Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!milton!cyberoid From: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Post Office plans to sell address databases. Message-ID: <13279@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 19 Dec 90 22:01:20 GMT References: <13017@milton.u.washington.edu>> <22219@well.sf.ca.us> Distribution: comp Organization: Human Interface Technology Lab, Univ. of Wash., Seattle Lines: 39 In article <22219@well.sf.ca.us> nagle@well.sf.ca.us (John Nagle) writes: > > An opportunity arises here to make a big dent in junk mail. If the >Post Office offers an address database, everyone should have the opportunity to >designate their address in various ways, such as "no unsolicited 3rd class >mail", or "no unsolicited mail". Mailers could be required to drop addresses >so designated from their mailings. > > The Post Office already maintains a list of "persons who do not wish >to receive pornography", which provides a precedent for this service. >Consolidation of such filtering information would provide a significant >enhancement of service. > > John Nagle This is a totally excellent idea. It was the basis of a bill that percolated around the California Legislature last session (I helped to draft it, AB 539, Moore, 1989) that would have enabled those in databases to generally designate themselves as recipients of third- party communications, or refusers thereof. Another bill that went down before lobbying from databases vendors and the telephone companies would have created a telephone database of "NO CALLS," available to all telemarketers for a fee (to cover the cost the the lists compilation). If you put your telephone number (not your name or address) into the list, which was to be maintained by the same organization that maintains other lists for utilities, anyone who called you with a pitch was liable for damages. Simple to administer, virtually no government intervention, and it would have limited the single largest bother to telephone customers, unwanted "junk calls." The telemarketers and the telephone companies preferred to push Caller ID, for the obvious reason that, while it appears to offer a (spurious) solution to junk calls, will actually stimulate them. Some thoughtful Congress member should get on the stick and start talking with the Post Office about John Nagle's suggestion...NOW. Bob Jacobson