By Elizabeth Blakey E-Commerce Times
10/04/01 2:42 PM PT
When it came to taking responsibility for regulating and prosecuting spammers in
California, state agencies knew little and were quick to pass the buck.
Run Your Entire Contact Center in the Cloud Many businesses are increasingly seeking ways to improve the quality, flexibility, and scalability of their traditional call centers. Download this free white paper and learn the top 8 reasons to consider going virtual.
Despite promises to the contrary and a number of
state laws
making it unlawful to send unsolicited, commercial e-mail, the California Attorney General
and the California Department of Consumer Affairs (DOCA), including its newly
formed Office of Privacy Protection, appear to have done little to
fight the crush of spam that is burdening businesses in the state.
Moreover, when asked about fighting spam, the responsible agencies fumbled for
information, and were not sure whether they had a program to fight spam or the
authority to do so.
An agent named Karen in the consumer assistance department of the
California Attorney General's Office told the
E-Commerce Times to use its Web site to file
an online inquiry and complaint
to report damages caused by spam, saying that the complaint form was used "to develop
information about patterns of activity by specific companies."
However, when pressed on the question of whether the online inquiry and complaint form
would result in any action by the Attorney General's office to combat spam, the agent
said, "I don't know if there is an enforcement program or whether the AG office will be
able to provide info on who has jurisdiction."
An online inquiry and complaint form regarding spam was filed with the AG's office in
mid-August, but resulted in no action or response on the part of law enforcement agency.
The AG's office, however, did forward copies of the
state laws in California that forbid
the sending of unsolicited e-mail advertisements.
Empty Promises
Much like the efforts to reach a company that sends out thousands of spam e-mails using a
false address, the effort to find someone in the California law enforcement
and regulatory agencies who is doing anything about spam came to a dead end --
although it appeared promising at first.
The DOCA publishes a page on its site entitled "Fighting a Spam Attack," which says that
people affected by the "barrage of spam-mail" should contact the Office of Privacy
Protection or call the Consumer Affairs office at (800) 952-5210.
Open Door Policy?
According to the "Fighting a Spam Attack" site, the Office of Privacy Protection was to
open on July 1st. However, when the E-Commerce Times called the DOCA in mid-August, the
agent, Dan Gomez, said the Office of Privacy Protection was not yet open.
Wednesday, an agent in the Office of Privacy Protection told the E-Commerce Times that the
office has been funded and employees are already working on
research and educational projects, but that the Web site and
services are not fully operational. The site address provided for the office,
http://www.privacyprotection.dca.ca.gov, went nowhere.
Passing the Spam
According to Gomez, contacting the Attorney General's office would be "the quickest route"
for getting information on enforcement actions. He also provided the phone number of the
person in charge of the newly formed Office of Privacy Protection, Joanne McNabb.
When the E-Commerce Times called McNabb, she said that the Office of Privacy Protection
was late in opening its doors because it was in the process of getting funds and hiring
people to help businesses and consumers protect their privacy.
The Office of Privacy Protection would also be running educational
programs and working with other agencies in enforcing state privacy laws, McNabb said.
However, McNabb said, she did not believe that there was a state law that prohibits
spam and that it "is up to the consumer" to track down the source of spam,
"which can be pretty darn tricky."
"It's a challenge to regulate," McNabb said, "It's not
clear where it takes place or who has jurisdiction."
Gathering Dust
What is clear -- at least in the legal books -- is that spam
is illegal in the Golden State.
The California Business and Professions Code, in sections 17538.4 and 17538.45,
prohibits the sending of unsolicited e-mail advertisements.
Subsection 4 provides that e-mail senders must include a toll-free number or valid return
e-mail address that consumers and businesses can use to request that no further
unsolicited e-mails be sent. The subsection also specifically requires that e-mail
advertisements bear the legend "ADV" in the header of the mail.
Subsection 45 -- which is an entirely separate law from subsection 4 despite their
similar number designations -- prohibits use of another company's services or equipment
for the transmission of unsolicited e-mail advertisements.
According to subsection 45, those damaged by violations of the law can recover actual
monetary losses or liquidated damages of US$50 for each illegal e-mail,
up to a maximum of $25,000 per day.
Going Straight To Jail
In addition, California has broad references in its penal code regarding the illegal use
of computers.
Penal Code section 502 makes it a crime for individuals and companies to damage,
knowingly access without permission, or otherwise use any data, computer, computer system
or computer network in order to execute a deceptive scheme or wrongfully obtain money,
property or data.
The law's scope includes those acts in which an individual knowingly, and without
permission, disrupts or causes the disruption of computer services. The punishment for
violating section 502 includes fines not exceeding $10,000 and imprisonment.
Apparently, someone in the state attorney general's office believes that section 502
applies to
spam because the law was included in the set of laws it mailed out in response
to the telephone inquiry about what businesses in California can do about spam.
Taking Charge
Under the terms of the section 502, violating the computer-use
law from a computer in Arizona through use of a computer in California gives
California law enforcement officers the authority to prosecute.
However, research revealed that only a few Internet service
providers and highly motivated
private citizens in the state have stepped up to the plate and brought
lawsuits against spammers -- to little avail.
Stirring Up Unrest with Tech Layoffs October 03, 2001
According to one analyst, the layoffs of the past six-plus months have sown the seeds
for massively disruptive turnover among employees whose positions were not cut.
SpamCop Stops Spam, While Lawmakers Fall Short June 13, 2001
According to SpamCop, its filtering system works because the majority of
spammers use bogus e-mail addresses and never receive the return
requests for more information about their e-mails.
One Year Ago: Any Outrage Over E-Commerce Outages? January 07, 2002
When unscheduled outages hit e-tailers and online auctioneers, the internal response at
the company can be a panicked scramble, even while the public relations campaign is
reassuring.
One Year Ago: Is BlueLight.com a Model? December 18, 2001
Although BlueLight was able to get around the shopping 'bot' debacle, maintaining
its customer base proved more costly than expected in early December 2000.