By KATHY BARKS HOFFMAN, Associated Press Writer
Starting Friday, parents can sign up for what Michigan officials say is the
nation's first registry aimed at keeping spammers from sending children
inappropriate e-mail. The new law bans sending messages to children related
to such things as pornography, illegal or prescription drugs, alcohol,
tobacco, gambling, firearms or fireworks. Parents and schools will be able
to register children's e-mail addresses.
"From my perspective as a parent, I'm horrified by what comes in" to
her three children's e-mail accounts, Gov. Jennifer Granholm said
during a news conference Thursday. "This will put an end, we hope, to
inappropriate e-mail getting to our children."
Signing up for the registry is free, and parents soon will be able to
add their children's instant message IDs, mobile phone numbers, fax
numbers and pager numbers.
E-mail senders must comply with the new law by Aug. 1. Violators face
up to three years in jail or fines up to $30,000 if convicted of
breaking the law, and could face civil penalties of up to $5,000 per
Some Internet safety experts have said anti-spam laws have been
difficult to enforce and others worry the lists will give hackers a
way to get access to a large database of children.
Public Service Commission Chairman Peter Lark said safeguards,
including encryption of e-mail addresses and other information, will
keep the Michigan registry secure.
Utah is getting ready to set up a similar registry for children there.
On the Net:
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder what would be the result in a
case like this: I have a fourteen year old nephew who lives in Chicago
but (among other things) has an email address from a Michigan ISP. I
am seriously thinking about making him the _email coordinator_ for
TELECOM Digest; that is, forwarding all Digest email through him via
his Michigan email address. When the email hits his box, it will be
reforwaded on to me, of course, after judicious picking through of the
pieces which are spam. I would have him listed on the 'do not email'
list. Heck, maybe we could cut corners if Kansas passed such a law
or maybe Massachusetts. So, there would be a jillion plus one pieces
of email spam each day. All the spam and porn would be automatically
forwarded to the appropriate state enforcement authorities for
prosecution and hopefully fine collections. What would be the success
rate? Maybe one percent? I really would not care; at one percent
success, an occassional -- very occassional -- conviction and share of
the proceeds in the fines collected would be worth the little
effort it would take to forward my spam box each day to the state
authorities. I think a 'do not email' list is a great idea, as long
as the states or federal government intends to share (at least a little)
the loot they can collect by enforcement based on my complaints of