Slashdot Mirror
UK And EU May Make Unsolicited Email Illegal
An anonymous reader writes "According to this BBC article the UK and the EU are planning to making unsolicited email simply illegal. This doesn't do anything for prevention practically, but it does legally pave the way for measures that do. Lord Sainsbury of Turville admits it will do nothing to stop spam from outside the EU."
Last time I checked, UK was a part of the EU, and has been for decades. :P
Sort of nit-picking, I know, but shouldn't that be unsolicited "commercial" email. I get heaps of unsolicited email. From friends, colleagues etc...
:-)
I would hate not to get any email that wasn't a direct response to something I sent. What would I do for 2hours every morning when I got in?
I wonder where they'll draw the line of `unsolicited email'. Which mails fall under this category ? For mails like `RRApply for a online mortgage loan 247', it is clear, but if I send a mail to somebody, and this person doesn't like me, can he accuse me for sending unsolicited email ?
Or at least is targeted at the US - most of the offers I get every day are for cheap dental care, cheap medical care, loans in USD and fake diplomas from US Universities (and of course porn).
;)
This would indicate that most is from the US, so obviously this new law means F**k all, although I guess we could go for extradition or arrest them if they come to Europe on holiday
In Denmark it is already illegal for companies(but not people) to send out SPAM.
:-)
If the EU makes SPAM illegal, then spammers cannot SPAM from the EU.
US is also trying to stop SPAM.
Lets say these countries are the only ones to do something. It will still work!
Currently I put everything from china into my SPAM-folder and by golly, I'll just blacklist every country that doesn't have anti-SPAM laws.
Problem (almost) solved
-- Make software not war
1. Signup for lots of pr0n sites
:)
2. Receive lots of spam
3. ???
4. Profit!
How long before someone gets their ass sued off as a result of this.
Gah i hate spam
Last.fm - join the social music revolution
...it can't (and won't) be stopped. It probably WILL be taxed, however. When these governments realize how much they could be raking in if there was a postage-like tax on spam messages, they won't be able to resist creating a broad email tax. Think, for instance, how much money postal services must be making off junk mail.
EU has already made unsolicited commercial email (UCE) illegal, see article 13 of the Directive on privacy and electronic communications (2002/58/EC), after intense lobbying e.g. by EuroCAUCE.
The directive must be implemented by the member states by 31 October 2003.
(I just wrote statement [in Finnish] to the Finnish ministry of transports and communications on behalf of Electronic Frontier Finland of our proposed local implementation of the directive (which at the current form would allow ask-permission-spam (i.e. you would be allowed to send spam to ask permission to send more spam. :( )))
Both services take about three months to fully kick in following registration.
There's a loophole in the mailing one though, and a comment in another thread some time ago mentioned a way round it. Junk mail may still be delivered to 'The Occupier' by the Royal Mail. Someone a while ago mentioned there was a service to stop this too - haven't been able to find that one. Anybody know?
Cheers,
Ian
Well, Welsh rugby needs saving at the moment, but their soccer team is doing ok.
Ah you meant Whales.
I heard some of the debate in Parliament on Radio 4 last night (I think, I was sleepy). I recall hearing an MP (member of parliament) suggesting in all seriousness that since faxes are supposed to have a reply address, requiring this for email would help matters. His heart is in the right place, no complaints there, but it shows how worryigly easy it is to pass inappropriate technology legislation if the legislators aren't clued up to understand the subtleties.
Currently I put everything from china into my SPAM-folder and by golly, I'll just blacklist every country that doesn't have anti-SPAM laws.
The interesting thing is this: let's say that the U.S. and EU do both ban spam, and all the spam is coming from outside the U.S. and EU. A *lot* of people will react the same way you do.
That is to say, we'll suddenly see a lot more careless e-mail blocks being placed on large swaths of entire countries, some by individuals, and most likely often by ISPs. We already see a LOT of huge e-mail blocks being done by ISPs, especially AOL, without much concern for collateral damage; it isn't inconcievable that a number of random ISPs might just look at their statistics and shortsightedly go, hmm, 90% of our spam comes from (for example) Indonesia, who is going to be talking to people in Indonesia anyway, i'll just block the whole country (or maybe just most of their IP space).
Once this starts happening, internet users and businesses in (for example) Indonesia are suddenly going to start discovering that they are having trouble communicating with the U.S., and this is because of spammers in their country. I find it likely that if this happens, their response will be to complain to their government to do something about the spammers that are making the americans block them... until one day, spam is illegal in indonesia as well, and shortsighted ISPs in indonesia are going, hey, all my spam's coming from Myanmar, why don't i just block e-mail from there..
So if the US or EU ever adopted real antispam laws, it could start a big domino effect that would cause a lot of other countries to adopt antispam laws as well.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
These spammers clearly represent a threat to freedom, diversity and sanctity worldwide. We must be swift and decisive in the coming days. A crippling onslaught of spamming faces us and we must stand proud in its defiance.
We must act with haste to bring these spammers to justice. Must we wait for the "smoking gun" of a mushroom cloud? Victory can only be ours if we crush these spammers with our military might.
</bushspeek>and syria.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
IANAL, in fact I didn't even read the article (and proud of it too), but spam is unsolicited commercial email. To keep it simple if your email is...
... then it is spam. If you're just mass mailing rants and raves about non-commercial stuff, it's just chain e-mails (to me at least, not that I love them any more than spam).
1) Sent in bulk to people who did not specifically ask to be contacted via email.
2) Is selling some form of product or service.
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
In Denmark we have had a law against unsolicited commercial email for some time. The law was originally against fax spam, but has been extended to cover email too.
> As I read this - and INAL
"I not a linguist" ?
This directive was first published in the middle of last year, I don't know why it's suddenly become newsworthy. The anti-spam campaigners have done well, though. As far as EU companies go, email will be opt-in for the whole European Economic Area (which includes the European Union). I'd like to thank the people who have put in so much effort to bring about this result.
Another interesting legal change comes with the Electronic Commerce Directive, which removes ISP's liability when they are acting as a "mere conduit" for illegal information. This is already in force, and marks the end of Godrey v Demon.
> Joe comes across slashdot and, offended by the diatribe, writes an angry flame in disagreement and e-mails it to Bill
(40) Safeguards should be provided for subscribers against intrusion of their privacy by unsolicited communications for direct marketing purposes in particular by means of automated calling machines, telefaxes, and e-mails, including SMS messages. These forms of unsolicited commercial communications may on the one hand be relatively easy and cheap to send and on the other may impose a burden and/or cost on the recipient. Moreover, in some cases their volume may also cause difficulties for electronic communications networks and terminal equipment. For such forms of unsolicited communications for direct marketing, it is justified to require that prior explicit consent of the recipients is obtained before such communications are addressed to them.
> excuse for the idea that Bill has entered into a business relationship with it, and then sends Bill spam forever without a clear sign of how to remove himself from their lists?
(41) Within the context of an existing customer relationship, it is reasonable to allow the use of electronic contact details for the offering of similar products or services, but only by the same company that has obtained the electronic contact details in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC. When electronic contact details are obtained, the customer should be informed about their further use for direct marketing in a clear and distinct manner, and be given the opportunity to refuse such usage. This opportunity should continue to be offered with each subsequent direct marketing message
Yeah, there's alot of crashes on the big 2 lane road bridge they built from London to Paris. There's a section in the middle of the English Channel where you can drive on either side of the road - and because of this your car insurance is not valid for this 100m section.