Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway
From: dwtamkin@chinet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: California Junk Fax Bill
Message-ID: 
Date: 1 Oct 89 16:16:55 GMT
Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US
Lines: 32
Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 422, message 4 of 12

Mark A. Holtz wrote in volume 9, issue 419:

| Quite recently, a bill was passed through both houses of the
| California legislature which prohibits unsolicited "junk fax" from
| being sent. The basis: Regular junk mail costs nothing more than
| the time to toss it into file 13, while you pay for the ink and
| paper for junk fax.
|
| However, the governor of California has stated that he would not
| sign said bill.
|
| He is bound to change his mind.
|
| Several radio stations have gotten a hold of the Governor's fax
| number. And, they have given it out, telling people to keep the fax
| machine busy with junk fax. And, sure enough, it has been busy.
|
| If you were the governor of California, would you sign the "Junk
| Fax" bill now?

There is a story, or perhaps an urban legend, that when a bill to outlaw junk
faxing reached the desk of the governor of Connecticut, a junk-faxing
advertiser found out the number of the governor's fax machine and spread it
around the industry, telling fellow advertisers to bombard the state house
with letters against signing the bill.  The governor was so infuriated at
their tying up the fax machine and preventing its use for official state
business that the bill was signed immediately.


David Tamkin  P.O Box 813  Rosemont, Illinois 60018-0813 |      BIX: dattier
dwtamkin@chinet.chi.il.us   (312)693-0591  (708)518-6769 | GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN
Everyone on Chinet has his or her own opinion about this.|   CIS: 73720,1570