This stinks to rotten eggs

Discussion in 'ten-forward' started by Smokey, Jul 5, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Smokey

    Smokey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2002
    Posts:
    1,513
    Location:
    Annie's Pub
    The debate over how best to crack down on junk e-mail has erupted into brass-knuckle lobbying wars in several state capitals, with some legislators accusing Microsoft Corp. and other Internet service providers of sabotaging efforts to craft tough anti-spam laws.

    Nowhere is the dust more unsettled than in California, where a bill is pending that could restrict e-mail marketing more than in any other state.

    One state senator, who represents several Los Angeles suburbs, accused Microsoft of eleventh-hour arm-twisting to exempt Internet service providers from responsibility for being the conduits of spam. Firms such as Microsoft, America Online and Yahoo Inc. market to their own members, and large portions of overall e-mail traffic traverse their systems.

    "Microsoft is talking out of both sides of its mouth," said state Sen. Debra Bowen (D), who points to statements by Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates about how much the company is fighting to eliminate junk e-mail. But "their focus has been on getting immunity for themselves and preserving their ability to strike deals to send spam," she said.

    A Microsoft spokesman rejected the charge, arguing that an alternative bill the company supports is similar to Bowen's in all key areas. The sponsor of that bill, Sen. Kevin Murray (D), disputes Bowen's analysis that the bill would give Internet service providers a free pass.

    But the final language of Murray's bill, which passed out of committee with a strong push from Microsoft, has not yet been drafted. Bowen said she worries that Microsoft will try to weaken its provisions further, adding that she has not given up the fight to hold service providers responsible for spamming.

    In Missouri, Attorney General Jay W. Nixon said he still has "the bruises" from fighting a losing battle to create a do-not-spam registry, similar to do-not-call lists to block telemarketers that many states and the federal government have instituted.

    "Microsoft put their hired guns to work," stripping the registry out of a state no-spam bill, which ultimately passed, Nixon said. Among other things, Nixon said, the software giant hired the husband of the lieutenant governor's chief of staff and other prominent state Democrats to lobby on its behalf.

    Microsoft opposes do-not-spam registries, citing concerns that if the database were hacked, millions of e-mail addresses could be compromised.

    Like other Internet service providers, marketers and retailers, Microsoft argues that spam laws should aggressively target the purveyors of scams and pornography, who would ignore a no-spam registry anyway.

    But many consumer organizations, anti-spam groups and state lawmakers make no distinction between unsolicited e-mail from legitimate marketers and those from notorious spammers. A registry, they argue, could provide a simpler way for consumers to tell all marketers not to send them unsolicited advertising.

    Nixon said he thinks Microsoft wants to protect its franchise of selling Internet access with advanced spam-filtering features.

    "They are attempting to run a protection racket," he said. " 'Pay us and you won't get spammed as much.' "

    An effort to establish a no-spam registry met a similar fate in Michigan, where state Sen. Michael Bishop (R) thought he had sufficient support for the idea after the Senate passed it unanimously.

    Then Microsoft's people moved in, said Matt Miner, a Bishop aide.

    "They lobbied extremely hard," Miner said. "They presented ideas . . . that confused [House] committee members that made our list sound kind of far-fetched and impossible."

    In California, the saga of the Bowen bill began two months ago. The author of California's current anti-spam law, which requires commercial e-mail to be labeled "ADV" for advertisement, decided that it was not working.

    Instead, she drafted legislation that would ban all unsolicited commercial e-mail unless specifically requested by consumers, a process known as opt-in.

    Microsoft, America Online and Yahoo all, at various times, lobbied against the bill. They have argued that marketers should be allowed to send advertising until consumers ask for the advertising to stop, which is known as an opt-out process.

    Microsoft spokesman Sean Sundwall said Microsoft has been consistent in its efforts to lobby for legislation that "balances the need for businesses to communicate with their customers and at the same time protect consumers from the onslaught of spam."

    Murray's bill, like Bowen's, is based on the opt-in process, making Microsoft's support of it a first for the company. But Sundwall said the company looks at legislation, and the political realities of each state, on a case-by-case basis.

    Murray said his bill is unique in targeting the retailer of the product that is advertising via spam, not just the marketers that send out the messages.

    In some ways, the state battles mirror jockeying on Capitol Hill, where several bills are pending. Most follow the opt-out model favored by marketers and Internet service providers. One, by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), proposes a no-spam registry. All, however, would supersede state laws.

    America Online continues to support the approach taken by Virginia, which is an opt-out system with aggressive penalties for fraudulent spammers, said spokesman Nicholas J. Graham.

    Source: TechNews.com
     
  2. Mr.Blaze

    Mr.Blaze The Newbie Welcome Wagon

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Posts:
    2,842
    Location:
    on the sofa
    :mad:AHAA I KNEW IT AOL DOES SPAM ITS OWEN CUSTOMERS WITH JUNK MAIL

    YOU KNOW I FOUND IT STRANGE THAT WHEN I CLOSED MY OLD ACCOUNT'S AND CREATED NEW ONES IN AOL I IMMEDIATELY GOT SPAM EVEN ON THE FIRST DAY.

    i asked aol about that i found it strange did i didn't sighen up for anything didn't give any one those e-mail address and used mass security

    only to get bulks of e-mail spam

    they said that they do not sale personal or e-mail account info yet with these new accounts these people were addressing me by my personal name

    so aol is spam monkeys.

    you know since i moved to juno for 10 bucks a month i get same internet experience with aol but with out the e-mail bulk spam.

    i use juno 4.0 and the only advertisements i have to del with is if i download my e-mail lol but if i just go to my juno account e-mail at there web site i never get those advertisement pop UPS with my security settings.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.