Every day the Senate delays, big-time spammers [get] another opportunity to crank up their operations to even more dizzying levels of volume," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, a sponsor of the bill. "I don't go to a town hall meeting, I don't meet a friend who doesn't say, 'Take care of that spam,"' said Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Montana, another bill sponsor. The bill would not outlaw all unsolicited commercial e-mail, focusing instead on the fraudulent or deceptive messages estimated to make up two-thirds of all unsolicited commercial e-mail. Marketers who falsify return addresses or routing information, hide their pitches behind misleading subject lines such as "Re: your request" or promote body-enhancement pills or other fraudulent products would face jail sentences of up to a year and fines of up to $1 million; repeat offenders could face jail terms of up to five years. Marketers would have to label sexually explicit messages to allow users to filter them out. The bill would also prohibit marketers from sending unsolicited messages to consumers who place their e-mail addresses on a "do-not-spam" registry, similar to the popular "do-not-call" anti-telemarketing measure launched earlier this month by the Federal Trade Commission . Marketers could e-mail addresses not on the list until asked to stop. Other common spammer tactics, such as hijacking users' identities, using multiple accounts to evade filters, and sending messages to millions of randomly generated e-mail addresses, would be outlawed as well. State and federal law enforcers and Internet service providers such as EarthLink, Inc. would be allowed to pursue spammers, but individual users could not sue directly. More than half of U.S. states have passed anti-spam bills of their own, many of which set tougher regulations for marketers. The bill would preempt most state laws, but would allow states to set higher penalties for deceptive or fraudulent activity if they wished.

10-23-2003, 08:48 AM	#2
Eyes_Without_A_Face Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: The dark side of the moon Posts: 600	Go for it George. __________________ Poocis Pornstar Directory: English - Español - Português - Français - Italiano

10-23-2003, 09:02 AM	#3
Rochard Jägermeister Test Pilot Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NORCAL Posts: 74,698	Yes, and of course there will be two dozen loop holes. I"m not an attorney, but from what I"ve read of anti spam laws passed on the state level there is always a clause along of the lines of "if you do business with a customer, then you legally have the right to send that customer promotional messages". In other words, I have the right to send email to anyone who ever signed up for one of our sites. I think the Senate needs to understand this is not something that only affects people living within the US, but every where else in the world. I'm sure some spammer from Russia would love to get their hands on the "do not spam" list. And just what is the US going to do when someone from some third world county violates this law? __________________ “The choice is no longer between right or left. The choice is between normal and crazy.” - Sarah Huckabee Sanders YNOT MAIL \| THE BEST ADULT MAILING SOLUTION

10-25-2003, 06:31 PM	#5
- Jesus Christ - Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: ::::::::::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: ::::::\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|:::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: :::::::::::\|\|::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::: Posts: 7,197	Bump __________________ Amen

10-25-2003, 06:31 PM	#6
CAHEK C.C.C.P. Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Novorossiya Posts: 7,134	SPAM is still alive __________________ Pharma from True-Meds. High converting shop in Europe and USA, fast payouts via BTC !!! Z

10-23-2003, 09:11 AM	#4
Rinaldo Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: South Florida Posts: 5,086	WWW.SEXPROMOTE.COM 35 per free trial try it and make money

10-25-2003, 07:03 PM	#7
skitten Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 217	Correct me if I am wrong - but a similar law was recently passed in California. It states that sending unsolicited spam email to California residents could result in up to a $1,000 fine. I live in Los Angeles and I'm still receiving spam. Also, look what happened to the "Do-Not-Call List".