California Moves to Ban Unsolicited E-Mail Spam
from the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/23/bu...23d2ffc0f22370
September 23, 2003
By SAUL HANSELL
California is trying a deceptively simple approach to the
problem of junk e-mail: It is about to ban spam.
Gov. Gray Davis of California signed a bill today that
outlaws sending most commercial e-mail to or from the state
that the recipient did not explicitly request. That is a
far more wide-reaching law than any of the 35 other state
laws meant to regulate spam or any of the proposed bills in
Congress.
``We are saying that unsolicited e-mail cannot be sent and
there are no loopholes,'' said Kevin Murray, the Democratic
state senator from Los Angeles who sponsored the bill.
The law would fine spammers $1,000 for each unsolicited
message sent up to $1 million for each campaign.
As the nation's most populous state and the home to many
large Internet companies, the California bill could well
have a significant effect on spam. The bill puts the burden
on the sender to determine if the recipient resides in
California.
The marketing industry vehemently opposes the law, saying
that it will only restrict actions by legitimate marketers
and not the rouges who send the most offensive spam.
The burden of complying with the state law, moreover, could
well affect nearly all e-mail marketing.
``California represents up to 20 percent of the e-mail that
is sent or received,'' said J. Trevor Hughes, the executive
director, of the Network Advertising Initiative, a group of
technology companies that send e-mail for marketers.
``Instead of trying to segregate the California e-mail
addresses, many of our members are going to make the
California standard the lowest common denominator.
Thirty-five states have already passed laws meant to
regulate spam. But mostly these ban deceptive practices in
commercial e-mail - like fake return addresses - and many
require that spam be identified with the phrase ``ADV'' in
the subject. But these laws do nothing to stop someone from
sending advertising by e-mail, so long as it was properly
labeled and not deceptive.
Delaware, also, banned sending unsolicited e-mail in 1999.
But that law can only be enforced by the state attorney
general, who has not taken any action under the statute.
Action under the California law, by contrast, can be
brought by the state, by e-mail providers that have to
handle spam and by the recipient. The bill's proponents say
the right of individuals to file lawsuits should ensure
that the bill is enforced, even if state prosecutors have
other priorities. Indeed, a similar provision is credited
with helping to insure compliance with the federal law
against unsolicited faxes.
But at a news conference today, Kathleen Hamilton, the
director of California Department of Consumer Affairs,
promised that the state was ready to enforce the new law
when it takes effect on Jan. 1.
``There will be a focus to make sure that once this law is
in effect that advertisers abide by it so consumers and
businesses are free from unsolicited spam,'' she said.