FC: Democrats kvetch about "cyberlibertarian" opposition to spam laws

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Tue Jun 05 2001 - 12:34:09 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Happy Birthday, PGP! Ten year anniversary of v1.0 release today"

    Background, including CDT policy post:
    http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=spam
    
    Incidentally, CDT is hardly a "cyberlibertarian" organization. While not
    as hostile to business as some groups, it is far from libertarian in its
    political views (and support for some types of government regulation).
    
    My article, which also seems to have prompted this aggrieved response
    from the DLC:
    http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,44088,00.html
    
    -Declan
    
    ---
    
    ==================================
    NEW DEMOCRATS ONLINE
    --  NEW DEM DAILY --
    Pithy news and commentary from the DLC.
    ==================================
    [ http://www.ndol.org ]
                                                                            
    05-JUN-2001
    
    Getting a Label on Spam
    
    Legislation to deal with "spam" -- unsolicited commercial email --
    has been bouncing around Congress for several years, most
    notably in legislation by sponsored by Reps. Heather Wilson
    (R-NM) and Gene Green (D-TX), which passed the House last
    year.  Last month the House Judiciary Committee killed an
    amendment to this bill, sponsored by New Democrat Rep. Adam
    Schiff (D-CA), that would have provided a very simple protection
    for spam recipients.
    
    The Schiff Amendment simply provided that every bite of spam
    carry an identifier on the subject line of the email: the characters
    ADV, for "advertising."  It would apply to all spam, but to spam
    only; not to political emails or the jokes that Internet users are
    forever forwarding to everyone in their address books.  It's one
    of the measures the Progressive Policy Institute recommended
    in a November, 1999 report, "How to Can Spam."
    
    But while the untimely death of the Schiff amendment drew little
    attention, cyberlibertarians are aflame over a provision that
    remains in the bill: an amendment by Rep. Melissa Hart (R-PA)
    that requires specific labeling for pornographic spam so that
    unwilling viewers or parents can either delete it or create a filter
    to keep it from landing like a bag of rotten potatoes on the home
    PC screen.  Today, porno-spammers often use tricky and
    misleading subject lines like "Sorry I missed your call," or
    "Haven't heard from you in a while," aimed at misleading
    recipients into opening their nasty little surprise.
    
    A cyberlibertarian group called the Center for Democracy and
    Technology views this mild and reasonable labeling requirement
    as a serious threat to the Constitution, calling the label "forced
    speech" which is "as offensive to the Constitution as forced
    silence."  Since similar or even greater restrictions already
    apply to physical mail with sexual content, the real
    cyberlibertarian case lies in the mistaken impression that the
    Internet is inherently a Wild West medium where no rules
    should ever apply.  That's exactly the kind of thinking that could
    quickly make the Internet an inhospitable zone of abusive
    conduct that many current or potential users will not want to enter.
    
    Since the argument against the Hart Amendment relies heavily
    on opposition to regulation of content on the Internet,
    cyberlibertarians should logically support the Schiff Amendment
    as an alternative: it does not distinguish between different types
    of commercial messages, and applies a strictly descriptive
    subject-line label that calls it what it is: advertising.
    
    Rep. Schiff is thinking about introducing his spam labeling bill
    as free-standing legislation.  Every reasonable party to the debate
    should be able to support it.  Without labels, Internet users will
    continue to be force-fed spam for years -- or will get sick of it and
    rely on other ways to communicate.
    
    Related Material:
    
    "E-Mail Spam Labeling: Why the Cyberlibertarians Have It Wrong,"
    by Shane Ham, PPI Front & Center, June 4, 2001:
    http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=107&subsecid=126&contentid=3422
    
    "How to Can Spam: Legislative Solutions to the Problem
    Of Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail," by Randolph H. Court
    and Robert D. Atkinson, PPI Policy Briefing, November 1999:
    http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=1349&knlgAreaID=107&subsecid=126
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 12:55:02 PDT