Dec. 09, 2003 - 18:53 MST

THE WONDERING JEW

Lo-Cal Spam ?

Article in todays paper by Ted Bridis of the Associated Press. "Spam takes a hit"

"Today, its a nightmare that threatens to overwhelm people's legitimate use of the Internet,' said Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M."

The fanfare, "Congress on Monday approved the first national effort to stem the flood of unwanted pitches known as spam, advertising messages that offer prescription drugs, cheap loans and other come ons."

"The house voted without dissent to approve the slight changes Senate lawmakers made to the 'can spam' legislation. which would outlaw the shadiest techniques used by the Internet's most prolific e-mailers, who send tens of millions of messages each day."

I guess the money men bought the privilege to use the least shadiest techniques, huh ? Looks to me as if they left a lot of wiggle room. What is said and not said is a question of whether the reporter left it out or it just ain't there. For instance, "The legislation would prohibit senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail from from disguising their identity by using a false return address or misleading subject line. It also would prohibit senders from harvesting addresses off Web sites and would require such e-mails to include a mechanism so recipients could indicate they did not want future mass mailings."

So, a mechanism so recipients could indicate they did not want future mass mailings, sounds good -- but are there any teeth in it ? Does that include a national "No spam" list like the no-call with attendant penalties ? Reporter or Congress ? ? ? ? ? ? who knows ?

Maybe something like "caller i.d" could be set up, something that would separate the sheep from the goats.

My personal feelings are quite similar to the "no-call' idea. I do not want any, ANY unsolicited e-mails from any source of a commercial, political or religious nature.

I wonder, have they enacted Lo-Cal Spam ? . . . . . . . . . . .

Blog