Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (15173)	8/29/1998 5:06:00 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

>>AMZN is a loser with no name brand, no special service or technology, no barriers towards entry to its market, huge and mounting losses, and more experienced, established and well known competitiors. Are talking about America Online in 1993? :) Gerr, bow wow. William, It is beyond me how you can compare Amazon to AOL. They are so very different. Glenn

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (15173)	8/29/1998 8:09:00 PM
From: llamaphlegm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

William: Did you bother my post from yesterday about internet brand name recognition? IS Business Week not reputable enough for you? You might consider the possibility that bears are right and that amzn has little if any brand name reognition with non-web users or newbies. If so, from where will the unstoppable growth come??? LP

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (15173)	8/29/1998 8:20:00 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 164684

****Legislatures Processing Spam Laws Newsbytes - August 28, 1998 16:30 %LEGAL %WAS V%NEWSBYTES P%NBYT WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A., 1998 AUG 28 (NB) -- By Robert MacMillan, Newsbytes. As the California Assembly last night approved a bill to make illegal the sending of e-mail with falsified domain names, as well as allowing Internet service providers to sue spammers because of their raison d'etre, the House Commerce Committee may be getting ready to push for full approval of anti-slamming and anti-spamming legislation before the October recess. According to the Association for Interactive Media, House leadership is pushing hard to pass H.R. 3888, a bill that would severely restrict the rules about sending bulk e-mail, known more by the moniker "spam." Although calls to most members of the House Committee on Commerce went unreturned because of the continuing congressional recess, support on the Hill is high for some sort of restriction on spam, which proves at best an annoying amusement, and at worst a disabling disease, for almost all e-mail users. H.R. 3888, the Anti-Slamming Amendments Act, would require bulk e-mail distributors to label their mails as advertisements, disclose their names and addresses and also allow the recipients to demand that they receive no further spam. Other sections of this act deal with the practice of "slamming," in which long distance companies replace customers' current provider with their own service, and the customer does not find out until the next bill arrives. The House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection referred H.R. 3888 to the full committee on Aug. 6. The bill's sponsor is Louisiana Republican W.J. "Billy" Tauzin. The California action Thursday evening made it illegal to send e-mail with forged domain names. Introduced in January, the bill also prohibits bulk mail senders from sending the mails to domains whose ISPs specifically contain anti-spamming policies. ISPs that receive spam would be allowed to sue the company and seek damages of $50 per e-mail. The bill also stipulates that the spammers would be responsible for paying a portion of the ISP's attorney fees. Reported by Newsbytes News Network: newsbytes.com . 14:37 CST <BR>Reposted 17:34 CST (19980828 /WIRES ONLINE, LEGAL, BUSINESS, TELECOM/SPAMLEG/PHOTO)