Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-12-Speech-1-104"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011112.9.1-104"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, it is not often that I completely agree with my colleague in the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, Mr von Boetticher, but this time I agree with him that we need a national choice regime to allow opt-out on e-mails and I am speaking against the socialist amendments.
There is one great myth that has gripped the Left and that is that spam is the same as unsolicited e-mail. I am afraid to say, Commissioner, that the Commission is at the root of this confusion. In your original proposal you said that spam equals unsolicited e-mails. It is not true. I am afraid the spammers who are already breaking the law are going to carry on breaking the law. Mrs Paciotti, you will continue to get spam!
I support the opt-out on two grounds. The first is that opt-in will unjustifiably harm both business and charities. Big American firms can afford TV advertising, press, billboard and so on. We are going to damage small- and medium-sized European firms for whom commercial e-mail provides a legitimate way into e-commerce. It is going to put them at a disadvantage. It is going to put charities at a disadvantage and studies show that people do not mind receiving them. They will not opt out even if they could. But of course it is human nature not to opt in to get them. There is also a misunderstanding about the civil liberties implications. Under opt-out, it is very easy to show that you have opted out and reputable senders have no interest in ignoring your request because they will just irritate you.
Opt-in is superficially pro-consumer, but you would have to prove that you never opted in, which is actually more difficult. Finally, under an opt-in regime, people might opt to receive mailings from organisations that could be embarrassing for them, such as gay organisations when they did not wish to come out, or they could be open to malicious abuse. If they opted in to get mailings from subversive political movements they could find themselves attracting unwarranted surveillance from the police, for instance. The Left has got it wrong and for once Mr von Boetticher is right."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples