Public Act 42 of 2003

      Comments on this legislation    Post new comment    Text and Analysis    Add to Watch List 
  Previous   Next 

• Introduced by Rep. Bill Huizenga (R) on April 2, 2003, to require senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail (“spam”) to Michigan residents to conspicuously place in the e-mail the sender's legal name, correct street address, a functioning return electronic address, and a valid internet domain name. The message would be required to include in a subject line "ADV:" as the first four characters for a commercial e-mail. Also, senders would be required to provide a convenient, no-cost mechanism to notify the sender not to send any future e-mail to the recipient, including a toll-free telephone number to call to be excluded from future mailings. The bill also prohibits the transfer of software which has the purpose of enabling the falsification of e-mail transmission or routing information. Penalties of up to a $5,000 fine and one year in jail are provided, and greater penalties for using deceptive practices. Recipients of unsolicited e-mails, or Internet service providers, would be able to sue for actual damages, or the lesser of $10 per unsolicited message received or transmitted through an e-mail service provider, or $25,000 for each day a violation occurs, plus legal costs.
  • Referred to the House Energy and Technology Committee on April 2, 2003.
    • Reported in the House on May 7, 2003, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
  • Substitute offered in the House on May 13, 2003, to replace the previous version of the bill with one which incorporates technical changes that do not affect the substance of the bill as previously described. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on May 13, 2003.
• Passed 107 to 0 in the House on May 13, 2003.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
• Received in the Senate on May 14, 2003.
  • Referred to the Senate Technology and Energy Committee on May 14, 2003.
  • Reported in the Senate on June 10, 2003, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
  • Substitute offered in the Senate on June 19, 2003, to replace the previous version of the bill with one which authorizes higher penalties against spammers who violate the bill's provisions, including higher damages payable to spam recipients. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 19, 2003.
  • Amendment offered by Sen. Bruce Patterson (R) on June 24, 2003, to establish that an Internet service provider who designs and implements a dispute resolution process for a sender who believes the sender's e-mail message has been improperly blocked, and makes contact information accessible on its website, is not liable for blocking the e-mail. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 24, 2003.
• Passed 37 to 0 in the Senate on June 24, 2003, to require senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail (“spam”) to Michigan residents to conspicuously state in the e-mail the sender's legal name, correct street address, a functioning return electronic address, and a valid internet domain name. The message would be required to include in a subject line "ADV:" as the first four characters for a commercial e-mail. Also, senders would be required to provide a convenient, no-cost mechanism to notify the sender not to send any future e-mail to the recipient, including a toll-free telephone number to call to be excluded from future mailings. Sending spam to a recipient who notified the sender that he or she did not want to receive future e-mails would be prohibited. The bill also prohibits the transfer of software which has the purpose of enabling the falsification of e-mail transmission or routing information. Penalties of up to a $10,000 fine and one year in jail are provided, and greater penalties for using deceptive practices. The Attorney General, recipients of spam, or Internet service providers could sue for actual damages, $500 per unsolicited message, or $250,000 for each day a violation occurs, plus legal costs. See also Senate Bill 357, which establishes a state “do not spam” list.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
• Received in the House on June 24, 2003.
• Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 25, 2003, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
• Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on July 11, 2003.