'Anti-spam bill could lead to more spam'

Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON: An anti-spam bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives over the weekend drew praise from many high-tech businesses, but anti-spam activists said that it could actually lead to more unwanted commercial e-mail.

The House passed a bill early Saturday that would set up a national "do not spam" list and outlaw much of the spam that now clogs users' inboxes. Violators could face up to five years in jail and millions of dollars in fines.

The Senate could approve the bill as early as Monday, and President George W. Bush is expected to sign it into law.

Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates called the bill a "milestone" that would help complement filtering and other technological anti-spam measures. Time Warner Inc's America Online and several business groups also praised the bill.

But others said the bill was toothless because it would allow marketers to send unsolicited e-mail as long as they observed certain guidelines and honored consumer opt-out requests. Such an approach will only encourage businesses to send out more e-mail, they said.

"This is not the bill voters had been asking for," said Andrew Barrett, executive director of Spamcon, an anti-spam watchdog group. "I think it's probably the best spam law money can buy."

"This bill, as it stands now, acts as a green light for any company considering sending unsolicited e-mail to millions of innocent users," said Chris Belthoff, a senior security analyst at Internet security firm Sophos.

The "do not spam" list proved controversial as well. Patterned after the Federal Trade Commission's popular "do not call" anti-telemarketing list, it would lay the groundwork for the FTC to set up a list of consumers who do not want to receive any unsolicited commercial e-mail.

New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer pushed for the no-spam list over the objections of the FTC, which told Congress that spammers would simply ignore it. An FTC spokeswoman said she could not comment until the Senate approved the bill.

The Direct Marketing Association, a powerful trade group that has backed much of the rest of the bill, said the no-spam list would serve as a little deterrent for the shadowy marketers who push fraudulent products or use false return addresses.

The list "would only serve to punish law-abiding small- and mid-sized companies, who are trying to break into the marketplace, while doing absolutely nothing to stop the most egregious perpetrators of spam," said DMA chief executive, H. Robert Wientzen.

Chris Murray, legislative counsel at the consumer-advocacy group Consumers Union, said the bill contained plenty of loopholes that could potentially be closed when the FTC figures out how to enforce it.

"It's a stumble in the right direction," he said.

Reuters