Yet Another Anti-Spam Bill In U.S. Senate

ackthpt writes "Another bill has been introduced in the U.S. Senate, according to CNN/Technology, by Sens. Conrad Burns (R-Montana) and Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) Yahoo supports it, but DMA and AOL want to polish it a bit more. Version 0.9 beta would require States Attorney Generals to sue spammers on consumers behalf. (So long as I get some moola from these jerks, I'd be happy with that) My wishes are: craft a strong enough bill to stand 1st Amendment challenges and punish violators in the pocketbook enough and a few prosecutions will bring most of the domestic junk to a screeching halt. I tend to daydream about winning the lottery, too. Contact your Senators and Representative with your wishes, maybe this time something will get a move on."

Comments

Willing to burn karma for an explanation

[unfortunateson]

Ok, when I posted the same info from a Yahoo article several days ago, this was rejected, but now it's news?

I even mentioned the fact that all it's asking for is legit reply addresses and obeying remove requests (of course if the reply address is bogus, you can't ask to be removed, and the attorneys general have a harder time suing anyway...).

Can anyone explain what makes this reference by Timmy to a CNN story migut be more respected than mine to the Yahoo story?

Re:Offshore?

[thadeusPawlickiROX]

Well, what if spammers go to SOVIET RUSSIA? In SOVIET RUSSIA, you spam the spammers!!