FTC Announces Labels for Pornographic 'Spam'

[directfiesta]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Pornographic "spam" e-mail will have to be clearly labeled by mid-June to allow Internet users to easily filter it out, the Federal Trade Commission announced on Wednesday.

Unsolicited pornography will have to bear a label reading "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT-CONTENT:" in the subject line and the messages themselves will not be allowed to contain graphic material, the FTC said.

Outrage over unsolicited pornography and other forms of unsolicited e-mail spurred Congress to pass the first nationwide anti-spam law last year, which required the FTC to develop labels for smut.

An FTC study released last spring found that 17 percent of pornographic offers contained images of nudity that appeared whether a recipient wanted to see them or not.

The new rule is intended to change that. Pornographers will not be allowed to include sexually explicit pictures in the body of the message, though they will be allowed to include hyperlinks or other methods to access their material.

Like other e-mail marketers, they will also be required to include their postal address and an easy way to opt out of future mailings.

Several states have already passed laws requiring pornographic spam to bear an "ADV:ADULT" label or some variant, but they will be overridden by the federal standard.

The FTC determined the "adult" tag was too vague as it could apply to gambling or tobacco, an official said.

"Lots of things are appropriate for adults that aren't appropriate for children," said FTC Assistant Director Allen Hile.

The hyphenated "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT-CONTENT:" label, while ungrammatical, will make it easier to block explicit content while letting through messages from anti-pornography groups or others who may use the phrase, the FTC said in its notice.

The public will have three weeks to comment on the proposal, which is due to take effect in mid-June.

Hile said the agency is especially interested to hear whether the measure will encounter any technical hurdles. Free-speech arguments will carry less weight as the agency has been directed by Congress to develop the labels, he said.

"We don't have a whole lot of discretion in this," Hile said. "I guess we can't prevent commenters from saying, 'What a stupid idea,' or 'It violates the Constitution' or whatever, but we can't do anything with that."

[Webby]

Not that I approve of spam.. porn or not! :-)

But wondering how the US FTC can make laws about it?

Why not the Icelandic government??

[silentkey]

Fuck America.

[Pornwolf]

Yeah sure, folks will really follow this rule.

[Chichio]

Originally posted by Webby
Not that I approve of spam.. porn or not! :-)

But wondering how the US FTC can make laws about it?

Why not the Icelandic government??

That's a great question. The American government is still under the impression that they will be able to control the internet.

[Brujah]

Think about the reason behind it. Because kids are getting hardcore images in their emails with subject titles like "Hey You!" or "Where were you last night ?".

This looks like it's meant for those emails that contain sexually explicit images.

[Spudstr]

this is getting out of hand by the US goverment.. god damn it

[Theo]

no problem

PHP Code:

S<!-- rff3 -->EX<!-- r2d3 -->UAL<!-- r34c3 -->LY-EXPL<!-- rf3263 -->ICIT-C<!-- r523 -->ONTE<!-- 6543 -->NT: 


[Hustler DJ]

Well intentioned, poorly executed concept. How long is it gonna take the suits in DC to "get it"??!?
<br>

[Smokey The Bear]

Who thinks up these hairbrained ideas.

[taboo_gal]

While this maybe a well intentioned, but poorly thought out concept. Do you not think something needs to be done?

For crying out loud, I am a woman and I get emails that say "Can't please your woman?" Anyone heard of targetted marketing? Yeah, some women may bite if they want their mate to try it out, but come on! And do kids really need to see "Suzy g3tting f^ck&ed with Blg Black C@cks"?

I'm not saying the US government is the best entity to make, regulate and enforce any laws concerning the internet and the issues involved with its use. Perhaps they should develop an organization like the UN or even a sector of the UN to handle these issues.

Here is a thought: Why not get involved and lobby for such an organization? I hear alot of complaining, but what are you doing to better the situation?

[Carrie]

Nice in theory. No one will follow it, though.

"Perhaps they should develop an organization like the UN or even a sector of the UN to handle these issues. "

ACK. NO.
Who is going to decide which people (with which morals) are going to sit on this Internet UN and make decisions about what the rest of us can/can't do online and can/can't see?
The best thing about the Internet is freedom of expression and open exchange of information and ideas. Put a "ruling body" in charge of that and you'll kill it or drive it underground.

[ulfie]

Originally posted by taboo_gal
I'm not saying the US government is the best entity to make, regulate and enforce any laws concerning the internet and the issues involved with its use. Perhaps they should develop an organization like the UN or even a sector of the UN to handle these issues.

hahahahahah, yeah, let the UN do it. It's a POWERLESS organization. How are they going to stop spam? By passing resolutions? Worked real well with Saddam.

UN: stop spamming.
Spammer: Fuck you.
UN: We passed a resolution.
Spammer: Fuck off.
UN: We passed another resolution and we REALLY mean it this time.
Spammer: Get bent.
UN: You better watch out we're building a coalition.
Spammer: I paid off France and Russia so blow me.
UN: You are a naughty person.
Spammer: Thank you, now kindly go fuck yourself.
UN: We passed another resolution.
Spammer: Send it to me, I'm out of toilet paper.
UN: You are really annoying us.
Spammer: So what?
UN: We said stop spamming!!!
Spammer: I said fuck off.

That about sums up how effective the UN is.

[chrisp420]

as if the government shouldnt be dealing with important issues.. like the scum bag insurance companys that rape people daily.

[jawanda]

Originally posted by Chichio
That's a great question. The American government is still under the impression that they will be able to control the internet.

Nah, US Laws only apply to shit that is sent from within the US, just like California Laws only apply to shit that is sent from within California ... and German Laws only apply to shit that is sent from within Germany.

It doesn't say anywhere that this will be a globally-enforced law, it's just implied that when the US passes a law, it pertains to the US.

I think this is a step in the RIGHT direction, making it legal to advertise via email as long as you meet certain guidelines to protect children. My biggest problem with it is that the 'label' is just so damn long, you won't be able to see the rest of the subject in most email clients.



-Phil

[taboo_gal]

Originally posted by ulfie


hahahahahah, yeah, let the UN do it. It's a POWERLESS organization. How are they going to stop spam? By passing resolutions? Worked real well with Saddam.

UN: stop spamming.
Spammer: Fuck you.
UN: We passed a resolution.
Spammer: Fuck off.
UN: We passed another resolution and we REALLY mean it this time.
Spammer: Get bent.
UN: You better watch out we're building a coalition.
Spammer: I paid off France and Russia so blow me.
UN: You are a naughty person.
Spammer: Thank you, now kindly go fuck yourself.
UN: We passed another resolution.
Spammer: Send it to me, I'm out of toilet paper.
UN: You are really annoying us.
Spammer: So what?
UN: We said stop spamming!!!
Spammer: I said fuck off.

That about sums up how effective the UN is.

I said "LIKE". I know full well nothing is full proof, but something should be done and I hear no other suggestions; only complaints.