Slashdot Mirror
Michigan's Proposed Spam Law Called Toughest In U.S.
goats_in_boats writes "A new bill (PDF
or HTML)
was presented to the Governor
of Michigan that would require spam sent to residents of the State to be identified
as such. Highlights include the requirement that unsolicited email 'Include in
the e-mail subject line "ADV:" as the first 4 characters' and that 'a person who
violates this act is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not
more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both.' An article
in the Detroit Free Press calls the bill 'the most stringent anti-spam law in
the nation.'"
This is the explanation I got when I asked the same question about a California law, regarding newspaper advertising.
Maybe they are worried more about the economy. The world doesn't revolve around pro-homosexual's. With the unemployment at it's all time high right now, they need to help the economy so folks can get a job and make money..
Actually the latest figures show that the majority of the spam comes for the good'ole USA. So we can't complain all the time about offshore spammers and not fix the problem in our own backyard..
The ADV: header isn't really useful, since the spam will be deleted only after the delivery, at the target machine. And let me cite after CAUCE:
Some junk emailers say, "Just hit the Delete key!" Unfortunately, the problem is much bigger than the time and effort of one person deleting a couple of emails. There are many different places along the process of transmitting and delivering email where costs are incurred. In the Internet world, "time" equals many different things besides the hourly rate that many people are still charged.
For example, for an Internet Service Provider, "time" includes the load on the processor in their mail servers; "CPU time" is a precious commodity and processor performance is a critical issue for ISPs. When their CPUs are tied up processing spam, it creates a drag on all of the mail in that queue -- wanted and unwanted alike. This is also a problem with "filtering" schemes; filtering email consumes vast amounts of CPU time and is the primary reason most ISPs cannot implement it as a strategy for eliminating junk email.
The problem is also compounded by the fact that ISPs purchase bandwidth -- their connection to the rest of the Internet -- based on their projected usage by their prospective user base. For most small to mid-sized ISPs, bandwidth costs are among one of the greatest portions of their budget and contributes to the reason why many ISPs have a tiny profit margin. Without junk email, greater consumption of bandwidth would normally track with increased numbers of customers. However, when an outside entity (e.g., the junk emailer) begins to consume an ISP's bandwidth, the ISP has few choices: 1) let the paying customers cope with slower internet access, 2) eat the costs of increasing bandwidth, or 3) raise rates. In short, the recipients are still forced to bear costs that the advertiser has avoided.
"Time" also makes for some other interesting problems, especially coupled with volume. Recent public comments by AOL are a useful point of reference: of the estimated 30 million email messages each day, about 30% on average was unsolicited commercial email. With volumes such as that, it's a tremendous burden shifted to the ISP to process and store that amount of data. Volumes like that may undoubtedly contribute to many of the access, speed, and reliability problems we've seen with lots of ISPs. Indeed, many large ISPs have suffered major system outages as the result of massive junk email campaigns. If huge outfits like Netcom and AOL can barely cope with the flood, it is no wonder that smaller ISPs are dying under the crush of spam.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
I stand corrected on the source of the quote, and I'll even correct the quote itself:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserved neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Always thought that was Jefferson (even did a quick google before posting to verify it - it sucks when a majority of the people get it wrong).
I myself love the quote, which is one of the reasons I'm so tempted/torn/troubled with anti-spam legislation. In the end, I do in fact strongly believe in our freedoms (especially our freedom of speech), so I do ultimately side against the anti-spam laws in principle (despite how inconvenient spam makes my daily life, when I am barraged with it).
But that isn't quite as funny, now, is it?
..Jeff Keegan
seven syllables explain TiVo: kee gan dot org slash ti vo
I'm all for wiping out Spam, but this law is a giant piece of junk
No, this law is measured, reasoned, and appropriate. If you don't think so, you are a deceptive and fraudulent scam artist who fully deserves to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law -- and beyond it by tattooed burly fellows named Adolf in prison, as well.
Asshat.
I run a small business. I solicit business by email. Lots of people do. Now you're telling me that if I try and solicit any work from a client that happens to reside in Michigan that I'm going to get hit with a $250,000 fine? Nope.
Yep.
You will be in violation of this law only if you do not comply with Sec. 3. For those who don't bite at trolls like you enough to check it out, here's the text:
Sec. 3. A person who intentionally sends or causes to be sent an unsolicited commercial e-mail through an e-mail service provider that the sender knew or should have known is located in this state or to an e-mail address that the sender knew or should have known is held by a resident of this state shall do all of the following:
(a) Include in the e-mail subject line "ADV:" as the first 4 characters.
(b) Conspicuously state in the e-mail all of the following:
(i) The sender's legal name.
(ii) The sender's correct street address.
(iii) The sender's valid internet domain name.
(iv) The sender's valid return e-mail address.
(c) Establish a toll-free telephone number, a valid sender-operated return e-mail address, or another easy-to-use electronic method that the recipient of the commercial e-mail message may call or access by e-mail or other electronic means to notify the sender not to transmit by e-mail any further unsolicited commercial e-mail messages. The notification process may include the ability for the commercial e-mail messages recipient to direct the sender to transmit or not transmit particular commercial e-mail messages based upon products, services, divisions, organizations, companies, or other selections of the recipient's choice. An unsolicited commercial e-mail message shall include, in print as large as the print used for the majority of the e-mail message, a statement informing the recipient of a toll-free telephone number that the recipient may call, or a valid return address to which the recipient may write or access by e-mail, notifying the sender not to transmit to the recipient any further commercial e-mail messages.
(d) Conspicuously provide in the text of the commercial e-mail, in print as large as the print used for the majority of the e-mail, a notice that informs the recipient that the recipient may conveniently and at no cost be excluded from future commercial e-mail from the sender as provided under subdivision (c).
If you do all this, you're cool, and the law has no effect on you, so quitcher whining. If you don't, then you are a Horrid Evil Spammer Who Should Be Repeatedly Anally Raped and fully deserve all the penalties of the law and more. If you disagree that these are reasonable penalties, then you are either a really bad troll, or a complete asshat. Pick one.
This has already happened. In 1994 a (married) pair of California BBS owner/operators were tried and convicted on Tennessee porn charges.
CUDigest report
It's a particularly bad idea when an official in some other state decides to set you up for the fall.
Email: slashdot3@FreeMars.org (Address will be abandoned when it gets spam.)
Who and what has to be in Michigan for this to work?
Read the article:
Sec. 4. (1) A person who sends or causes to be sent an unsolicited commercial e-mail through an e-mail service provider located in this state or to an e-mail address held by a resident of this state shall not do any of the following:
There are many cases on the books that basically say if someone can have ANY expectation of being hailed into another state, then they can be supeonaed and must appear in the calling court to defend themselves or face summary judgement. I think the really binding one involved the mother on the partridge family and an editor and writer from a tabloid. I know one case to start with is International Shoe vs. Washington.
Yes.
Other states' laws are available at the same site.
Use software that can whitelist. It's that simple.
I filter mail with a rather brutal sieve script, for instance, but the script is written to let mail with "blessed" headers (certain subjects or senders) through even if it'd normally trigger the rest of the filters.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
I, for one, received nearly 400 spam over the 4th of July weekend. Of course, only 1 got by my spam filter and it was in Spanish. :)
Commercial speech is not considered as part of the first amendment. There is no constitutional issue here whatsever. This isn't the smoking gun you're looking for. Move along.
Little Brother, watching the watchers