Did 'foul play' swing UK spam laws?

One party named as a supporter of the UK anti-spam laws which protect the rights of spammers to send unsolicited email into businesses has suggested the DTI consultation may have been subject to foul play.

The Institute of Independent Business appeared on the list of companies opposed to tighter anti-spam laws but, when contacted by silicon.com, a senior representative of the company claimed to have no knowledge of the 2003 consultation and expressed anger at whoever submitted the response on behalf of the IIB.

Suspicions have also been raised by a number of companies who submitted more than one response to the DTI consultation.

Peter Winning, network administrator at the IIB, who claims he would have been the person responsible for submitting any such response in 2003, told silicon.com: "I can assure you that is not the official stance of the IIB. It's a ridiculous position to have taken."

The IIB works with 2,000 independent contractors around the world and Winning suggested a rogue contractor may have responded, serving a personal agenda while claiming to be speaking for the IIB.

"Some of our contractors periodically tend to call themselves a little closer to the IIB than they really are," he said.

"I'd like to find out who it was and wring their neck," Winning told silicon.com.

"I can honestly say my position and that of the IIB is crystal clear."

Winning, who claims to have lost around 20 hours just last week fighting spam email, believes tighter legislation is essential and urged any organisation who did submit a response backing light-touch legislation on business-to-business spam email to retract their support now.

"The legislation we have now is toothless," said Winning.

"Anybody who did sign up to that two years ago and doesn't retract it now is a moron."

At least one other major contributor to the DTI consultation process, The Birmingham Chambers of Commerce, who backed light-touch legislation on B2B email, has since had second thoughts, adding that with hindsight it would have opted for a more hard line approach having seen the extent to which spam has escalated.