Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Ritter signs into law spam reduction bill

Spammers face greater risk of being caught, backer says

By Jeff Smith, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published April 23, 2008 at 7 p.m.

Text size  

Related Links

More Tech & Telecom

More stories »

Colorado consumers and businesses have another ally in their war on spam.

Gov. Bill Ritter on Wednesday signed into law the Spam Reduction Act, which provides state enforcement authority similar to federal authority against unwanted e-mails.

Ritter, in the signing at the Capitol, noted that spam costs U.S. businesses billions of dollars each year in lost productivity and virus-protection software.

"They cause server crashes. They help spread viruses and can facilitate e-mail fraud and identity theft," he said.

The federal CAN-SPAM (Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing) Act of 2003 made such unwanted e-mails a deceptive trade practice and gave enforcement powers to the Federal Trade Commission, which has cracked down on some major violators.

But Rep. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, who sponsored House Bill 1178, said Colorado isn't "really on the radar" and the state law will give consumers the additional option of taking complaints to local authorities, such as the state attorney general's office.

"We need all hands of deck," Carroll said after the signing. The bill increases the odds of catching spammers, she said.

A survey last year by the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that the volume of spam is growing in personal and workplace e-mail accounts, but that e-mail users are less bothered by it.

"Users have become more sophisticated about dealing with spam," wrote senior research fellow Deborah Fallows. She noted that more than 70 percent use filters by their e-mail provider or employer to block spam. Consumers also reported less pornographic spam.

Carroll said she decided to sponsor the bill after counting 6,000 spam e-mails in her personal and campaign inbox within a two-week period. "We all feel the price of spam - it costs us time, it costs us money and, most importantly, it costs us our privacy."

Among other things, the state law prohibits someone from knowingly misleading or deceiving a recipient about the source or sender of an e-mail. It also prohibits knowingly sending a commercial e-mail to any person who has previously told the sender not to e-mail.

A violator can be fined up to $1,000 for each commercial e-mail, up to a total of $10 million. E-mail fraud constitutes possible criminal misdemeanor penalties.

In the most prominent local example, Scott Richter in 2005 agreed to pay $7 million to Microsoft Corp. to settle a lawsuit accusing his Westminster e-mail marketing firm of participating in an illegal spam ring.

smithje@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5155

Cracking down

Gov. Bill Ritter on Wednesday signed into law the Spam Reduction Act, which protects consumers against unwanted e-mails. It is similar to the federal CAN-SPAM Act of 2003.

* What it does: The new law provides state enforcement authority against the deceptive trade practice.

It prohibits an e-mail sender from knowingly misleading or deceiving a recipient about their identity. It also prohibits knowingly sending a commercial e-mail to any person who has previously told the sender not to e-mail.

A violator can be fined up to $1,000 for each commercial e-mail sent, up to a total of $10 million. E-mail fraud carries criminal misdemeanor penalties.

Comments

  • April 26, 2008

    9:59 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    SockRayBlue writes:

    What a dumb idea! So what are they going to do? Make and angry telephone call to the Philipines, the Ukraine, Humgary or some other back water cyber dump? I get emails from Columbia House in Argentina. I've called.....it hasn't stopped.

  • April 26, 2008

    9:13 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    DirtySanchez,

    You hit the nail on the head. Another criminal statue that the feds already have on the books. Short story is it costs taxpayers to fund CO law enforcement to enforce this do nothing law that the the feds have it statute today.

    Ritter should have vetoed it as wasteful, better statues are inplace at federal level. Instead he signed it for the PR value.

    Does her dad know your sockpuppet is DS? Now go get a wet wipe for that finger.