• Mission & Governance
• Services Overview
• How to Get Involved
• Standing Committees
• NCSL Foundation

• Issue Areas: A-Z
• State-Federal Relations
• NCSL Standing Committees
• News from D.C. and the States

• About State Legislatures
• Elections, Campaigns & Redistricting
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory
• Web Sites

• Online Guide to NCSL Services
• Staff Sections and Networks
• Meetings & Professional Development
• Staff Directories

• Meetings Calendar
• Online Registration
• Meetings Home Page
• Legislative Summit

• Bookstore
• State Legislatures Magazine
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory

News From the States

Spring 2001

CONTENTS

Last Updated: April 25, 2001

Communications and Information Policy Committee Meeting in Costa Mesa, California
March 23 -25, 2001

On Saturday, March 24^th, the Committee held a joint program with the Legislative Effectiveness Committee on the use of information technology to support voting. Speakers explained the various kinds of voting technology used by the states and discussed the future of e-voting. Next, at a roundtable on e-communications, the committee discussed best practices for using e-mail and web pages to communicate with constituents. And they discussed a proposed committee project to develop a series of online videos and a short publication outlining best practices for legislator e-communications.

Over lunch the committee planned programs for their next meeting—the NCSL Annual Meeting in San Antonio, August 11-16, 2001. Following lunch, the "High Tech Education" program showcased LemonLink, a wireless system used by the Lemon Grove, California school district that provides laptops for students to use at school and home, and the Florida Virtual School. The "Best Practices for Integrated Justice Systems" included an overview of state approaches, the National Governor's Association project, and a discussion of Iowa's approach to managing integrated justice systems. The last program on Saturday, "Update on UCITA," featured University of Arizona law professor Jean Braucher and Carl Ring, Chair of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws UCITA drafting committee, who discussed the basic elements of this model legislation that provides rules for the sale of computer software information and databases. Several of the committee sessions are available in audio through the Committee web site, and all the handouts may be downloaded from the site also.

- Submitted by Jo Anne Bourquard

The Committee at Annual Meeting

The Communications and Information Policy Committee will hold its next meeting during the NCSL Annual Meeting in San Antonio, Texas, August 11-16, 2001. Programs will focus on electronic government, telecommunications, privacy, best practices for using information technology, e-commerce and more. Online registration is available.

E-Procurement Growing

North Carolina will launch its web-based procurement system in July for agencies, municipalities, universities, community colleges, and schools. The suppliers will be charged a 1.75 percent marketing fee on each order. Open to a nationwide market, state agencies' participation is mandatory. Virginia's eVA system is an "electronic mall" with set prices. In the future, eVA will include online auctions and will be available to local government.

Hawaii's e-procurement project will be phased in three steps. First, an online purchasing process for vendors who already do business in Hawaii will be developed. Second, the system will register new vendors and process requests and bids of less than $25,000. The final phase will develop a process for proposals and formal bids on contracts worth more than $25,000. South Carolina's system will include a central database of products and services through pre-negotiated contracts and an electronic catalog. The system will be open to 76 state agencies, 46 counties, public schools, universities, cities, towns and local political subdivisions.

- Submitted by Heather Morton

Practical Advice for Electronic Records Access Programs

- Submitted by Heather Morton

2000 Information Technology and Internet Laws Report

As the Internet continues to impact business, government and personal life, state legislatures are addressing a myriad of measures designed to continue facilitating electronic commerce, encouraging electronic government services, combating computer crime, improving criminal justice through technology and ensuring privacy and consumer protection. In order to identify information technology policy, NCSL's Communications and Information Policy Committee has published the 2000 Information Technology and Internet Laws report. This report summarizes 402 enactments, grouped into four major areas: 1) Electronic Commerce and Transactions; 2) Electronic Government Services and Information; 3) Crime and Justice; and 4) Electronic Mail and the Internet. Please contact the NCSL Publications Department at (303) 830-2054 or books@ncsl.org for a copy.

Internet Filtering Law Challenged

Eighteen states have laws that require schools or libraries to adopt policies concerning minors’ access to the Internet or to use filtering software. At least 11 states introduced legislation in 2001 relating to filtering or blocking in libraries or schools, including bills enacted in Arkansas and Utah in March 2001.

- Submitted by Pam Greenberg

Websites for Kids Sidestep Privacy Rules

The Center for Media Education (CME) found that COPPA has corrected some of the most egregious practices on the web that threaten children’s privacy. CME also found that more sites are limiting the personal information they collect and are posting privacy policies. However, the CME study, like the Annenberg study, found that most sites do not display a clear and prominent link to privacy policies. CME also found sites that were not properly requiring parental consent before collecting personal information from children.

Congress passed COPPA to regulate the collection, use and disclosure of personal information from children. The FTC’s Kidz Privacy site provides information about COPPA and advice for parents, teachers, and kids about how to protect kids’ privacy online.

- Submitted by Pam Greenberg

Internet Fraud Complaint Center Report

Auction fraud accounted for a whopping 64.1 percent of all referred complaints, while non-deliverable merchandise and payment comprised 22 percent. Nationally, California was ranked as the leading state for both Internet criminals and victims. Worldwide, the United States was the clear leader in the top-ten international list of perpetrators.

The report also highlighted complaint characteristics, breaking down the complainant by type, gender, age and average loss per complaint. E-mail and web pages were the top mechanisms by which transactions occurred.

Report recommendations include the need to educate the public as technology--and fraudulent behavior--increase. The report notes that fraud was documented in all 50 states, and with the expanding use of computers and the Internet, criminal activity in the electronic age can only escalate if not addressed.

The report can be accessed at http://www.ifccfbi.gov/strategy/6monthreport.pdf.

- Submitted by Janna Goodwin

Hacking & Virus Update

Exotic Internet sirens? No, these are examples of recent viruses and hacker groups that have made their electronic presence felt. A couple of years ago, the Melissa virus terrorized IT staff with its ability to email itself in Outlook Express. More recently, the Anna Kournikova worm spread its collective wings to wreck havoc worldwide. And with recent hacks to the websites of the Associated Press and Parkinson's Foundation, security needs have never been stronger.

This year, at least 13 states are considering legislation that deals with hackers, viruses and authorized access issues. For example, Arkansas and Maine are cracking down on computer viruses. Virginia S.B. 1294 broadens the definition of computer trespass to include government computers, while Nevada S.B. 48 prohibits hacks that prevent, impede, delay, or disrupt the normal operation or use of any Internet or network site, email address, computer system or network.

All 50 states have laws addressing hacking and unauthorized access, and at least 16 states prohibit unleashing viruses or contaminants into computers, systems or networks.

Applying these laws may be difficult, especially since the venue of many cases are outside the state. The creator of last year's "I Love You" virus was from the Philippines. A 20-year-old man in the Netherlands wrote the Anna Kournikova worm. Hackers frequently shield themselves under a veil of anonymity, while most of the more prevalent perpetrators (like Kevin Mitnick) are prosecuted under federal computer crime laws.

Some states are forunate, however. David L. Smith, author of the Melissa virus, pled guilty in a New Jersey Superior Court, and is currently awaiting sentencing.

- Submitted by Janna Goodwin

States Send a Message to Spammers

Laws in California, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and West Virginia require senders to include certain information, such as a toll-free telephone number or valid e-mail address, in the message so that recipients can decline or opt out of any future messages.

California, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Tennessee laws require senders to include a label in the subject line of a message, to indicate whether the message contains an advertisement (ADVT:) or an advertisement that is not suitable for children (ADVT: ADLT).

David E. Sorkin, Assistant Professor of Law at the John Marshall Law School’s Center for Information Technology and Privacy Law, maintains a website that summarizes and provides links to these state spam laws. Bills or resolutions have also been introduced in at least 11 states in 2001 sessions, as follows:

Hawaii H.B. 155; Kentucky H.B. 314; Massachusetts H.B. 3707 and S.B. 1795; Nebraska L.B. 26; New Jersey A.R. 143 and A.R. 146; New York A. 1390, A. 5877, A. 7762, A. 8330, S. 1452, and S. 2330; Ohio S.B. 8; Oregon H.B. 3851; Pennsylvania H.B. 635 and S.B. 561, and Texas S.B. 1217 and S.B. 1218.

In addition, five anti-spam bills are pending in the 107^th Congress: S. 630—the CAN SPAM Act of 2001, H.R. 95—the Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Act of 2001, H.R. 113—the Wireless Telephone Spam Protection Act, H.R. 718—the Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Act of 2001, and H.R. 1017—the Anti-Spamming Act of 2001, which was reported out of committee on April 4, 2001.

- Submitted by Pam Greenberg

Technology Use in Education

In a separate survey by NetDay, a national education technology nonprofit organization, 84 percent of teachers believe that computers and access to the Internet improve the quality of education. Seventy-five percent of teachers say the Internet is an important tool for finding new resources to meet new standards. However, the use of technology in elementary and high schools has not changed the way teachers teach. Two-thirds of teachers agree the Internet is not well integrated into their classrooms and only 26 percent of them feel pressure to use it in learning activities. Forty-eight percent of teachers say the Internet has become an important tool for teaching over the last two years, yet across every demographic group of teachers, half or more use the Internet at school for less than 30 minutes a day. The overwhelming majority of teachers cited lack of time as the number one reason for not logging on to the Internet.

- Submitted by Heather Morton

Tennessee asks, What's in a (domain) name?

Because the scope of the Internet is so wide and international, few states have tackled the issue of domain names. Last year, California passed S.B. 1319--the "cyber-piracy" act, which provides that it is unlawful for a person with a bad faith intent to use an Internet address of a living person or deceased personality.

- Submitted by Janna Goodwin

2000 Telecommunications Laws Report

Connecticut Building a Large Do-Not-Call List

Indiana and Mississippi passed "do not call" bills this year that are awaiting the governors' signatures, and California and Texas are considering similar legislation.

The Connecticut do-not-call law took effect on January 1, 2001. By March of 2001, residents of 328,000 households in the state have registered for the list. With a population of 3.2 million, current registration represents about one of every four of Connecticut's estimated 1.25 million households. Registration is free and available over the telephone, by mail and on-line.

By contrast, New York, which began registration for its do-not-call list in October 2000, has signed up approximately 750,000 individuals, or 4 percent of its 18 million residents. The Idaho list is scheduled to become effective May 2, 2001. Approximately 12,600 consumers, or one percent of the state's population, have signed up to be included on the state list.

Unlike most other states with do-not-call lists, Connecticut contracts with the Direct Marketing Association to maintain its list. Telemarketing companies face fines of up to $5,000 per violation for infringements. Telemarketing calls made by non-profits and companies tracking down debts are exempt. And, businesses new to the state of Connecticut are permitted to make one telephone call to residents.

- Submitted by Bob Boerner

The FCC Rules on Reciprocal Compensation Payments

Under the reciprocal compensation rule, established in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, telecommunications companies must pay each other every time they connect a call from one system to another. For example, when customers of A (Internet service provider) want to connect to the Internet, their calls are carried from their home telephones via B (a Bell company) to C's system (a competitive local exchange carrier), where they are then routed to A's servers. B must pay C for every minute those calls are connected. Because Internet connections typically last longer than voice calls, the compensation quickly adds up and, by some estimates, reach as much as $2 billion per year. Companies like B argued that the rule is unfair since companies like C rarely send calls to B, thus undermining the intent of "reciprocal" compensation. In some cases Internet service providers like A have changed into competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs) like C to receive the rewards of reciprocal compensation.

In the order, the FCC commissioners adopted rules to clarify proper intercarrier compensation for telecommunications traffic delivered to Internet service providers. It reduced compensation payment amounts from .2 cents per minute to .0015 cents per minute initially and down to .0007 cents per minute in two years.

California and several other state public utility commissions had been considering reciprocal compensation issues and it is unclear to many experts if this FCC ruling alters state utility authority. However, Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth, in dissent, noted "the Commission shows little respect for states, their lawmakers, their regulators, federal law, or the Congress that enacted the 1996 Act."

The Commission stated it believed this ruling met concerns of the U.S. Appeals Court, Washington, D.C. The court had put on hold the agency's previous 1999 order.

Selected materials on reciprocal compensation are located at http://www.nrri.ohio-state.edu/Recip_Comp/recip_comp.htm.

- Submitted by Bob Boerner

Wamming? (Wireless Advertisement Messages)

Cellphone "spam" is starting to cause problems for users. Marketers are beginning to utilize Short Message Service (SMS) messaging to send unsolicited advertisements to cell phones, pagers and wireless e-mail devices. Consumers are concerned because many wireless providers charge extra for text messaging, including per-message charges over a certain amount.

U.S. Representative Rush Holt (D-N.J.) recently introduced HR 113 that would prohibit unsolicited SMS advertisements. While there are several state laws addressing unsolicited commercial email and a handful of pending federal bills addressing email spam, none expressly concentrate on the relatively new arena of wireless technology.

Wireless spam, like its e-mail counterpart, is easy to implement because access to the numbers between 0000 and 9999 that have the same prefix is simple and effortless. In addition, SMS does not display headers, so perpetrators are nearly impossible to trace.

Welcome to the wonderful world of wireless . . . and all its subsequent consequences.

- Submitted by Janna Goodwin

Uniform Electronic Transactions Act Passed by More Than Half the States

Twenty-nine states have adopted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA). This model act, developed by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL), places electronic signatures and records on the same legal footing as manual signatures and paper records. In 1999 two states, California and Pennsylvania passed UETA; in 2000, 21 more states adopted this model act, and so far in 2001, six more states—Arkansas, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota and Wyoming have passed it. For a list of states that have introduced and/or enacted UETA including links to the full text of these bills and laws, go to the NCSL UETA page.

In June of 2000, President Clinton signed into law the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, S. 761 (E-SIGN). This federal act establishes the validity of electronic records and signatures, and it permits the states to preempt federal law if the state has enacted the official version of UETA as adopted by the NCCUSL. See the NCCUSL web site for more information about the overlap of the federal law and UETA.

- Submitted by Jo Anne Bourquard

Update on UCITA

- Submitted by Jo Anne Bourquard

Visitor counts for this page.