Internet Spyware (I-Spy) Prevention Act of 2007

Floor Speech

INTERNET SPYWARE (I-SPY) PREVENTION ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - May 22, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1525, the Internet Spyware Prevention Act of 2007. I'm very pleased that my first stand-alone bill that will be passed in this House under the new Democratic majority is one that both protects Americans on the Internet and fosters continued technological innovation. I thank my friend, Congressman Bob Goodlatte, for working with me once again on this legislation to combat spyware.

Spyware is becoming one of the biggest threats to consumers on the Internet. Thieves are using spyware and key loggers are harvesting personal information from unsuspecting Americans. It also affects the business community that is forced to spend money to block and remove it from their systems.

Experts estimate that as many as 80 to 90 percent of all personal computers are infected with spyware. In short, it's a very real problem that's endangering consumers, damaging businesses and creating millions of dollars of additional costs.

This is a bipartisan measure that identifies the truly unscrupulous acts associated with spyware and subjects them to criminal punishment. This bill is the right approach because it focuses on behavior, not technology. It targets the worst forms of spyware without unduly burdening technological innovation.

The bill imposes tough criminal penalties on those who use spyware in furtherance of another Federal crime or to defraud or injure consumers. It also funds the Attorney General to find and prosecute spyware offenders and phishing scam artists.

Focusing on bad actors and criminal conduct is preferable to an approach that criminalizes technology or imposes notice-and-consent-type requirements. You know, bad actors don't comply with requirements. The more notices Internet users receive, in fact, the less likely they are to pay attention to any of them. Seventy-three percent of users don't read agreements, privacy statements or disclaimers on the Internet.

In 2005, the Pew Internet and American Life Project proved this point. A diagnostic site included a clause in one of its user agreements that promised $1,000 to the first person to write in and request the money. The agreement was downloaded more than 3,000 times before someone finally claimed the reward.

We don't want to overregulate user experience. We must avoid interfering with increasingly seamless, intuitive and interactive online environments. Regulation of technology is almost always a bad idea because technology changes faster than Congress can legislate; and what we attempt to regulate will morph into something else and render useless the regulatory scheme we adopt.

Legislation that attempts to control technology can also have the pernicious effect of chilling innovation by chilling investment into prohibited technological arenas. H.R. 1525 avoids these pitfalls by focusing on bad conduct, and that's why it has the broad support in my district in Silicon Valley, California.

What we're doing here today is important for consumers, for businesses. It's also important for the future of our high-tech economy.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of this crucial legislation.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source