Slashdot Mirror
New Michigan Law Means Kids Can Opt Out of Spam
tekiegreg writes "Thanks to a new Michigan Law, parents can now opt their kids out of Spam. One wonders whether or not such severe penalty will make Spammers think twice ($30,000 fine and 3 yrs/jail)." I wonder how much legislation will actually help keep kids from being spammed, but if it works, I'm happy to say I'm under age 13 if it means I get less spam.
Group with the list of kids does this:
1. Make hashes of every kid email address using SHA-512 or whatever.
2. Makes list of hashes queryable via some service.
Bulk-Mail Advertisers (spammers) do this:
1. Send a query of every email address they want to test to the list. If it's a kid email address, they get some sort of message telling them so.
So, basically, you can't just browse the list for email addresses to send to. You have to at least have the email address (or guess it) first.
This is something false that people think is true because it keeps getting repeated over and over by people on sites like slashdot. The US have the most spammers in the world. Here are the top ten spammers:
United States: 42.11 per cent
South Korea: 13.43 per cent
China (including Hong Kong): 8.44 per cent
Canada: 5.71 per cent
Brazil: 3.34 per cent
Japan: 2.57 per cent
France: 1.37 per cent
Spain: 1.18 per cent
United Kingdom: 1.13 per cent
Germany: 1.03 per cent
Within the US, IIRC, the number one spamming state is Florida.
One reason this falsety spread though is that Chinese server admins used to have very lax attitudes to open relays, which meant that the (mostly American) spammers often used Chinese servers to send their spam. Russia comes in because Russian mafia hacker groups are known to set up botnets - armies of infected zombie XP machines connected to the Net - and they then sell the use of the botnets for doing things like sending spam to (mostly American) spam groups.
IMO blaming the Chinese and Russians in these cases for spam is like blaming the manufacturer of a gun used in a murder, instead of the person who decided to pull the trigger. You don't fix a problem by blocking the symptoms - you go to the source of the problem.
I can't believe no one has mentioned this yet. This law really does abridge freedom of speech - if you send an email with a link to a site with credit card advertisments to an email on this list, you could concievably be thrown in *jail*.
I D=3023
http://www.marketingsherpa.com/sample.cfm?content
The security is explained here: https://www.protectmichild.com/technical_complianc e.html
A simplified explaination is that they send their mailing list (which is encrypted), and get back their list with the protected addresses removed.
All someone would have to do is send in a list and see what is removed to have a list of addresses for households with children.
I could not find any State requirements on how the list holders should protect this information.
It sounds like you have a problem them. But it's good that you're up for protecting kids.
Since I only email kids who are my relatives, I don't have to verify any email addresses I mail to.
But if you often send mail to kids, well, then that's an issue.
"I'd also like to grow hair and be taller." :)
Puberty should help with that
From their website:
i d=4
https://www.protectmichild.com/answer.html?src=q&
QUESTION: How is the privacy of registrants maintained?
ANSWER: The security of a list of child-accessible e-mail addresses was of great concern when designing the Protect MI Child Registry. Registered e-mail addresses are stored in such a way that the addresses will not be revealed, even if the system's database is compromised. Even the state does not have access to the registered e-mail addresses.
Bingo, right in one.
from cyberspace v engler permanent injunction:
A state's power to regulate commerce may be limited by the right of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. U.S. Const. Art. I, 8, cl. 3. Michigan's effort to regulate what information may be transmitted to Michigan's children, via the Internet, attempts to control Internet communications which might originate within Michigan, in other states, or in other countries. The Commerce Clause precludes the application of state statutes to commerce that commences or occurs outside of a state's borders. American Libraries Association v. Pataki, 969 F.Supp. 160, 175 (S.D. N.Y. 1997).
"[A] statute that directly controls commerce occurring wholly outside the boundaries of a State exceeds the inherent limits of the enacting State's authority and is invalid regardless of whether the statute's extraterritorial reach was intended by the legislature." Healy v. The Beer Institute, et al., 491 U.S. 324, 336 (1989). Thus, regardless of the legislature's intent to regulate solely within the State's own borders, the Act would, in effect, attempt to control communications occurring outside of the State of Michigan. Therefore, Michigan's 1999 Public Act 33 would violate the Dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, and may not be enforced.
possible examples:
"legalize medical marijuana in hawaii"
"don't drink and drive"
"tobacco kills"