Slashdot Mirror


Lawmakers Try to Protect Kids From Spam

Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "Some states have moved to shield children from email peddling porn, alcohol and other adults-only products, the Wall Street Journal reports. Critics say the laws, which establish a registry of kids' email addresses, are unfair to marketers and could create security risks. The debate echoes earlier discussion about a proposed do-not-spam national registry that the Can-Spam Law urged, but which the FTC nixed. This time, though, the registries are moving forward on a state-by-state basis, and facing court challenges from the adult entertainment industry." From the article: "Few email addresses have been placed on the state registries so far. Earlier this week, Utah's registry had 1,992 addresses, and 62 schools had registered their domain names to block emails to student accounts. About 160 companies had submitted their email lists for screening. In Michigan, 3,658 email addresses have been registered, along with 41 school domains. About 170 marketers had applied for screening."

2 of 332 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely by AviLazar · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Oh please, like some parent stands a chance against all those marketers sloshing their emails, and their kids email boxes full of porn and other adult-only products. Come on let us be realistic...those markets will mass mail anything and anyone - they don't care and they need to be punished. This is not overreaching...this is not the gov't telling me how to raise my kids....this is the gov't helping me out by making it harder for jackasses to email my kid a picture of some girl having sex with a cow and saying "need some viagra?"

    As to your numbers

    1) Yea, but accidents do happen as well as unexpected financial difficulties like being laid off from your job due to catastrophic events like 911, Katrina, .com bubble, etc.
    2)Thanks - now I need to join a church to have a family. Thanks for pushing your religious republican views on me
    3)No, raising a child - at no point - means having one parent at home. That is a luxary some families have, but many do not. Also, you cannot assume each family is frivolously spending money on toys, cars, vacations, etc before spending money on their childrens clothing, food and education. Oh, and things like toys - for children - is an important part of their growth cycle. Children need to be children before they can be adults.
    4)Duh we know that, but life is life and sometimes kids will slip away. Also, you need to be able to let your kids wander on their own at times so they learn on their own.

    Whats that, the phone is ringing...your elephant buddies are calling something about needing to get a AK-47, fully auto, with laser sight and sniper scope so they can go kill obliterate a herd of pigeons off their back yard.

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
  2. Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    I would never let my kid be alone with an adult -- ever.

    You're going to have some weirded out kids.

    Your daughter can never go to a slumber party at Mary's house, because her mom happens to be divorced?
    Your son can never, ever go for a bike ride with Billy and his dad?
    Your daughter can never go get her nails and hair done with older cousin Kate?

    I feel sorry for your kids. They may never learn how to releate to people without mom and dad around.