Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
The deluge of unsolicited commercial e-mail, or spam, that threatens to choke the Internet has produced that rarest of Washington occurrences: consensus. Even rarer, the consensus is on the need to regulate. Major Internet companies, consumer advocates and policy-makers agree that to protect the viability of electronic mail — probably the most widely used Internet application — Congress must enact legislation to reduce the amount of spam. The concern about spam is growing and well-founded. Spam is estimated to now make up 40 percent of all e-mail communications, posing problems for consumers, Internet service providers and legitimate marketers alike. Consumers complain of mailboxes full of messages that are at the very least annoying, and that at their worst are personally offensive. Spam imposes costs on ISPs that can be measured in reduced available bandwidth, and in the increased equipment and person-hours required to stem the flow. Legitimate marketers worry that unwanted marketing messages drown out appropriate, permission-based marketing. Noncommercial political speech is also drowned out. Overall, there is concern that unsolicited e-mail will compromise the value of electronic mail and, ultimately, of the Internet. HIDDEN COMPLEXITY However, as Congress prepares to respond to the public demand for legislation, the appearance of consensus hides complex questions and conflicting ideas about how best to fight spam. As so often happens in the policy arena, there are competing interests at stake, all with some validity. Legislation must effectively curb the proliferation of commercial spam, without constraining the legitimate online marketplace. It must limit the unwanted messages that reach consumers, while protecting the right of free speech. It must address the technological threats to the Internet experienced most directly by ISPs, without stifling innovative means of reaching individuals. And as a federal law, it must take into account the interests of the states in protecting the consumer rights of their citizens. A look at just some of the tough issues raised by spam proposals highlights the challenges ahead:

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.