I just got this forward and I hope you all can pass it around.

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 inefficiency. 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.

Congressional representative, Tony Schnell (R) 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!


What the hell is this country coming to?

Sure it's not a scam?

This must be a bogus mail, if not all ISP's must be happy that their government more or less closes them down along with the entire use of the Internet in the US. It would also lead to all US based ISP relocate abroad, sure that's what the intent would be, kick out all US ISP's.

-Nordic

It's a hoax. You can read more aobut it at F-Secure's site (http://www.europe.f-secure.com/hoaxes/bill602p.shtml).

Frank

Hi ya'll

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blemtax2.htm?terms=postal

...You should really trust an article with spelling and grammar errors, especially if it quotes fictitional identities...

Originally posted by ProSam
What the hell is this country coming to? You mean because the education system is in such a sad state that people don't know that a bill being considered at the federal level in the US would either have a number starting with "HR" if it was in the House of Representatives, or "S" if was introduced in the Senate, but would never be something like "Federal Bill 602P?"

I agree. :)

I was looking for the line:

Please forward this email to everyone on your icq list. The federal government has promised that if this email gets forwarded to at least 100.000 people they will drop the bill

<laff> @ Pilgrim. :)

laughing or not, I actually do seem to remember that e-mail hoax actually having that line at the end of it...

remember, believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see. :)

Greg Moore

i was believing it at first lol

Originally posted by Pilgrim
I was looking for the line:

Please forward this email to everyone on your icq list. The federal government has promised that if this email gets forwarded to at least 100.000 people they will drop the bill
YUP! It did. I erased it!:D

Damn, I'm good! :D

I can regognize icq scams even if they don't come over icq. Can you imagine how long I have been using it ;)

(if you can't imagine...try june 1997)

Don't Give The Government Any Ideas!!! LOL :D

Edit -
Note to self: Read whole thread

First of all I could see that being a scam just looking at the title. The internet being the abstract thing it is, isn't "own" by really any government body. It is regulated by certain government bodies but their abilities to take action are as defined as their abilities to take action in real life. I.E. the US can make all the laws it wants about the Internet, I.E. e-mail fees, user fees, taxes on sales, etc... and not a single other country has to necessary do the same or respect those laws. A good example of this is that US business don't have to charge taxes on internet sales? (Correct me please if I'm wrong) while all Canadian business must charge 7% sales tax.

Internet laws / fees are just like the laws in different countries, they may differ a bit or not exist. Yet another example is that in the US you can host a gossip site and not be charged for comments made on it, while in Canada you can as it is your responsibility.

So in all, the US could make a e-mail fee but it would not be effective world-wide. Also if they did so I think they would see a lot of Internet companies invest in other foreign markets without such billing.

Originally posted by JayC
You mean because the education system is in such a sad state that people don't know that a bill being considered at the federal level in the US would either have a number starting with "HR" if it was in the House of Representatives, or "S" if was introduced in the Senate, but would never be something like "Federal Bill 602P?"

I agree. :)

Errr... seems like this "education" factor is actually in a even sadder state of affairs than we though!!! :))

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blnydebate.htm

Originally posted by technoart

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blnydebate.htm Yeah, I remember that; I was watching that debate.

I don't know what is worse: that the candidates -- especially Lazio, who was already in Congress -- couldn't recognize the invalid bill number, that the candidates couldn't recogize that if anyone did propose such a thing there'd be such an outcry that they certainly would have heard of it before then, that Lazio was a co-sponsor of the Upton bill that referenced the hoax but didn't remember any of it; or that a purported political reporter would be ignorant of the same facts, or that such a reporter would ask participants in a major debate in which she was a moderator questions that she hadn't given any thought to or done any research on.

By the way, this link has a little more detailed description of what was actually said by both candidates about "602P" http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://washingtonpost.com/wp%2Ddyn/articles/A34390%2D2000Oct8.html