Speaking of bribery, I'd like to make it illegal for any corporation to make campaign contributions to US Congressmen. That should get Congress back under the people's control.
I believe the odds of ending privacy-invading marketing are best as the state/commonwealth level. Congress is hopelessly enamored with keeping those campaign bribes--er, I mean CONTRIBUTIONS--flooding into their coffers. Governors and state/commonwealth Senators, Delegates, or whatever are MUCH more in tune with the needs of their constituents. It's the states/commonwealths, not Congress, that will ban spam, teletrespassing, and personal info sharing.
Here's a law I'd love to see: From now on, ALL places of business--including nonprofits/tax exempt stuff--would be required to follow the same privacy rules that lawyers do. It'd be a business/client privilege modeled after the attorney/client privilege in all 46 states, 5 commonwealths, three territories and the District of Columbia. Disclosure of ANY of my information to ANYONE without a signed, notarised Declaration of Permission from me would be a felony. (Obviously, an order from a judge would also be a permissible reason.) If that doesn't keep the empty suits in check, I don't know what will.
How many spammers are out there? If it was just one person/corporation with a monopoly on spam, then the idea is workable. However, any idjit with a dialup can send millions of spams a day. How many lists do I need to "opt out" of? One, okay. Five? Ten? A hundred? If "opt out" became acceptable, we'd all be "opting out" literally thousands of times. How much spam would we have to get before our IN boxes become useless?
Try the following links for more info on the spam problem:
That should be enough to get you started. We shouldn't have to put up with those d*mn ads in the first place. My IN box is MY property; no one else's. Period!
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking of bribery, I'd like to make it illegal for any corporation to make campaign contributions to US Congressmen. That should get Congress back under the people's control.
I believe the odds of ending privacy-invading marketing are best as the state/commonwealth level. Congress is hopelessly enamored with keeping those campaign bribes--er, I mean CONTRIBUTIONS--flooding into their coffers. Governors and state/commonwealth Senators, Delegates, or whatever are MUCH more in tune with the needs of their constituents. It's the states/commonwealths, not Congress, that will ban spam, teletrespassing, and personal info sharing.
Here's a law I'd love to see: From now on, ALL places of business--including nonprofits/tax exempt stuff--would be required to follow the same privacy rules that lawyers do. It'd be a business/client privilege modeled after the attorney/client privilege in all 46 states, 5 commonwealths, three territories and the District of Columbia. Disclosure of ANY of my information to ANYONE without a signed, notarised Declaration of Permission from me would be a felony. (Obviously, an order from a judge would also be a permissible reason.) If that doesn't keep the empty suits in check, I don't know what will.
Try some of these websites:
http://www.suespammers.org
http://www.junkbusters.com
http://www.spamfree.net
How many spammers are out there? If it was just one person/corporation with a monopoly on spam, then the idea is workable. However, any idjit with a dialup can send millions of spams a day. How many lists do I need to "opt out" of? One, okay. Five? Ten? A hundred? If "opt out" became acceptable, we'd all be "opting out" literally thousands of times. How much spam would we have to get before our IN boxes become useless?
Try the following links for more info on the spam problem:
http://www.cauce.org/about/problem.shtml
http://www.stentorian.com/antispam/
http://user.mc.net/~miketoth/mainpage.html
That should be enough to get you started. We shouldn't have to put up with those d*mn ads in the first place. My IN box is MY property; no one else's. Period!