• PC World
• »Software
• »Browsers & Add-Ons

WASHINGTON -- An antispam law could be closer to reality, after several days of Congressional hearings where both constituents and lawmakers expressed irritation at nuisance e-mail.

Lawmakers may differ on how to address the spam problem, but a proposal by the House Energy and Commerce Committee may emerge next week, suggests Chairman William Tauzin (R-Louisiana). He declared his intent at a joint meeting Wednesday of two Energy and Commerce subcommittees.

"I want to thank...so many of you for coming together to try to find a common product," Tauzin said, "and we're going to have one next week."

Action Expected

Congress is widely expected to pass an antispam bill this session, but so far little consensus has emerged beyond the belief that spam is annoying and destructive. At the most recent hearing, the subcommittees examined and heard testimony about two bills. Tauzin backs HR 2214, the RID-SPAM Act; the other is HR 2515, the Anti-Spam Act. Both would use civil and criminal penalties to stem the rising and endless tide of spam currently drowning Americans' in-boxes.

Some differences in the two bills, however, have proven divisive, and not everyone on the committee shares Tauzin's optimism. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-New York) said at the hearing that he is discouraged by what he sees as the splitting of the committee into two camps. Dissension has plagued Congress whenever it tries to cure the spam epidemic, he added.

"I want to express my frustration that we find ourselves here again," Engel said. "I regret that we still find ourselves debating this issue."

Bill Overview

HR 2214, or The RID-SPAM Act, is sponsored by two Republican committee chairs, Tauzin and Jim Sessenbrenner of Wisconsin, who chairs the Judiciary Committee. It requires Internet marketers to reveal their e-mail and physical addresses, and enables consumers to refuse any further advertising through an "opt-out" clause. Firms that falsify addresses or ignore consumers' opt-out requests would be subject to fines of up to $1.5 million and prison sentences of up to two years.

Many lawmakers and consumer advocates say that the Tauzin bill allows too many loopholes for marketers and doesn't go far enough to protect consumer rights.

John Dingell (D-Michigan), the committee's ranking Democrat, contends HR 2214 "would create a new category of legalized spam" by capping civil damages and allowing all corporate subsidiaries to advertise as individual companies. He and many other committee Democrats support the other bill.

The Anti-Spam Act, HR 2515, is sponsored by Reps. Heather Wilson (R-New Mexico) and Gene Green (D-Texas). It contains a broader definition of spam and imposes stiffer civil and criminal penalties.

Wish Lists

Neither bill endorses the right of private e-mail users to file class-action lawsuits against spammers, a tactic advocated by the Consumers Union.

"Spam is such an enormous problem, we need to recruit the help of all sides of this, and consumers are an absolutely integral part of that," Chris Murray, legislative counsel for the Consumers Union, told legislators. "I think that people would go after the money, but assuming that [companies] with the money have done some bad behavior, I don't think that's necessarily out of line."

But Paul Misener, vice president for global public policy at Amazon.com, said his company will not support legislation that could penalize legitimate companies who fall victim to technology or human mistakes.

Despite the friction, Tauzin called the bills "remarkably similar" and held to his forecast of legislation being passed this session.

"We're likely to get some real action this year," Tauzin said.

Grant Gross of the IDG News Service contributed to this report.

• See more like this:
• spam,
• congress,
• legislation,
• antispam,
• HR 2214,
• the RID-SPAM Act,
• HR 2515,
• the Anti-Spam Act,
• proposals,
• law,
• tauzin,
• hearings