washingtonpost.com
Anti-Spam Crusade Reaches Critical Mass
Regulators, Members of Congress and Major Corporations
By David McGuire
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 30, 2003; 6:50 AM
The growing volume of unsolicited commercial e-mail has crossed the threshold from public nuisance to public enemy, triggering an unprecedented push by U.S. lawmakers and corporations to solve the problem of "spam."
This week, two lawmakers announced plans to introduce tough anti-spam laws; America Online, Microsoft and Yahoo announced a joint assault against unsolicited e-mail; and the Federal Trade Commission today kicks off a three-day forum devoted to spam.
"You've got people with higher visibility now complaining about all this unwanted e-mail, and that's what it took," said Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.).
The outcry from ordinary citizens and major corporations is coalescing into a "critical mass" of public opinion that could drive anti-spam legislation through Congress this year, said Burns, who is cosponsoring a bill to restrict spam with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the reason spam has suddenly attracted so much attention is that divergent forces opposing junk e-mail are finally aligning to tackle the issue, opening a window for legislators to act.
"There's a general conclusion that the private sector can't deal with this on their own despite their best efforts," he said. "The amount of e-mail spam is going up exponentially and there's a real understanding that if something isn't done by next year at this time a lot of people and companies will stop using e-mail."
Schumer this week said he would introduce legislation to create national "do-not-spam" registry.
The earliest congressional efforts to outlaw or restrict spam occurred in 1997, but there is still no federal law aimed at tackling the problem.
Burns's bill -- known as CAN-SPAM -- allows Internet users to opt out of receiving spam, and imposes criminal penalties on spammers who violate consumers' wishes. He first introduced a CAN-SPAM bill in 2000, but it did not develop any traction. Burns said he has heard more interest this year in his bill than ever.
"Now [constituents are] talking about it. That spurs the conversation here. Once you start it, then you can do some things," Burns said.
Over in the House of Representatives, Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) has announced plans to introduce legislation that would force spammers to label their messages, and would offer a bounty to users who track down spammers that violate the labeling requirements.
Virginia also has jumped into the anti-spam fight. Gov. Mark Warner (D) yesterday signed into law two bills that establish the toughest state rules yet against spamming. Virginia already had an anti-spam statute on the books, but the new law goes further in targeting spammers by allowing the state to seize their assets if they are convicted of sending misleading junk mail.
More than two-dozen states have an anti-spam law on the books, though spam laws in general are difficult to enforce because of the borderless nature of the Internet.
Eileen Harrington, the FTC's director for marketing practices, said the "geometric" increase in the amount of spam deluging electronic inboxes has galvanized frustration over unsolicited e-mail.
In 2001, the FTC received 10,000 messages a day through its spam database. The agency now receives about 130,000 spam messages a day.
The Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUCE) estimates that 30 to 40 percent of all e-mail sent is spam and that it costs companies "north of $10 billion" a year to handle the load.
"I think the costs have reached a critical level," Harrington said.
She noted that one of the FTC's goals in convening this week's public forum is to help lawmakers avoid pitfalls in their charge to enact anti-spam rules. "We certainly would like to help as the Congress considers these issues by laying out a very rich record."
The FTC periodically chases after spam operations, either prosecuting them or forcing them to cease their operations. The commission has held workshops to address spam before, but this is its largest yet.
CAUCE co-founder John Mozena said that the event would help industry leaders and lawmakers develop a consensus on the best legal and technical means to combat spam.
The Direct Marketing Association, which in the past opposed legislation to restrict commercial e-mails, also hopes that the government and the private sector will arrive at a good conclusion on how to combat misleading junk mail.
"They're cluttering up e-mail boxes and making it impossible to discern between legitimate offers that [consumers] may be interested in and crap," said Louis Mastria, the DMA's director of public and international affairs.
The DMA now supports legislation requiring spammers to include their real e-mail addresses in their messages and to honor "unsubscribe" requests, but opposes bills that would require marketers to label their messages as spam because it says such a law could hurt the businesses of many of its members.
Schumer said he hopes the spam measures being considered in Congress can be melded into a single bill that can draw on the best ideas, and get approval from the president.
Commercial e-mailers, meanwhile, are getting ready to fight for what they say is their constitutional right to continue sending unsolicited e-mail. EMarketersAmerica.org, a nonprofit corporation based in Florida, filed a lawsuit against two anti-spam groups last week, claiming that they blacklist and harass direct marketers who are not guilty of sending spam.