Direct marketers endorse anti-spam laws

ZDNet ^ | 22 October 2002 | Declan McCullagh

[steve-b]

Until now, the DMA has opposed the majority of anti-spam bills in Congress or offered only lukewarm support. But the ever-rising tide of junk e-mail has made the influential trade association rethink its stand.

"Even legitimate business' messages are not being looked at because of the get-rich-quick schemes and pornography and so forth," Jerry Cerasale, the DMA's vice president for government affairs, said in a telephone interview Monday afternoon....

The DMA told the Senate Commerce committee in April 2001 that a law governing spam might not be objectionable if it overruled about 20 state laws currently on the books and prohibited only "the practice of sending fraudulent electronic mail messages" with forged headers....

But, Cerasale said, a federal requirement that consumers "opt in" instead of "opt out" of bulk e-mail is unacceptable. "We think the opt-in creates a true noneconomic model," Cerasale said. "We don't believe you get a viable economic model in opt-in."

[steve-b]

These people are just like Saddam, making phony offers to "cooperate" as long as they are allowed to continue their low-life business as usual. Just as we need to tell Saddam that he will no longer be permitted to aid and abet global terrorism, we need to tell the DMA that it will no longer be permitted to steal bandwidth. Make sure your Congresscritter understands that nothing but opt-in is acceptable.

[EggsAckley]

It sounds like they're scared to death of the anti-spam legislation and are jumping on the band wagon to protect their own butts.

[EggsAckley]

Oh, I forgot to add that when I clicked on the link, I got a popup ad! LOL!!
In spite of popup stopper!

hehehe

[steve-b]

Yep, hence my analogy to Saddam's "negotiating for the return of inspectors" dance.