Re: FW: Pay for Email?

From: Nate Schmolze (vygotsky@home.com)
Date: Mon Feb 19 2001 - 12:06:19 PST


You've been had Paul. That's been around for years. I first saw it in a
newsgroup about 2 years ago. Hope you didn't send in any money to help that
lawyer offering his services for free. ;)

Nate

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul H.Dillon" <illonph@pacbell.net>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 12:17 PM
Subject: Fw: FW: Pay for Email?

> I just received the following concerning a Bill to charge for the use of
> email. I think it's worth looking into since it certainly would
negatively
> affect mailing lists/listservs and in general destroy the basis of
> solidarities that email has allowed.
>
>
>
> Paul H. Dillon
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > >Hi--
> > > Forwarding. I never heard of Bill 602P. I
> > >have no idea whether the report below has any
> > >validity, but if it does it sure would put me out
> > >of business.
> > > Best,
> > > Bob
> > >----------
> > >Some interesting information. You might want to
> > >check it
> > >out.
> > >
> > >VOTE NO ON Bill 602P!!!!
> > > I guess the warnings were true. Federal Bill 602P
> > >
> > >5-cents per E-mail
> > > Sent. It figures! No more free E-mail! We knew
> > >this was
> > >coming! Bill 602P
> > > will permit the Federal Government to charge a
> > >5-cent
> > >charge on every
> > >delivered E-mail. Please read the following
> > >carefully if
> > >you intend to
> > >stay online, and continue using E-mail. The last
> > >few
> > >months have revealed
> > >an alarming trend in the Government of the United
> > >States
> > >attempting to
> > >quietly push through legislation that will affect
> > >our
> > >use of the Internet.
> > > Under proposed legislation, the US Postal Service
> > >will
> > >be attempting to
> > > bill E-mail users out of "alternative postage
> > >fees."
> > >Bill 602P will
> > >permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent
> > >surcharge on every E-mail
> > >delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers
> > >at
> > >source. The consumer
> > >would then be billed in turn by the ISP.
> > >Washington,
> > >DC lawyer Richard
> > >Stepp is working without pay to prevent this
> > >legislation
> > >from becoming
> > >law. The US Postal Service is claiming lost
> > >revenue, due
> > >to the
> > >proliferation of E-mail, is costing nearly
> > >$230,000,000
> > >in revenue per
> > >year. You may have noticed their recent ad
> > >campaign:
> > >"There is nothing
> > >like a letter." Since the average person received
> > >about
> > >10 pieces of
> > >E-mail per day in 1998, the cost of the typical
> > >individual would be an
> > >additional 50 cents a day-or over $180 per
> > >year-above
> > >and beyond their
> > >regular Internet costs. Note that this would be
> > >money
> > >paid directly to the
> > >US Postal Service for a service they do not even
> > >provide. The whole point
> > >of the Internet is democracy and noninterference.
> > >You
> > >are already paying
> > >an exorbitant price for snail mail because of
> > >bureaucratic efficiency. It
> > >currently takes up to 6 days for a letter to be
> > >delivered from coast to
> > >coast. If the US Postal Service is allowed to
> > >tinker
> > >with E-mail, it will
> > >mark the end of the "free" Internet in the United
> > >
> > >States. Our
> > >congressional representative, Tony Schnell ? has
> > >even
> > >suggested a "$20-$40
> > >per month surcharge on all Internet service" above
> > >and
> > >beyond the
> > >governments proposed E-mail charges Note that
> > >most of
> > >the major
> > >newspapers have ignored the story-the only
> > >exception
> > >being the
> > >Washingtonian - which called the idea of E-mail
> > >surcharge "a useful
> > >concept who's time has come" (March 6th, 1999
> > >Editorial). Do not sit by
> > >and watch your freedom erode away! Send this
> > >E-mail to
> > >EVERYONE on your
> > >list, and tell all your friends and relatives
> > >write
> > >their congressional
> > >representative and say "NO" to Bill 602P. It will
> > >only
> > >take a few moments
> > >of your time and could very well be instrumental
> > >in
> > >killing a bill we do
> > >not want.
> > >
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 01:01:17 PST