What I call the "Yes, You Can Spam Act" has now been signed into law by President Bush, but many readers agree with my assessment that this bi-partisan show of stupidity will only make the spam problem worse.
"The proponents have been told in no uncertain terms just how insane this law is, but still insist it is wonderful," wrote one reader. "Meanwhile, anyone in their right mind that has dealt with spam will never willingly give a spammer -- many of which are now apparently working with virus writers -- confirmation of their e-mail address. The law is taking away some anti-spam tools, and those who actually believe spammers play fair and ask spammers to stop will soon find out quickly how wrong they are. After Congress has been suitably embarrassed they'll develop a rewritten law -- while insisting it is merely improving on a good thing. We'll be saying ‘WE TOLD YOU SO!’"
"I agree that once again the government has messed up technology legislation," wrote another reader. "Look at the DMCA and how it's being (ab)used and you can see another shining piece of your government writing garbage laws with no regard for the real world. The real problem so far as I am concerned is this really garbage spam, much of which comes from outside of the U.S. The legislation can't do anything to stop that."
One reader reacted to the arguments floated by some that unsolicited commercial e-mail must be protected under the First Amendment. "I'm so sick of hearing this ‘free speech’ argument. Spam is not free speech. Companies -- legitimate e-mailers and misleading spammers alike -- are absolutely free to say what they like within the confines of the law. I have no problem with that. But flooding my private email account, which I pay for, is NOT an expression of free speech. Random strangers invading my home is not allowed simply by claiming ‘free speech.’"
11:14:29 AM 
|
