Bad Texas Spam Bill: Score One for the Good Guys

Mickey Chandler and I appeared to testify against the bill. Adina and Ms. G stopped by to sign cards in opposition, which was a help. So, we at least got the stake driven into the ground that email users don't like this bill.

The committee was shocked to hear this. When Mickey was testifying, the chair interrupted to ask if he's an email marketer. Mickey had to convince him, no, he's a spam victim.

The problem with this bill is that it was written by a bunch of folks who have a marketing interest, without consulting anybody who has solely a consumer interest. One by one, they eviscerated any meaningful protections such that what they ended up with was not a spam prevention bill, but a spammer protection bill.

I made a brief opening statement, so that my position (against it) and my intentions (want to fix it) were clear. Then, I presented written testimony that summarizes some of my objections to the bill.

At this point, I'm not trying to get a good bill so much as remove the horribly pro-spammer cruft. I think the committee probably will want to move forward with something. I hope when they do, it's something that sucks less than what's there now.

Many of my points landed on target. I hope that planted enough of a doubt so that the committee has desire to fix some problems before the bill advances.

Or, they may end up ignoring it all and just moving forward with what they got. But for tonight, the bill sits on hold, and that's a win for the good guys.