Very Computer

While trumpeting Microsoft's investment in antispam technology for its
MSN Online and Exchange and Outlook application customers, Gates
downplayed the idea of a technological fix to the spam problem. "There
is no silver-bullet solution to the problem," he wrote.

Instead, Gates advocated a multifaceted approach involving new
legislation, increased enforcement of existing laws and a healthy dose
of technology industry self-regulation.

The centerpiece of Gates' antispam plan is a proposal to establish
global independent trust authorities that would CERTIFY LEGITIMATE
E-MAIL SOLICITATIONS, champion best practices and serve as a mediating
body for customer disputes. LEGITIMATE E-MAIL SOLICITATION COMPANIES
would receive a "seal" identifying them as TRUSTED SENDERS."

Rather than creating a complicated new body of laws regarding spam,
FEDERAL LEGISLATION SHOULD INDEMNIFY INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS FROM
BLOCKING SPAM AND PURSUING SPAMMERS, while providing INCENTIVES FOR
E-MAIL MARKETERS TO ADOPT BEST PRACTICES, Gates wrote.

For example, the federal government could set up a "SAFE HARBOR" program
that would ABSOLVE ONLINE MARKETERS that participate in SELF-REGULATORY
ORGANIZATIONS from COMPLYING WITH MORE ONEROUS ANTISPAM LAWS, such as
labeling spam e-mail messages with "ADV," Gates suggested.
....... unquote .......

* capitols my emphasis

'legitimate e-mail solicitations'. I don't think so. If I don't want
spam then I don't want spam. Who is going to do this legitimizing,
obviously not me ?

'seal .. trusted senders ..' Trusted by whom ? who is going to award
this trusted *seal*? Trusted to do what, SPAM my *inbox* !

'self-regulatory organizations' I see :) These spam merchants are going
to award themselves a seal of approval to spam my *inbox*. But wait I
can always threaten to sue my ISP for passing on the spam. Or can I ?
Not if they take gates advice and 'indemnify internet service providers
from blocking spam and pursuing spammers'.

Unsolicited advertising sent as email is just that *advertising*. In
other words *spam* I for one do not want it. The simplest solution IS to
lable it ADVertising. What motivation would anyone have to object to this ?

get this, gates considers it onerous to require the smammers to put an
"ADV" token in the header.

This is working to protect the consumer from spam ? I don't think so.
While Microsoft champions itself as defending its customers from spam
elsewhere ,gates is quietly working on capitol hill to do the exact
opposite.

---

See also:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134640869_we...

Microsoft pushes for weakening of anti-spam law
Paul Queary  --  The Associated Press

OLYMPIA Anti-spam activists and a state attorney have argued against
a proposal pushed by Microsoft that would weaken Washingtons tough
law against unwanted e- mail.

The Microsoft bill would cut the minimum award to $10, and cap damages
at $25,000 per day.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Bill Finkbeiner, R-Kirkland, is being
brought forward in many states, said Scott Hazlegrove, a Microsoft
lobbyist. Its aimed at balancing the interests of consumers who dont
want to be spammed with businesses desire to tap the Internet as an
advertising medium, Hazlegrove said.

Neither Hazlegrove nor Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake would comment
further on the companys motives for proposing the bill.
....... unquote .......

NOTHING.