California Passes Spam Ban

IDG News Service - California took a tough stand against spam last week, as Gov. Gray Davis signed a law prohibiting anyone from sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to California e-mail addresses.
The law sets up an opt-in requirement intended to prevent users from getting e-mail advertisements unless they've asked to be on the sender's list. Senders of unsolicited messages could be held liable for damages up to $1,000 for each message to an individual and up to $1 million for each e-mail advertisement sent out. The recipient, the state attorney general or the e-mail service provider could seek damages.
The law also bans the sending of spam from California and prohibits the collection of e-mail addresses or registering multiple e-mail addresses for the purpose of sending spam. The law is set to take effect Jan. 1.
Unscrupulous spammers who are hard to track down are unlikely to knuckle under, but the law should have some effect on both senders and recipients of commercial e-mail, legal experts said.
"I don't think this is the silver bullet to spam. You're still going to want e-mail filters, and you're still going to receive spam from parts unknown, but this will make a dent," said David Kramer, a partner at law firm Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich and Rosati in Palo Alto, Calif.
Companies that may have been on the fence about whether to send unsolicited commercial e-mail now have a clear sign that it's illegal and that the potential for lawsuits will enter the cost equation, he said.
A strong law in the U.S. state with the highest population will also apply pressure for more effective national laws, Kramer added. Now, for members of Congress, "it's hard to go on record supporting weak or preemptive legislation," he said.
Washington is indeed where the battle is headed, said Devin Gensch, an attorney at Fenwick & West LLP in Mountain View, Calif.
"I don't think this is the end of it," Gensch said. The law is likely to spark action by both spam opponents that want stronger laws and industry groups that want to preempt California with a more permissive federal law, he said.
Cindy Cohn, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based Internet rights group, said she's worried about the impact of the law.
"It's not appropriate for one state, by writing an overly broad law, to dictate what people do elsewhere," she said. The best way to fight spam is not with a law but with filtering technology, which is more flexible, Cohn said.
Lawson writes for the IDG News Service.