Re: Spam

Michael Lorrey (
Tue, 02 Feb 1999 21:47:58 -0500

Mark D. Fulwiler wrote:

> I find spam to be a nuisance, but like the mass U.S. Snail mailings of
> Publisher's Clearing House, it is free speech. I do not agree that
> distinctions should be made between commercial and noncommercial speech.
> It just takes me a few seconds of the day to put this stuff in my trash
> can and dispose of it. I have a life but I wonder about those people who
> are pushing for a big government solution to this non-problem.

Wonder about this: "Your right to swing your arm ends in front of my nose." You have the right to speak, yes. I have the right to not be forced to listen to you, or to have my time wasted by your insistent harassment in trying to force your speech on me.

My privacy rights exceed your speech rights within a given radius of my body and ears, given that I am on private property in which I have some say in the activities there (especially if it is my own). Just because I have a mailbox at the property line does not mean that every Tom, Dick, and Jerk-wad can stuff it full of tree killing crap. I have the right to refuse to receive any class of mail I wish.

The way the USPS regulates this with snail mail is by requiring that all users of bulk class (2nd class periodicals, 3rd class standard) mail rates MUST submit CASS certified audits of every mail list they use that certifies that NONE of the people on the mail list are on the industry standardized refuse list (among other things). They must do this with EVERY mailing to get these rates. I know this because this is one of the services that a company I consult with provides to direct marketers and periodicals publishers.

Since the internet crosses state lines and national borders, the congress, delegating to the USPS, the Commerce Dept,, what have you...have the right to regulate (under the Interstate Commerce clause) commercial communications which cross those borders (i.e. the equivalent of 2nd and 3rd class mail). The authority is already there to regulate spam, and it is just, constitutional, and has a decent pedigree of precedent supporting it. The only reason why it isn't being enforced is that the populace is so used to getting trod on by the government, business, etc that they no longer understand that they have the right to be free of this shit. They've been trained through life by the media and the government that their right to privacy is less than other people's right to harass you with their opinions or their wares...when its the exact opposite that is true.

   Michael Lorrey
------------------------------------------------------------ Inventor of the Lorrey Drive
MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering
How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?