Internet Advertising Report relates the content of a House Judiciary Committee move to enact the Criminal Spam Act of 2003. A second Senate Bill, the Can Spam Act of 2003, will likely be combined with the final House bill to make a final version of legislation that will put maximum penalties on fraudulent and deceptive spam deliver (that is, as far as I can tell, the sending of spam which claims you opted in when you didn't) at up five years in prison for repeat offenders. First-time spammers can get a year in prison.
Okay, now I know spam is a pain in the ass, but jail time for what amounts to the same thing that fills our postal mailboxes everyday? Can we think of a way to deal with spam--or anything--that doesn't involve jailing someone? Since a lot of spam originates overseas, what will the bill do to our actual ability to reduce spam? Seems like the answer is "nothing," unless we want to extradite spammers, which I seriously doubt falls in the scope of most extradition treaties.
Very steep financial penalties, which can be applied to foreign companies by restricting their U.S. bank accounts and transfers to their accounts overseas is certainly a more effective way to deal with unwanted email. Jail is just over the top, when the question is how to make the economics of sending spam so unattractive that most spammers will stop. Let's bankrupt these people, but not throw them in jail. Jeez, the jails are already full of a hundred other categories of non-violent offenders who are brutally abused by real violent offenders. www
Posted by Mitch Ratcliffe at September 29, 2003 10:01 AM | TrackBack