Re: i'm afraid this is a new one for me:

Joachim Feise (
Sat, 20 Nov 1999 12:27:37 -0800

> Karee Swift wrote:
> Looks like the French really did spam fork. They didn't include this:
> Under Bill s. 1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th U.S. Congress
> this letter cannot be considered spam as long as we include
> contact information and a removal link.
> this was attached to one of the many things that float into my email box. Amazing enough, Congress won't consider
> this spam and they have the legal bill to prove it. Anyone aware this passed?

I knew that this is law in CA (California Code 17538.4,
I researched it because I got junk faxes, and that is actually legal as long as they
include a phone #:
<< (1) In the case of a fax, that person or entity establishes a
toll-free telephone number that a recipient of the unsolicited faxed
documents may call to notify the sender not to fax the recipient any
further unsolicited documents.
(2) In the case of e-mail, that person or entity establishes a
toll-free telephone number or valid sender operated return e-mail
address that the recipient of the unsolicited documents may call or
e-mail to notify the sender not to e-mail any further unsolicited

I vaguely remember reading about a proposed bill like this in Congress, but I wasn't
aware that they passed anything. And a search at reveals
that these spammers are just lying anyway (what did you expect):
Bill S.1618 is the "Medicare Wellness Act of 1999", introduced by the 106th Congress.
There is nothing at all in there about spam.