[Politech] Why Fed spam law is absolutely evil, by John Gilmore [sp]

From: Declan McCullagh (declan@private)
Date: Sat Nov 22 2003 - 17:15:43 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "[Politech] Why the Fed spam law is probably pretty problematic after all [sp]"

    ---
    
    From: John Gilmore <gnu@private>
    Subject: US antispam bill is death to anonymity
    Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 11:43:00 -0800
    
    This bill makes it a crime to use any false or misleading information
    in a domain name or email account application, and then send an email.
    That would make a large fraction of hotmail users instant criminals.
    
    It also makes it a crime to remove or alter information in message
    headers in ways that would make it harder for a police officer
    to determine who had sent the email.  Anonymizers will be illegal
    as soon as this bill becomes law.
    
    There are MANY, MANY other things wrong with it -- including the fact
    that most of its provisions apply to *ALL* commercial email, not just
    BULK commercial email -- and that it takes zero account of the First
    Amendment, attempting to list what topics someone can validly send
    messages about, while outlawing all other topics that relate to
    commercial transactions.
    
    If it passes, I think I can make a criminal out of just about any
    company.  Companies are liable for spam that helps them, even if they
    had no part in sending it.
    
    Read the bill yourself:
      http://news.com.com/pdf/ne/2003/FINALSPAM.pdf
    And weep.  And then call your Congressman.
    
    Everyone's common sense goes out the window when the topic is spam.
    They're willing to sacrifice whatever principles they have.  And
    you already know how few principles Congress had left.  
    
    	John
    
    http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-1024_3-5110622.html
    
    Congress Poised for Vote on Anti-Spam Bill
    Declan McCullagh
    Published: November 21, 2003
    
    Congress has reached an agreement on antispam legislation and could
    vote on it as early as Friday afternoon, a move that would end more
    than six years of failed attempts to enact a federal law restricting
    unsolicited commercial e-mail.
    
    Negotiators from the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives said
    Friday that the legislation was a "historic" accomplishment with
    support from key Democrats and Republicans in both chambers. "For the
    first time during the Internet-era, American consumers will have the
    ability to say no to spam," House Energy and Commerce Committee
    Chairman Billy Tauzin, R-La., said in a statement. [...]
    
    If the measure becomes law, certain forms of spam will be officially
    legalized. The final bill says spammers may send as many "commercial
    electronic mail messages" as they like--as long as the messages are
    obviously advertisements with a valid U.S. postal address or P.O. box
    and an unsubscribe link at the bottom. Junk e-mail essentially would
    be treated like junk postal mail, with nonfraudulent e-mail legalized
    until the recipient chooses to unsubscribe. [...]
    
    One hotly contested dispute has been resolved: The bill would pre-empt
    more restrictive state laws, including one that California enacted in
    September. That law established an opt-in standard and was scheduled
    to take effect on Jan. 1. With final passage of this bill, the core of
    California's law would never take effect. [...]
    _______________________________________________
    Politech mailing list
    Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Nov 22 2003 - 17:12:59 PST