| |||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSSThe law, the Child Protection Registry Act, establishes a registry of children's e-mail addresses, compiled from information submitted by parents. The act bans marketers from sending e-mail promotions for material considered harmful or illegal for minors--including pornography, alcohol, cigarettes, or gambling--to addresses on that registry.
The Free Speech Coalition, a trade organization representing members of the adult entertainment industry, filed suit last November, claiming that the act violates the federal Can-Spam statute--which supersedes state laws regulating commercial e-mail, except for laws relating to fraud and computer crimes.
A coalition of ad groups and civil rights watchdogs--the American Advertising Federation, American Association of Advertising Agencies, Association of National Advertisers, Inc., Email Sender and Provider Coalition, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Center for Democracy & Technology--also filed papers opposing the law.
Among other arguments, they warned that the very act of creating a registry of children's e-mail addresses potentially put kids at risk because once such a list exists, it can fall into the wrong hands.
That particular concern at least has proven prophetic. It's now come to light that several weeks ago, a state employee in Utah released the e-mail addresses of four minors to the Email Sender and Provider Coalition. That gaffe occurred even though Unspam--the private agency managing the list--said it was inconceivable that the list would ever be divulged. "Even if ordered by a court or held at gunpoint, there is no feasible way that I, any Unspam employee, or any state official could provide you even a single address that has been submitted for compliance by any sender," Prince reportedly said in an affidavit.
A federal court in Utah is slated to hold a hearing on the law Nov. 9. It should seriously consider whether compiling and storing sensitive information, like e-mail addresses, potentially does more harm than good when it comes to protecting consumers.
1 person recommends this article.
RSS FEEDS
The second-biggest disappointment is the DMA's failure to get involved for fear of APPEARING to support pornographers. This cowardice ignores that their constituents who market "adult" products like beer, wine, credit cards and the like are hurt by a poorly constructed law.
Should a “do-not-email-kids� registry set a precedent and require e-mail factories to interface with the registry, the real fear is that a “do-not-email-adults� registry would follow shortly thereafter.