Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stronger Anti-Spam Law Proposed

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the seriously-quit-it dept.

NumberField writes "The fight against Spam is making for some strange bedfellows. A new bill sponsored by Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and the right-wing Christian Coalition that would let individuals sue spammers for $1000 per message. What isn't clear is how they will define spam broadly enough to outlaw it, but narrowly enough to avoid making it a bonanza for lawyers. For more information, see Schumer's fact sheet (PDF), or his press release." Update: 06/13 14:20 GMT by M : The draft bill (pdf) is available.

6 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. Why bother by kamukwam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can propose all the anti-spam laws you want. But if you keep it restricted to one country, you won't go very far. Spammers will use other locations to send their spam from. So it only works if you have an international law.

    1. Re:Why bother by the_bahua · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think what the poster said about it being a bonanza for lawyers was an understatement. This, if it pans out, will create a whole new basis for practice for many lawyers.

      Funny thing is, it still won't end spam.

    2. Re:Why bother by jkrise · · Score: 5, Insightful

      " If i wanna screw my business competitor I just send lots of spam out advertising his/her companny?"

      Watch it! Since you seem to be interested in competing using such sly techniques, your competitors products might actually succeed...

      You'd do better improving and selling YOUR product, than screwing competition. One Microsoft is enough for One World.

      --
      If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
  2. Assuming you can identify the spammer.... by apdt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's all very well, but for a large chunk of spam, identifying the spammer if difficult, and to it in a way that would hold up in court would be even harder..

    --
    I lay awake last night wondering where the sun had gone, then it dawned on me.
  3. Not necessarily by cperciva · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the law is drafted in a manner which allows authorities to go after the people benefiting from spam, rather than just the people actually sending it, then they could make substantial progress. Most of the spam I receive is for US-based companies, even if it was actually sent from China.

    --
    Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
  4. Do not Spam list not effective for ROW by EvilMike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't see the point in having a 'do not spam' list for the US, when the majority of spam the rest of us are receiving on this planet comes from the US. Is the US govt seriously going to compile a list for all 6 billion of us?

    This proposal still makes it a civil matter for the recipient, having to sue the spammer for damages. What's needed is a federal US law making mass junk emailing a criminal offense. Instead they are just pushing it back onto the people to fight in civil courts. The only winners here are the spammers and lawyers.