Slashdot Mirror

This is really cool; do other cities use this as well?

Yes.
Here's one I use:
Seattle traffic

Orwellian concerns are written all over this. Very good point.

I also don't understand why it has to be in vehicle. Washington state department of transportation already collects much of this information on our local highways. This is done via sensors on the freeways and cameras. The sensors are paced every mile or so.

1) they can tell who has their headlights on via cameras
2) they can determine speed of cars and volume of traffic using electromagnetic sensor embedded in the freeway.
3) Road temps and weather are collected by some very nice weather stations dotted throughout the system.
4) they can determine whether or not ABS is functioning based on the accidents reported :)

I really see no other purpose to this than Big Brother motives. How easy could it be to link this to TIPS or what ever they're calling it these days.

I'll be placing my order for a tin foil hat soon. And maybe one for my next vehicle.

We get into my car and after securing our seatbelts, turining on the lights, etc. we take off. I exit the parking lot and a cop that was going the other way makes a U-turn. I say to my ex-gf "We are going to get pulled over in just a second." We stop at the 4 way stop (2 lanes in each direction) and since there is no traffic I start to cross the intersection. About that time some pedestrians across the intersection and on the opposite side of the road start to cross the street.

Not 2 seconds later I get pulled over (no surprise there). The officer comes to the car window and I ask him how he is doing, his response: "Apparently better than you are"...I was like "Oh shit, I'm getting a ticket for SOMETHING..."

Ten minutes later Officer cocksucker comes back and writes me a ticket for failure to yield the right of way to a pedestrian...WHAT A DICKHEAD!!! Like I was supposed to stop in the middle of the intersection and wait for these people to cross the street after I had already started moving BEFORE they tried to cross the street...

Needless to say I am contesting this ticket based on the law and The Corresponding RCW 46.61.235

This "Officer" was out to write a DUI, and I just happened to be the lucky person leaving the general area at the time...The INTERESTING part is that I am out at this club almost nightly and only drink (more than 1) when I am NOT driving...90% of the time I drink Diet Pepsi or Coffee (OK, so bar coffee is not generally Starbucks...but you get the idea...

This is clearly a case of a cop having NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN HARASS...THe most fucked part about this is, that I moved back to WA State just over a year ago from NJ...and I'll be goddamned if I haven't been pulled over more in a year back in here WA than I was in 5 years in NJ....

We get into my car and after securing our seatbelts, turining on the lights, etc. we take off. I exit the parking lot and a cop that was going the other way makes a U-turn. I say to my ex-gf "We are going to get pulled over in just a second." We stop at the 4 way stop (2 lanes in each direction) and since there is no traffic I start to cross the intersection. About that time some pedestrians across the intersection and on the opposite side of the road start to cross the street.

Not 2 seconds later I get pulled over (no surprise there). The officer comes to the car window and I ask him how he is doing, his response: "Apparently better than you are"...I was like "Oh shit, I'm getting a ticket for SOMETHING..."

Ten minutes later Officer cocksucker comes back and writes me a ticket for failure to yield the right of way to a pedestrian...WHAT A DICKHEAD!!! Like I was supposed to stop in the middle of the intersection and wait for these people to cross the street after I had already started moving BEFORE they tried to cross the street...

Needless to say I am contesting this ticket based on the law and The Corresponding RCW 46.61.235

This "Officer" was out to write a DUI, and I just happened to be the lucky person leaving the general area at the time...The INTERESTING part is that I am out at this club almost nightly and only drink (more than 1) when I am NOT driving...90% of the time I drink Diet Pepsi or Coffee (OK, so bar coffee is not generally Starbucks...but you get the idea...

This is clearly a case of a cop having NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN HARASS...THe most fucked part about this is, that I moved back to WA State just over a year ago from NJ...and I'll be goddamned if I haven't been pulled over more in a year back in here WA than I was in 5 years in NJ....

I apologize for not being able to answer your question. I live in the US, you see. I am not familiar with the concept of government incentives and payments in exchange for favors from the corporate sector. Not only that - I live in a state which will give 2+ billion US, free training to their workers, freeway expansion around their facilities, and a free cargo dock to our favorite corporate entity in exchange for 1,200 jobs. But since our state government knows best, it must be done because it has a tremendous ROI.

Quoth the poster:

Too late. The spammers "CAN-SPAM" act has already taken away our individual rights to redress grievances through courts of law. Individual recipients of spam cannot sue spammers. The power is left in the hands of attorney generals.

(sigh) Yet another legal illiterate /. er. The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

The "CAN-SPAM" act, while a shitty law, specifically exempts laws like Washington's that prohibit falsifying headers and subject lines. For those too lazy to RTFA, here's the relevant section:

(1) IN GENERAL- This Act supersedes any statute, regulation, or rule of a State or political subdivision of a State that expressly regulates the use of electronic mail to send commercial messages, except to the extent that any such statute, regulation, or rule prohibits falsity or deception in any portion of a commercial electronic mail message or information attached thereto. (emphasis added for blithering /. conspiracy buffs!)

What this means is, law's like Washington's are untouched by CAN-SPAM. So take off the tinfoil hat and join the real world.

And enforceability isn't really the issue here either. For instance, WA state law did allow for state residents to take on out-of-state spammers.
Alright, you can't take them to small claims court but you can still sue them in state court (cf. the Heckel case). I know it works because I've personally seen it work.

True, collection of damages can be a bitch in cases like this but this is becoming increasingly true for all cases these days. That's why WA state law wisely also allows the Attorney General to go after spammers, at least in some cases.

Ultimatively, there won't be a legal solution to the spam problem - at least not as long as we're sticking to our current email protocols. Spammers will, similiar to telemarketers, just rent services overseas and thereby almost always avoid criminal prosection, as well as civil trial.

While it's not universal, my state's law is

Upon all roadways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, except (a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (b) when traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow, (c) when moving left to allow traffic to merge, or (d) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit, or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted.

without regard for the speed limit. "Keep right except to pass" is even posted at certain points near the borders. (And no, I'm not a legal geek, finding this only took half a minute.)

How in the hell did this get modded informative?

Had you read the bill (which is more than most congresscritters do, but I digress) you would have seen that:

This Act supersedes any statute, regulation, or rule of a State or political subdivision of a State that expressly regulates the use of electronic mail to send commercial messages, except to the extent that any such statute, regulation, or rule prohibits falsity or deception in any portion of a commercial electronic mail message or information attached thereto.

In other words, laws like Washington's are affected not in the slightest.

Wake up, /.'ers, the sky isn't falling. True, it isn't the greatest (or even a terribly "good" antispam bill,) but politics is the art of the possible. Nowhere is it more true than in politics that the perfect is the enemy of the good. We'll get a good law eventually.

No - your MA business would be fine. You aren't subject to the law unless you know, or have reason to know that the address is linked to a WA resident. RCW 19.190.020 (and if you are business obscuring your email details - I have no pity). In order to make sure spammers have reason to know, WA residents can register their email addresses. And besides, nothing stops an inquiry to the ISP either. There is nothing you can say, or argue, that can cause me to be sympathetic to commercial email.

The worst part about spam is that I can't do what I do with paper spam - cross mailing junk mail (insert visa offer into mastercard offer, and mail them off). The kick I get out of that is well worth 37 cents.

(IANAL, but)

Here, read this - this is apparently what they teach the kids in school in Washington state.

Something to consider when some of the kids that read this think they aren't hurting anyone - even if the law is 'stupid', even if the RIAA is a bunch of 'idiots', you could end up costing your parents money that could be going to your first car, your college fund, hell, even to put food on the table like in the case of the 12-year-old they went after a few months ago.

I still don't understand WTF these parents are thinking, not supervising their kids' internet usage. Isn't a parental lack of appropriate supervision and guidance considered neglect?

And I am SICK and TIRED of people getting caught and whining 'I didn't know' - why don't I get drunk and go out driving, I can just say I didn't know it was against the law. Whether I hurt someone or not, I'd still get taken in if I got pulled over. Why? Because it's against the law. Never mind that lots of people drink and drive all the time, some so much that they drive better than when sober, it's still against the law. There has been a TON of publicity about music piracy and filesharing and the consequences, how can anyone who is Net-knowledgeable enough to find and use Kazaa pretend that they have never seen any indication that they might be breaking the law???

At the risk of feeding the troll, I feel compelled to respond to this very old chestnut.

/* DISCLAIMER

This is not legal advice. You are not a client. I'm not even an attorney. If you want legal advice, contact an attorney admitted to the bar in your jurisdiction. What I am saying here is probably 100% wrong and if you do anything based on it, you are a blitering idiot who deserves whatever bad shit is very likely to befall you.

DISCLAIMER */

Now that that's out of the way . . .

Quoth the poster:

Violent anal rape every day for ten years is a pretty harsh punishment for getting caught with a bag of pot.

Getting caught with a bag of pot in most jurisdictions isn't enough to land you in jail, much less prison. In Washington, for example, possession of a couple of joints is a misdemeanor. Most likely, you can get into drug diversion court here and get the charges dismissed entirely.

Not saying I agree with the War on Drugs, just want to clear up some misinformation.

At the risk of feeding the troll, I feel compelled to respond to this very old chestnut.

/* DISCLAIMER

This is not legal advice. You are not a client. I'm not even an attorney. If you want legal advice, contact an attorney admitted to the bar in your jurisdiction. What I am saying here is probably 100% wrong and if you do anything based on it, you are a blitering idiot who deserves whatever bad shit is very likely to befall you.

DISCLAIMER */

Now that that's out of the way . . .

Quoth the poster:

Violent anal rape every day for ten years is a pretty harsh punishment for getting caught with a bag of pot.

Getting caught with a bag of pot in most jurisdictions isn't enough to land you in jail, much less prison. In Washington, for example, possession of a couple of joints is a misdemeanor. Most likely, you can get into drug diversion court here and get the charges dismissed entirely.

Not saying I agree with the War on Drugs, just want to clear up some misinformation.

There are plenty of existing laws already on the books to deal with misuse of these devices. As one example, in my own home area, RCW 46.37.190, Section 4, clearly states (among other things) that "Optical strobe light devices shall not be installed or used on any vehicle other than an emergency vehicle authorized by the state patrol, a publicly owned law enforcement or emergency vehicle, a department of transportation, city, or county maintenance vehicle, or a public transit vehicle."

The section goes on to define, in very specific detail, what the state of Washington considers to be an "Optical strobe light," and it explicitly includes devices to control traffic signals.

As another example, the California Vehicle Code, Section 25258(a), explicitly authorizes traffic control strobes only for emergency vehicles.

Final example: Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 816, Section 12, prohibits any kind of flashing light, other than the normal turn signals or hazard lights, on any vehicle other than an emergency or school bus type.

Now, you might be thinking "Hey, these things emit in the infrared region, so they're not visible to the unaided human eye. No problem!"

Well, there is a problem. First, 'unaided' is the keyword here. Normal video cameras see into the infrared region very well indeed (I know -- I've experimented along those lines), and many intersections now have these cameras installed in the interests of catching red light jumpers, speeders, etc.

That same camera will, if you're using one of these devices, pick up your strobe flash, IR or no IR, with no problems at all.

As if that's not enough, lots of cities have remote telemetry and monitoring of their traffic signals, and that monitoring includes an indicator that the pre-emption device has been tripped. Couple that trip indication with an image from the intersection camera, showing a nice bright white light from your dashboard where there's not supposed to be one, and you could be in big trouble really quick.

The thing that'll really kill the sales of these things is digital encoding of the strobe flash. King County (WA state again) has already done this. I've noticed that the Opticom emitters on our local fire and PD vehicles are all flashing in a very distinctive pattern, compared with six or so years ago where they were simply flashing at a certain frequency.

I guess the short way to say it is that there's going to be an awful lot of ticked-off people when they discover that their $300 time-saver either gets them at least the same amount in a traffic ticket, or when said device suddenly ceases to have any effect.

Have you registered your email address? Have you filed any complaints with the attorney general? Have you filed a lawsuit? Please don't complain if you haven't. It's like complaining about Bush, and having not voted.

Have you registered your email address? Have you filed any complaints with the attorney general? Have you filed a lawsuit? Please don't complain if you haven't. It's like complaining about Bush, and having not voted.

That fact is moot in as the police had a warrant.

The officers installed the GPS transponder under a "warrant authorizing a search of the vehicles for blood, hair, body fluids, fibers." Maybe I missed that lecture in my E/M fields class, but what part of the GPS signals are made up of blood, hair, body fluids or fibers?

Other than that, I agree he is a sick bastard and I'm glad the court upheld the conviction.

When I lived in Seattle in teh mid '90s we used to do this.

The transportation department setup monitors that showed the rate of movement of traffic, and displayed the route across the bridge from Bellvue to Seattle (520 IRRC) - it would show green dots or red dots depending on the speed of traffic, and you could use a couple of cameras along the route as well to see how traffic was.

I assume she's hot

Meh

*rocks hand from side to side*

Not a howler, but not exactly hot.

The theory, I guess, is that really effective filtering will so reduce the efficacy of spamming as to make it economically pointless. Eventually, then, the volume should drop off.

I'm not sure that will ever happen completely, but I give a combination of technological solutions (open relay blacklisting; Bayesian filtering built seamlessly into clients) much better odds of success than a "legal" solution. I live in a state that's had anti-spam legislation since 1998 -- to no perceptible effect.

> "it beats any PDA or cell phone auto traffic map... [or} mostly worthless GPS navigation and DVD units."

Let me get this straight. You think a single purpose gadget that is limited to Seattle (or at best major metro areas) is better then a general purpose tool that can do the same thing? What's wrong with this picture? Have you even tried the Seattle traffic data on a PDA? Works, great, takes only seconds, and is kept current. See the link for the Palm software.
Furthermore, a GPS or DVD with built in comm links, or a fast PDA with them can even display the Seattle traffic camera views in real time! Try that with a single purpose toy!

> "it beats any PDA or cell phone auto traffic map... [or} mostly worthless GPS navigation and DVD units."

Let me get this straight. You think a single purpose gadget that is limited to Seattle (or at best major metro areas) is better then a general purpose tool that can do the same thing? What's wrong with this picture? Have you even tried the Seattle traffic data on a PDA? Works, great, takes only seconds, and is kept current. See the link for the Palm software.
Furthermore, a GPS or DVD with built in comm links, or a fast PDA with them can even display the Seattle traffic camera views in real time! Try that with a single purpose toy!

It seems like, aside from the continual updates thing, a nicer idea would be to have a PalmOS or WinCE version that would be updated either at sync time or, hardware allowing, continually via wi-fi, modem, or Bluetooth circuitry. Better still, if your PDA had GPS abilities, then getting current traffic info (and, why not, weather as well) for your current location would be even better. By going to a traditional PDA, you lose the real-time updates that the dedicated device seems to provide, but you also lose one more gadget to have to carry around (or, I suppose, just leave in your glovebox), and you also gain a good deal of flexibility.

I think the most interesting thing about this application is the excellent data representation of in the WA-DOT map. I'd like to see this traffic map style replace some of the other, clumsier traffic sites that I'm used to, with their breakdown of a region in arbitrary ways ("well, my route takes me from this section, across part of that one, and ends up at this third one..."), under-descriptive icons, pages of text ("wait, where the hell is Frontage Road? OH, the so-and-so landmark on interstate $foo..."), useless webcams that are greyed by smog and blocked by obstacles, and maps that don't attempt to tell you anything at all. Compare this to the WA-DOT's system, which tell you conditions between each exit, attempts to explain data holes ("no data" / "no equipment"), and even provides archives of maps at earlier times ("what the hell was going on last Thursday?"). Nice!

But I don't think I want a device dedicated to receiving that information.

Especially one targeted only at Seattle... :-)

It seems like, aside from the continual updates thing, a nicer idea would be to have a PalmOS or WinCE version that would be updated either at sync time or, hardware allowing, continually via wi-fi, modem, or Bluetooth circuitry. Better still, if your PDA had GPS abilities, then getting current traffic info (and, why not, weather as well) for your current location would be even better. By going to a traditional PDA, you lose the real-time updates that the dedicated device seems to provide, but you also lose one more gadget to have to carry around (or, I suppose, just leave in your glovebox), and you also gain a good deal of flexibility.

I think the most interesting thing about this application is the excellent data representation of in the WA-DOT map. I'd like to see this traffic map style replace some of the other, clumsier traffic sites that I'm used to, with their breakdown of a region in arbitrary ways ("well, my route takes me from this section, across part of that one, and ends up at this third one..."), under-descriptive icons, pages of text ("wait, where the hell is Frontage Road? OH, the so-and-so landmark on interstate $foo..."), useless webcams that are greyed by smog and blocked by obstacles, and maps that don't attempt to tell you anything at all. Compare this to the WA-DOT's system, which tell you conditions between each exit, attempts to explain data holes ("no data" / "no equipment"), and even provides archives of maps at earlier times ("what the hell was going on last Thursday?"). Nice!

But I don't think I want a device dedicated to receiving that information.

Especially one targeted only at Seattle... :-)

It seems like, aside from the continual updates thing, a nicer idea would be to have a PalmOS or WinCE version that would be updated either at sync time or, hardware allowing, continually via wi-fi, modem, or Bluetooth circuitry. Better still, if your PDA had GPS abilities, then getting current traffic info (and, why not, weather as well) for your current location would be even better. By going to a traditional PDA, you lose the real-time updates that the dedicated device seems to provide, but you also lose one more gadget to have to carry around (or, I suppose, just leave in your glovebox), and you also gain a good deal of flexibility.

I think the most interesting thing about this application is the excellent data representation of in the WA-DOT map. I'd like to see this traffic map style replace some of the other, clumsier traffic sites that I'm used to, with their breakdown of a region in arbitrary ways ("well, my route takes me from this section, across part of that one, and ends up at this third one..."), under-descriptive icons, pages of text ("wait, where the hell is Frontage Road? OH, the so-and-so landmark on interstate $foo..."), useless webcams that are greyed by smog and blocked by obstacles, and maps that don't attempt to tell you anything at all. Compare this to the WA-DOT's system, which tell you conditions between each exit, attempts to explain data holes ("no data" / "no equipment"), and even provides archives of maps at earlier times ("what the hell was going on last Thursday?"). Nice!

But I don't think I want a device dedicated to receiving that information.

Especially one targeted only at Seattle... :-)

It seems like, aside from the continual updates thing, a nicer idea would be to have a PalmOS or WinCE version that would be updated either at sync time or, hardware allowing, continually via wi-fi, modem, or Bluetooth circuitry. Better still, if your PDA had GPS abilities, then getting current traffic info (and, why not, weather as well) for your current location would be even better. By going to a traditional PDA, you lose the real-time updates that the dedicated device seems to provide, but you also lose one more gadget to have to carry around (or, I suppose, just leave in your glovebox), and you also gain a good deal of flexibility.

I think the most interesting thing about this application is the excellent data representation of in the WA-DOT map. I'd like to see this traffic map style replace some of the other, clumsier traffic sites that I'm used to, with their breakdown of a region in arbitrary ways ("well, my route takes me from this section, across part of that one, and ends up at this third one..."), under-descriptive icons, pages of text ("wait, where the hell is Frontage Road? OH, the so-and-so landmark on interstate $foo..."), useless webcams that are greyed by smog and blocked by obstacles, and maps that don't attempt to tell you anything at all. Compare this to the WA-DOT's system, which tell you conditions between each exit, attempts to explain data holes ("no data" / "no equipment"), and even provides archives of maps at earlier times ("what the hell was going on last Thursday?"). Nice!

But I don't think I want a device dedicated to receiving that information.

Especially one targeted only at Seattle... :-)

It seems like, aside from the continual updates thing, a nicer idea would be to have a PalmOS or WinCE version that would be updated either at sync time or, hardware allowing, continually via wi-fi, modem, or Bluetooth circuitry. Better still, if your PDA had GPS abilities, then getting current traffic info (and, why not, weather as well) for your current location would be even better. By going to a traditional PDA, you lose the real-time updates that the dedicated device seems to provide, but you also lose one more gadget to have to carry around (or, I suppose, just leave in your glovebox), and you also gain a good deal of flexibility.

I think the most interesting thing about this application is the excellent data representation of in the WA-DOT map. I'd like to see this traffic map style replace some of the other, clumsier traffic sites that I'm used to, with their breakdown of a region in arbitrary ways ("well, my route takes me from this section, across part of that one, and ends up at this third one..."), under-descriptive icons, pages of text ("wait, where the hell is Frontage Road? OH, the so-and-so landmark on interstate $foo..."), useless webcams that are greyed by smog and blocked by obstacles, and maps that don't attempt to tell you anything at all. Compare this to the WA-DOT's system, which tell you conditions between each exit, attempts to explain data holes ("no data" / "no equipment"), and even provides archives of maps at earlier times ("what the hell was going on last Thursday?"). Nice!

But I don't think I want a device dedicated to receiving that information.

Especially one targeted only at Seattle... :-)

I like that all of their data is available to the public too..

Specs for the WSDOT data files

If you have some programming ability and a PDA/Phone with a mobile internet link, you could write your own software to process the data however you wish for free.

Nice!

In the directory you referenced (http://images.wsdot.wa.gov/nwflow/wireless/Webflo wUpdates/), click on Readme.txt for a message to hackers. : )

This device also answers the question "should I go now" (vs. later or not at all)

Presumeable you're asking whether you should leave when you're still at the home or office, where I'm guessing a geek with one of these would have net access, and thus able to answer the question better, in color and free at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/pugetsoundtraffic/cameras/

Indeed, you could use WSDOT's own WebFlow application, although it hasn't been updated in a long time. Sadly, they have a location already set up for new maps that's going unused.

Indeed, you could use WSDOT's own WebFlow application, although it hasn't been updated in a long time. Sadly, they have a location already set up for new maps that's going unused.

Indeed, you could use WSDOT's own WebFlow application, although it hasn't been updated in a long time. Sadly, they have a location already set up for new maps that's going unused.

Dangerous driving doesn't get a ticket. Police typicaly are not allowed to engage in high speed pursutes without either authorization, or unless it's in relation to a felony.

You haven't seen seattle traffic.

Or at least on I520 westbound, just prior to the bridge, the cops are on FOOT pulling people over for using the carpool lane when they only have one person in the car.

Check out the puget sound traffic map.

From 4pm to 7pm, at least a few spots on the map will be black. Back means that traffic is moving between 20 MPH and completely parked. And the majority of what is measured is freeway.

A 20 minute commute in good traffic can be a 3 hour commute in bad traffic! Traffic is bad when you can safely read 20 pages of a book while driving home.

No, I am not making this up.

Amen, brother! In fact, it is the law in Washington state.

4 other lanes? WTF are you talking about 4 other lanes?

Going through downtown Seattle there are 4 HOV lanes...

...and part of I-5 is constricted down to 2 lanes for a time.

I for one am sure not happy about paying extra taxes so that other people can use their "elite" lanes...

The problem is our transit infrastructure is *atrocious*.

Carpooling is a poor answer as well. The timing issues are very difficult to work out. You have two people heading in to work, and say one person has to work late.

Of course, the REAL answer is - people should live near where they work.

In Western Washington? HAH! You must not be from Seattle, my friend.

One would think that would be a viable solution..like the time the constituency voted against building a new Kingdome, but it was built anyway. Or the time there was a referendum to see if bridge parallel to the Tacoma Narrows bridge should be built, only won by 3%, and was built anyway, unchanged. Now, the ballpark was only an initial query, with no set location, but the new Tacoma Narrows will be plowing through neighborhoods and taking out houses. Surely, that should require a margin of voter hapiness greater than 3%. The area definitely has a history of shady tactics when it comes to gauging public interest.

If you're an ISP, you can actually sue for $1000/msg under the WA law, so in reality it's 2*(all the money in the world).

HB 1009, if anyone's interested.

Another fairly spectacular example is the collapse of Husky Stadium in Seattle in 1987 while it was under construction. Another is the sinking of the Mercer Island bridge, and the sinking of half of the Hood Canal bridge.

Gee, some things just aren't built that well out here in the Seattle area, are they? Or maybe it's the weather...

Um, yes it is. To quote from here:

A tying arrangement is one in which the availability of one item (the 'tying' item) is conditioned upon purchase or rental of another item (the 'tied' item) or agreeing to not purchase the tied item from the seller's competitors.

In this case, the use of FoxPro is being illegally tied to the purchase or rental of Windows. Of course it doesn't really matter since the DoJ couldn't care less now about Microsoft's continued law breaking. They're too busy helping the MPAA and RIAA bully college students.

You can do exactly that. The law states that no person may conspire with another to spam.

Gee, I haven't heard the expression dormant interstate commerce clause in a while!

I think you and other refer to another case, which upheld Washington State's antispam law, Heckel v. State.

I looked up material regarding what I think is this case and see you're right that it is a commerce clause case, but there are first amendment overtones that perhaps was not argued or the court overlooked. I'm not especially familar with this case, but do wonder about the possibility of 1st A. arguments.

In any event, the ruling of an intermediate California court is not hardly conclusive of the issue nationally or federally (I don't know how California is set up, but it may not even be statewide in effect). Did the California Supreme Court deny review? Anyway, Ferguson is just a state court ruling about a particular state's law, there are 50 more of then, and judges certainly enjoy contradicting each other. Federal challenges will add a whole new layer.

Old news, but so was Washington's, and the US Supreme Court let it stand.

OT, but the Microsoft-sponsored gutting of Washington's antispam law is all but dead.

Old news, but so was Washington's, and the US Supreme Court let it stand.

OT, but the Microsoft-sponsored gutting of Washington's antispam law is all but dead.

Oh, sorry, here's senate bill 6568, for comparison with house bill 5734.

Oh, sorry, here's senate bill 6568, for comparison with house bill 5734.

The current law can be found here. A report on a successfully prosecuted case can be found here. If one reads either, it's easy to see that the current law only applies to fraudulent headers.

Given that the current law only covers fraudulent headers, I doubt that Microsoft is maliciously trying to destroy the current law.

However, last year the senate introduced bill 6568 which extended the old law to require that commercial e-mail contain ADV: as the first 4 characters of the subject line. That bill passed the senate with flying colors. Unfortunately, it got locked up in committee in the house and died.

House bill 5734 is a watered down version of last year's senate bill 6568.

I don't like Microsoft much. That said, the story at the Seattle Times is riddled with half-truths and inaccuracies. For example, it claims that 5734 completely exempts ISPs. The senate summary of the bill says

Interactive computer services may not be held liable for acting as an intermediary between the sender and the recipient of commercial spam sent in violation of the law, or for providing transmission over its computer network or facilities of commercial spam that is sent in violation of the law.

I'd be really interested in knowing whether lobbyists that are partially funded by Microsoft also supported senate bill 6568 from last year. If so, this is definitely unjustified Microsoft bashing. However, if their lobbyists locked it up in the house then we can villify them for weakening a good bill.

Too bad the article doesn't comment on that, and I don't have a way to find out.