 |
 |
Anti-spam battle heats up, reaches Michigan lawmakers Think for a moment like the consumer you are. Aren’t
you tired of finding your e-mail inbox filled with offers for miracle
weight-loss products and make-money-in-your-sleep propositions? Unsolicited, unwanted commercial e-mail (popularly called
“spam”) now makes up 40 percent of all e-mail, according to
anti-spam firm Brightware. Now, legislation and lawsuits are making strides
in the effort to stem the tide of spam. Many retailers make effective use of legitimate commercial
e-mail, and many customers give permission to receive e-mail notices of
sales, specials and rebate programs from stores they frequent. Meijer,
Rite-Aid, CVS and many other retailers have effective commercial e-mail
programs. But as spam becomes increasingly common, legitimate uses
of commercial e-mail may be getting drowned in the flood. Annoyed customers
may be deleting spam and legitimate commercial e-mail at once, or using
blocking software that targets all commercial e-mail, whether legitimate
or spam. A recent report from the Federal Trade Commission found
that two-thirds of all e-mail spam contained false information. Of the
spam surveyed, 44 percent used a false return address to hide the sender’s
identity or a misleading subject line to fool a recipient into opening
it. State legislators in Michigan and elsewhere are drafting
bills that regulate unsolicited commercial e-mail, addressing the deceptive
practices described in the report. Currently, 27 states have anti-spam laws on the books.
Virginia enacted its legislation in April; violators there could face
fines as well as a prison term of up to five years. Michigan’s legislature is currently considering HB
4519, known as the “Unsolicited Commercial E-mail Protection Act.” As drafted, the bill requires senders of unsolicited e-mail
advertisements to identify themselves, to indicate in the subject heading
that the message contained an advertisement, and to allow recipients to
“conveniently and at no cost” opt out of receiving future unsolicited
e-mail ads from the sender. One important clause in the bill states: “if the
sender has a preexisting business or personal relationship with the recipient”
any e-mail from the sender to recipient is considered to be solicited.
This means that retailers who send e-mail based on customer lists should
be safeguarded from accusations of spamming. In addition, the bill would allow e-mail service providers
to block messages sent in violation of the act, provide criminal penalties
for such violations and establish a cause of action allowing recipients
and service providers to recover damages for violations. On the national scene, the FTC has used current laws to
slow down 48 spammers since 1997. Both the commission and Congress are
considering whether additional federal laws are needed. At the same time, Internet service providers (who also
pay a high price for spam) are using current laws to seek damages from
spammers in lawsuits. Internet giant America Online has won numerous lawsuits
against spammers and was recently awarded almost $7 million in damages
from a company that was spamming AOL users. In early May, Internet service
provider EarthLink won a $16.4-million judgment against a spammer in Buffalo,
New York. Retailers who use commercial e-mail will want to watch the spam debate closely. The legislation being crafted to protect consumers from spam will affect how business is done in the 21st century. |
|
