Originally published January 23 2004
The truth behind the gutting of California's anti-spam law
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
On this site, I promise to being you, "The News Behind The News on
Spam." So here's the straight dope on the CAN-SPAM act, like you've
never heard it before: the CAN-SPAM act was only passed because the
California anti-spam law struck fear into the hearts of direct marketers
and the DMA, who have for many years been proponents of an opt-out
approach to email, which most people equate with spamming. Washington
lawmakers like Senator Wyden were doing the best they could to get tough
anti-spam legislation passed, but they couldn't fend off the special
interest pressure of the DMA, so they ended up with a compromise that
basically guts the strong opt-in California law. As a result, California
is left with nothing with which to battle spammers -- precisely
the outcome hoped for by those who fought the California law in the
first place. Put another way, we ended up with a federal anti-spam
law that helped spammers because it gutted the much stronger
California anti-spam law. Want proof? Check your inbox.
SAN FRANCISCO -- California lawyers and law enforcement officials
continued their assault on the Can-Spam act Thursday, calling it
ineffective and warning attendees at a conference on spam and the law
that a solution to the spam scourge is still a distant dream.
In his keynote speech, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer called
the limitations "disempowering" and warned that his office did not have
the resources to track and prosecute spammers on its own.
"The Can-Spam act calls on a multi-tiered approach for enforcement,
which includes the FTC, ISPs, and attorney generals from each state,"
said Chris Fitzgerald, press secretary for Oregon Sen.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml