Privacy advocates criticized a Senate anti-spam bill today because it doesn’t go far enough.
“A good spam bill would have an opt-in criterion rather than an opt-out,” said Jason Catlett, CEO of Junkbusters Corp., during a conference call this afternoon.
Another problem is that the bill, S. 630, doesn’t allow “a private right of action,” Catlett said. “The consumer who is repeatedly spammed has to go to a government department or their ISP to have any action taken to stop the spammer.”
Catlett made a similar statement today in testimony before the Communication Subcommittee of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation for the U.S. Senate.
However, the bill recently introduced by Senators Conrad Burns (R-MT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) was supported in testimony by industry leaders.
“The Burns-Wyden bill represents a measured, bi-partisan legislative solution to e-mail marketing practices and is a good example of how Congress can play a constructive and defining role in ensuring both the continued growth of the Internet and the privacy of Internet users,” said David Moore, chief executive officer of 24/7 Media, in prepared testimony.
Meanwhile, Junkbusters and several other consumer groups sent a letter to Congressmen, calling on them to pass a tougher bill.
Catlett’s conference call also featured comment by Ray Everett-Church, counsel for the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial e-Mail, who argued that consumers bear the cost of spam in bandwidth costs and long-distance charges. He recommended that Congress treat spam the way it treated unsolicited faxes
Network
