To win the award for best “Nice Try But Waste of Your Time” legislature, the Senate has passed the bill introduced in the House of Representatives to help reduce spam. The idea is that, like the Do Not Call list, this bill allows the FTC to create a “do not spam” list, and makes it illegal to send emails to addresses on this list. It also makes it illegal to use any type of spoofing to hide the original source of the email.
[Conrad] Burns [(R. Mont)] said the spam bill wouldn’t have a major effect on reducing the amount of spam in consumers’ inboxes until a few major violators are prosecuted and fined or jailed. He said Congress would watch closely to ensure the legislation is properly enforced.
While that’s true, am I the only one considering a scenario much worse than simply being ineffective? How many people are going to hop at a chance to get on this list? Oh, say, everyone you know. That list, in order to give email marketers the tools needed to comply with the law, will be available to them in full. Let that sink in. A list of email addresses that they are 100% certain go to a live human being.
Thanks, Uncle Spam. Do Not Call had my praise, but this, I’ll pass.
Posted Tuesday November 25, 2003 in News by Chris Curtis
This is an older entry and as such, it may be by a guest author or contain formatting problems / extraneous code. If you notice something wrong with the entry, please use the Contact page to let me know the entry title and issue.
Oh yeah, oops. My memory must have been forgettaba-awesome.
By Derek Jones on November 26, 2003 at 12:02pm link
Although…
What are those advertisements for and “who” is advertising them? My point is that unwanted spam will eventually point to some merchant, some place for a point of sale, etc. Even with a “no spam list” it should be possible to prosecute violaters.
By caesar on November 27, 2003 at 09:11pm link
Copyright 2001-2008 Some rights reserved. ‡ Contact. ‡ Subscribe to Feeds.
XHTML, CSS. Powered by ExpressionEngine. Hosted on EngineHosting.
C’mon, dude… you’re supposed to cite your sources when you quote something! :D
By Chris Curtis on November 26, 2003 at 10:52am link