Unsolicited Commercial Electronic
Mail Choice Act
S. 771
Introduced by
Senator Frank H.
Murkowski on May 21, 1997
INTRODUCTION OF PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
(Senate - May 21, 1997) [Page: S4878]
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second time by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:
By Mr. MURKOWSKI:
S. 771. A bill to regulate the transmission of unsolicited commercial electronic mail, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
* * *
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
(Senate - May 21, 1997) [Page: S4879]
By Mr. MURKOWSKI:
S. 771. A bill to regulate the transmission of unsolicited commercial electronic mail, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
THE UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL CHOICE ACT OF 1977 [sic]
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will address one of the major complaints of Internet users--the proliferation of unsolicited e-mail advertisements, junk e-mail, or so-called spam.
Mr. President, in the span of 5 years, an entirely new method of commerce and communication--electronic mail on the Internet--has spread around the world. Along with the benefits of this revolutionary technology, there are some negative byproducts that can only damage the integrity of this new communications medium.
Because of technological advances, Internet e-mail has also become a very inexpensive means of distributing endless e-mails solicitations that not only annoy but can also defraud recipients. Moreover, the growth of junk e-mail can clog e-mail distribution networks and overtax the ability of service providers to distribute legitimate communications.
With a minimal equipment investment, any individual or business has the capability to transmit unsolicited advertisements to thousands of people nationwide each hour with the click of a mouse. As technology advances, thousands will turn into millions, and junk e-mail could overwhelm cyberspace.
Junk e-mail is known in the trade by the derisive term of 'spam.' Based upon the content of many of these e-mails, I'd be insulted if I were an employee of Hormel, the creator of the real Spam.
Mr. President, not only is junk e-mail an annoyance, but for many Americans, especially citizens living in rural States like Alaska, there is a real out-of-pocket cost they must pay to receive these unsolicited advertisements. When an on-line subscriber in rural Alaska or Montana, logs on to a network server, such as America OnLine, to check to see if there is e-mail, the subscriber often must pay a long distance charge. If there is no e-mail in his on-line mailbox, the subscriber's long distance charge may only cover 1 minute. However, if there are 25 messages in his mailbox, 24 of which are unsolicited e-mail ads, his long distance charges could triple or quadruple.
So what the rural on-line user is forced to do is to pay for the privilege of receiving junk e-mail and then having to waste his time hitting his delete button to empty this junk out of his mail box.
Mr. President, we ought to do something to end this practice. In 1991, Congress passed the Automated Telephone Consumer Protection Act that contained a provision which banned unsolicited fax transmissions. In the bill I am introducing today, the Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Choice Act of 1997, I have not chosen to take such a sweeping and unilateral approach because the Internet is about choices, not outright bans.
What my bill does is to require the use of the word 'Advertisement' in the subject line of any unsolicited commercial e-mail, along with the sender's real address, real e-mail address, and telephone number in the body of the message. This requirement will empower Internet users to filter out messages that they do not want to receive.
Spam generators who refuse to abide by this requirement could face legal action from private citizens, state attorneys general, and/or the Federal Trade Commission. FTC or state action could result in civil penalties of up to $11,000 per incident and, more importantly, cease and desist orders. Private citizens bringing suit could recover $5,000 plus reasonable attorney's fees.
Internet users can also choose not to unilaterally block all unsolicited commercial e-mails. Instead, they can send removal requests to specific mailing lists with further transmissions required to end within 48 hours.
Moreover, Internet Service Providers, such as America Online or Microsoft Network, would be required to filter out all e-mails with the word 'Advertisement' in the subject line when a consumer so requests.
Large service providers would have 1 year, from the date of enactment, to implement this requirement. Smaller Internet Service Providers would have 2 years to meet this requirement. Internet Service Providers would also be required to cut off service to those who use their services to send out unsolicited commercial e-mails in violation of the provisions of the act.
Mr. President, I want to point out what this bill does not attempt to do. It does not ban unsolicited commercial e-mails as some have suggested. I have not chosen an outright ban because I support the business practices of those who flood inboxes with sales pitches for worthless vitamin products and multilevel marketing schemes. Quite the contrary, I abhor such solicitations.
But I do not want to set a precedent in banning commercial speech on the Internet. Although these unsolicited advertisements are annoying, I do not believe that is a basis for an outright ban. A better approach is to simply ignore them by filtering them out. If enough Americans choose to filter out such e-mail messages, I seriously doubt that anyone will bother to send out such e-mails in the future since the cyberspace market will no longer be there.
I would also note that this bill does not impact automated mailing lists, e-mails between friends, or e-mails between businesses and their customers when there is a preexisting business relationship.
Mr. President, the Internet is about choices, not bans. The Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Message Choice Act of 1997 should restore to consumers and businesses the right to be free from endless e-mail solicitations. It will be up to the consumer to decide if he or she wants to receive such messages. That is the way I believe Americans want it. They don't want government telling them what they can receive, but they want right to decide for themselves.
Mr. President, as I said earlier, this is a very new technology and it is not my intention to hinder it's development nor interfere with legitimate commerce transacted on the Internet. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass legislation that resolves this problem.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
[Page: S4880]
* * *