Net News

Feds Reject 'Do-Not-Spam' List

The Bush administration recently announced that it will not create a national do-not-spam registry to discourage unwanted e-mail, for fear the list could fall into the wrong hands and become a target for new victims.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) told Congress that senders of unwanted sales pitches might mine such a registry for names. Its chairman, Timothy Muris, quipped that consumers “will be spammed if we do a registry and spammed if we do not.”

The FTC concluded that on the Internet, unlike within the highly regulated U.S. telephone network and do-not-call registry, regulators would be “largely powerless to identify those responsible for misusing the registry.”

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), the leading supporter in Congress for a no-spam registry, said the FTC's decision was disappointing.

“The registry is not the perfect solution, but it is the best solution we have,” Schumer said.

Regulators instead are looking at new authentication technology that will make it more difficult to disguise the origin of unwanted e-mails.

“A national do-not-e-mail registry, without a system in place to authenticate the origin of e-mail messages, would fail to reduce the burden of spam and may even increase the amount of spam received by consumers,” the commission said.

The government said it was particularly worried about issues of security and privacy with respect to children.

“A registry that identified accounts used by children, for example, could assist legitimate marketers to avoid sending inappropriate messages to children,” the commission said.

“At the same time, however, the Internet's most dangerous users, including pedophiles, also could use this information to target children.”

The FBI has identified over 100 significant spammers under the CAN-SPAM Act since it went into effect on Jan. 1, 2004.

According to Jana Monroe, assistant director of the FBI's Cyber Division, half of those identified may be prosecuted.

Monroe was one of several witnesses who spoke recently before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing examining the effects of the CAN-SPAM Act.

Monroe stated that “these cases may be investigated and prosecuted as computer intrusion matters, or as on-line frauds which may lend themselves to a variety of existing state and/or federal statutes, including the recently passed CAN-SPAM Act.”

The Act restricts the junk mail that spammers can legally send. Violators face penalties of fines and imprisonment of up to 5 years.

Under a new Federal Trade Commission rule, unsolicited commercial e-mails containing sexually oriented material must include the words “SEXUALLY EXPLICIT” in the subject line. The rule also prohibits graphic images from appearing in the opening body of a message, instead requiring the recipient to scroll down or click on a link to see the objectionable material.

According to a staff attorney with the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, Jonathan Kraden, the subject line advisory should help computer users set filters on their systems to recognize the words and help e-mail recipients to filter their e-mail.

Adult entertainment industry advocates are critical of the rule, seeing it as an attempt to violate first amendment rights.

Although tracking down violators may be difficult, spammers who are prosecuted face possible imprisonment and criminal fines of up to $250,000 for an individual or $500,000 for an organization.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) recently announced that it has sued an additional 493 people for copyright infringement, bringing the total number of music swappers sued to almost 3000 since last September.

The RIAA, which represents the five largest recording companies, has been filing lawsuits in an attempt to stop consumers from copying music through “peer to peer” Internet networks.

The industry group has filed “John Doe” lawsuits and, as yet, does not know the identities of those consumers targeted. They plan to discover the identities through subpoenas.

The RIAA resorted to “John Doe” lawsuits after an appeals court ruled that Internet service providers are not required to release customer names to the recording industry.

The RIAA also announced that 24 individuals, sued by name after their identities were discovered through the use of John Doe suits, have declined to settle out of court. The RIAA has settled more than 400 of the cases previously filed for about $3000 each.

(For more on the latest RIAA strategy, see “The RIAA's New Frontier“).

Feds Reject 'Do-Not-Spam' List

The Bush administration recently announced that it will not create a national do-not-spam registry to discourage unwanted e-mail, for fear the list could fall into the wrong hands and become a target for new victims.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) told Congress that senders of unwanted sales pitches might mine such a registry for names. Its chairman, Timothy Muris, quipped that consumers “will be spammed if we do a registry and spammed if we do not.”

The FTC concluded that on the Internet, unlike within the highly regulated U.S. telephone network and do-not-call registry, regulators would be “largely powerless to identify those responsible for misusing the registry.”

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), the leading supporter in Congress for a no-spam registry, said the FTC's decision was disappointing.

“The registry is not the perfect solution, but it is the best solution we have,” Schumer said.

Regulators instead are looking at new authentication technology that will make it more difficult to disguise the origin of unwanted e-mails.

“A national do-not-e-mail registry, without a system in place to authenticate the origin of e-mail messages, would fail to reduce the burden of spam and may even increase the amount of spam received by consumers,” the commission said.

The government said it was particularly worried about issues of security and privacy with respect to children.

“A registry that identified accounts used by children, for example, could assist legitimate marketers to avoid sending inappropriate messages to children,” the commission said.

“At the same time, however, the Internet's most dangerous users, including pedophiles, also could use this information to target children.”

The FBI has identified over 100 significant spammers under the CAN-SPAM Act since it went into effect on Jan. 1, 2004.

According to Jana Monroe, assistant director of the FBI's Cyber Division, half of those identified may be prosecuted.

Monroe was one of several witnesses who spoke recently before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing examining the effects of the CAN-SPAM Act.

Monroe stated that “these cases may be investigated and prosecuted as computer intrusion matters, or as on-line frauds which may lend themselves to a variety of existing state and/or federal statutes, including the recently passed CAN-SPAM Act.”

The Act restricts the junk mail that spammers can legally send. Violators face penalties of fines and imprisonment of up to 5 years.

Under a new Federal Trade Commission rule, unsolicited commercial e-mails containing sexually oriented material must include the words “SEXUALLY EXPLICIT” in the subject line. The rule also prohibits graphic images from appearing in the opening body of a message, instead requiring the recipient to scroll down or click on a link to see the objectionable material.

According to a staff attorney with the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, Jonathan Kraden, the subject line advisory should help computer users set filters on their systems to recognize the words and help e-mail recipients to filter their e-mail.

Adult entertainment industry advocates are critical of the rule, seeing it as an attempt to violate first amendment rights.

Although tracking down violators may be difficult, spammers who are prosecuted face possible imprisonment and criminal fines of up to $250,000 for an individual or $500,000 for an organization.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) recently announced that it has sued an additional 493 people for copyright infringement, bringing the total number of music swappers sued to almost 3000 since last September.

The RIAA, which represents the five largest recording companies, has been filing lawsuits in an attempt to stop consumers from copying music through “peer to peer” Internet networks.

The industry group has filed “John Doe” lawsuits and, as yet, does not know the identities of those consumers targeted. They plan to discover the identities through subpoenas.

The RIAA resorted to “John Doe” lawsuits after an appeals court ruled that Internet service providers are not required to release customer names to the recording industry.

The RIAA also announced that 24 individuals, sued by name after their identities were discovered through the use of John Doe suits, have declined to settle out of court. The RIAA has settled more than 400 of the cases previously filed for about $3000 each.

(For more on the latest RIAA strategy, see “The RIAA's New Frontier“).