H.R. 2929House108th Congress (2003-2005)Passed House

SPY ACT

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

17 earlier actions

SenateIntro Referral Latest Action

Received in the Senate.

October 6, 2004

View full timeline

HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

July 25, 2003

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Energy and Commerce Committee

July 25, 2003

HouseCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.

Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee

August 8, 2003

HouseCommittee

Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee

June 17, 2004

HouseCommittee

Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.

Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee

June 17, 2004

HouseCommittee

Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

Energy and Commerce Committee

June 24, 2004

HouseCommittee

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 45 - 5.

Energy and Commerce Committee

June 24, 2004

HouseCommittee

Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 108-619.

Energy and Commerce Committee

July 20, 2004

HouseCalendars

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 374.

July 20, 2004

HouseFloor

Mr. Barton (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

October 5, 2004 • 3:00 PM

HouseFloor

Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8080-8089)

October 5, 2004 • 3:00 PM

HouseFloor

DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2929.

October 5, 2004 • 3:00 PM

HouseFloor

At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.

October 5, 2004 • 3:26 PM

HouseFloor

Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8130-8131)

October 5, 2004 • 7:28 PM

HouseFloor

Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 399 - 1 (Roll no. 495).(text: CR H8080-8083)

View vote Passed

October 5, 2004 • 7:36 PM

HouseFloor

On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 399 - 1 (Roll no. 495). (text: CR H8080-8083)

View vote Passed

October 5, 2004 • 7:36 PM

HouseFloor

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

October 5, 2004 • 7:36 PM

SenateIntro Referral

Received in the Senate.

October 6, 2004

Voting History

1 vote recorded • Roll call available

HOUSE

Roll Call Available

October 5, 2004 at 7:38 PM

On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended

Majority required: 2/3 (66.7%)

Passed

399 - 1

Floor Debate

22 members

What members said about H.R. 2929 on the floor

+17

10 Republicans12 Democrats

Rep. Joe BartonR-TX-6 · Oct 5, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2929) to protect users of the Internet from unknowing transmission of their personally identifiable information through spyware…

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2929) to protect users of the Internet from unknowing transmission of their personally identifiable information through spyware programs, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2929.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, today the House is considering legislation to protect consumers against Internet spying.

Internet spying is all too common. Many consumers are totally unaware that even that their computers can be infected with programs that monitor their activity on the Internet and transfer private information to third parties. At the least, this private information is used to drive the annoying pop-up ads that we see when we turn on our computers. At its very worst, spyware is used by unscrupulous operators to steal financial information and even the individual who owns the computer's personal identity.

The term spyware is used to describe a number of nefarious activities on the Internet, all involve spying or stealing information about consumers without their permission. These activities include: Key stroke logging, in which all of the computer user's key strokes are recorded and sent to a third party; homepage highjacking, in which spyware takes control of the computer, highjacks the individual user's homepage to a commercial or in some case a pornographic site; phishing, in which spyware directs false messages to computer users purporting to be from reputable merchants to steal credit card or other financial information from the user for the use of the third party.

Spyware is downloaded on to a computer without the knowledge of the user. Computers can be infected just by visiting Web sites that cause spyware to be downloaded on to any computer visiting that site.

We tested some of the computers in the Committee on Energy and Commerce. We discovered that these computers had been infected with many pieces of spyware, I believe the number was over 60, and that some of it did direct information to third parties about the use of those computer. All of this was done without any notice to the owners of those computers. I would also point out that this was done by getting through at least two fire walls, the House of Representatives' fire wall and the Committee on Energy and Commerce's fire wall.

Technological development moves quickly, much faster than the regulatory or legislative process. It has taken the House 5 years to give regulators additional tools to combat spam, for instance. I am told that the Federal Trade Commission has not brought any cases against purveyors of spyware to date. Our reaction to spyware is the exception to this rule. In town meetings in my congressional district in Texas just this past August, my constituents unanimously expressed outrage at the brazenness of spyware and exhibited a strong desire for us to act as soon as possible against this insidious disease.

Every Member that I have spoken with on both political parties wants to take action to fight spyware. Some have heard from constituents. One of our subcommittee chairmen experienced the effects of spyware firsthand when his own homepage was highjacked. Today, on a bipartisan basis, it is my hope that we will pass this legislation to combat spyware.

The legislation before us would prohibit the sets of practices like highjacking a consumer's homepage. It

would prohibit keystroke logging. It would prohibit sending ads that cannot be closed except by shutting down the computer. It would also provide for a prominent opt-in for consumers prior to downloading any monitoring software under that consumer's computer.

I believe that consumers should be given notice and have the right to consent before monitoring software that collects information about them is added to their computers.

The legislation before us would also require that monitoring software be easily disabled at the direction of the consumer. It would also provide for FTC, Federal Trade Commission, enforcement with significant monetary penalties for those who knowingly violate the act. While criminal penalties may be appropriate for the most egregious behavior, I believe we have an obligation to provide additional protection to consumers' online information by having these civil fines that the FTC would enforce.

Importantly, the SPY ACT before us regulates information-collection programs. These are programs that have the capability to collect personally identifiable information and either transmit that information to a third party or use that information to deliver or display advertising on the computer. The SPY ACT requires companies that are sending ads to the computers to identify with each ad the information collection program that is generating the ad. With this disclosure, consumers will know who is bombarding them with ads and will be able to make their own decision as to whether they wish to be so bombarded.

The SPY ACT sets up a uniform national rule. Internet commerce is inherently interstate in nature. We need one set of rules for such commerce. I want to commend a number of Members for their strong work on this bill. First of all, I would like to thank the bill's sponsor, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono). It is she who has taken the lead to introduce the bill last October when most of us, myself included, had little knowledge of exactly what spyware was. She has been a tireless educator to many of us on its dangers and has worked tirelessly to improve the bill. She has brought dynamic leadership on technology issues to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and her commonsense approach on this legislation has brought the issue to the floor expeditiously. I want to commend her for her strong work.

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), the co-sponsor of the original legislation with the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono), he too has been a great bipartisan partner in this project. He made important contributions to the areas of network- and computer-based security.

The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection has been a key leader on all privacy related issues in this Congress. He has held eight hearings on privacy matters in this Congress and worked with the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) to perfect the legislation that is before us today.

I would also like to commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking minority member and the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) the ranking subcommittee member, for their excellent work at the subcommittee and full committee.

We have had truly a bipartisan effort to perfect this legislation and bring it to the floor today. It shows what can happen when Members on both sides of the aisle work together towards a common purpose.

The bill before us is a significant improvement on the original bill. And it is a result of the fine work that has been done by all Members on all sides of the aisle. This is a good bill. It has passed the Committee on Energy and Commerce overwhelmingly.

Anybody who has held a town meeting on this can tell you automatically that our constituents are opposed to spyware and want us to do something to protect their privacy as soon as possible.

Madam Speaker, I hope that we pass this overwhelmingly.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), the distinguished subcommittee chairman.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York who just spoke for his excellent leadership on this bill. It is a better bill because of his efforts.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono), who, along with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), was an original cosponsor of the original bill.

We think we have the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), subcommittee chairman, on his way; but other than that we have no other speakers.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.

To close the debate, let me simply say I think we have seen in this debate not just the bipartisan support but the unanimous support this bill has. Whether my colleagues represent metropolitan New York City or the suburbs of Chicago or the hurricane-ravaged plains of Florida, the prairies of Texas, or Southern California, we are all hooked up to the Internet; and we all have constituents who are outraged that as they do their Internet shopping and browsing and surfing, these insidious programs called spyware can infect their computers without their permission. Unfortunately, right now it is not even illegal.

What this bill does is make it illegal, and it gives the Federal Trade Commission the authority to impose significant civil fines for using this spyware.

I would also like to point out that thanks to the strong work of the committee staff on both sides of the aisle, we have a bill that the business community supports. Microsoft, the Software Business Alliance, Yahoo, Time Warner who owns AOL, they all support this. Ebay supports this bill. We are going to put those statements of support in the Record at this point.

TimeWarner,

September 21, 2004.

Hon. Joe Barton,

Hon. John Dingell,

House Energy and Commerce Committee, House of

Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Barton and Representative Dingell: On behalf

of TimeWarner and its AOL division, I would like to express

our support for H.R. 2929, the Safeguard Against Privacy

Invasions Act, which was authored by Representatives Bono and

Towns and approved by your Committee in June.

Battling spyware is one of AOL's top business and policy

priorities. Spyware is a growing concern for all Internet

users, wreaking havoc with consumers' computers and

undermining their online experience. We believe that spyware

must be addressed on many fronts, including through

legislation, technology, and consumer education.

We have been pleased to work closely with the House Energy

and Commerce Committee over the past several months on this

legislation. H.R. 2929 will provide some important tools in

the fight against spyware, outlawing destructive behaviors

that can deceive and defraud consumers through the use of

unauthorized software. We appreciate all of the improvements

you have made and continue to make to this bill as it moves

through the process, and we are hopeful that, along with

legislation that has been approved by the Judiciary

Committee, it will soon be considered on the House Floor.

The time is right for strong and effective federal spyware

legislation. We are grateful for the opportunity to work with

you and your Committee on this topic, and are eager to see

this bill move forward so that consumers and legitimate

businesses can enjoy additional anti-spyware protections in

the near future.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Jacobsen,

Vice President,

Global Public Policy.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Rep. John M. McHughR-NY-23 · Oct 5, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 163) to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.

Is that a parliamentary inquiry?

I know the gentleman thinks it is. I am waiting for direction from the Chair.

Mr. Speaker, I would say I support the consideration of the this bill at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I fully support the consideration of this bill at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I would say, if I may, in response to the gentleman's claim, that I am disappointed he has less faith in his power of persuasion than I do, because I came here prepared to be persuaded. But if I must decide now, I would vote no, so I do not claim to be a proponent of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, that leaves me where? I would claim the time in opposition.

Under the rules of the House, I would claim that time in opposition.

Mr. Speaker, I believe the time has already been claimed.

Mr. Speaker, as a matter of comity, I would be happy to split the time in opposition with the distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member on the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is much controversy here. Nobody is going to vote for this bill. If it were controversial, I think we would have a very close vote here. I doubt we will. In fact, I was not going to raise a point of order. I will not. I would ask the Chair rhetorical without expectation of a response, what happens when the sponsor claiming the time in support of the bill actually will vote against it? It will be interesting to see how the final tally is actually taken.

I am fascinated. I have a great deal of respect for the gentleman from New York, my fellow New Yorker, but I find it a bit amusing at best to hear him claim that the reason that this is a controversial issue is we read about it on the Internet. The only thing we read about on the Internet is what some of his colleagues are planting with respect to that.

The basis for our being here today is simply to answer the concerns of the

American people that have been created by political forces who are trying to create controversy where none should exist. The administration clearly, the Department of Defense clearly, and I suspect that at the end of this vote it will be shown the House of Representatives clearly rejects the fact, either before an election, at election or after election, that there is a need, there is a rationale, for returning to mandatory conscription by the United States military.

I would say to the gentleman from New York that he is the only sponsor of a bill in my 12 years in the House that is complaining that his bill has been brought to the floor. We have a great deal of respect for the gentleman. I suspect and I strongly believe he put together his bill with a great deal of conviction and belief, and we felt it time, given the Internet discussion and all the other absolutely baseless charges that were floating about, that this issue be put to rest, not for the issue and not for the concern of politics, but for the comfort of the American people who have been whipped into a frenzy unnecessarily about this issue.

Now some may say today that this legislation is really about the need to establish a system of national service--an attempt to instill in our youth a sense of responsibility and a clearer understanding of the sacrifices made over many years to win our freedoms--and what it takes to better secure our future. And I would say--that is a legitimate topic of discussion--an area that perhaps merits exploration.

But the clear objective of this bill--and the undeniable intent of recent claims of secret plans and post election plots is focused on a return of the draft--forced military conscription.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Michigan feels it is inevitable, he has a chance to vote for the resumption of the draft, if that is what he wants. By the way, he said the bill was introduced 2 days ago. I suspect he misspoke. It was introduced in January of 2003.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am stunned by the fact that my friend from New York stands up in his beginning comments and sites the reason we have to deal with this is because the Internet is saying so, and then criticizes people that it is an Internet rumor. He seems to be very comfortable with his Presidential candidate's position of being everywhere at every time.

Also, I would just say to the gentlewoman from California, who complained about her bill and increasing end-strength, the House Committee on Armed Services which, as we will remember, has already passed a bill into the House and we are in conference with the Senate, would increase end-strength by almost 40,000 troops. So we have responded to that this year and have for the past 2 years as well. Frankly, we did not need her bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes), a distinguished member of the House Committee on Armed Services.

(Mr. HAYES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments, and it proves perfectly why we are here tonight because that is what the message is the American people are listening to, what the gentlewoman just said. And there is one way to dispel this, and that is to defeat this. No President can impose a draft without the consent and the approval of the United States House of Representatives. It will not come tonight or at any other time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

There are few people I have more respect for than the gentleman from Pennsylvania. He made a very eloquent argument, very correctly, for an increase in end strength, not to a return of the draft and for the problems that that would create.

We have an end strength increase of 40,000 in our bill in the House that has passed, and there is a conference with the Senate. Those are the people we need, and we should move on that and not a draft.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), a distinguished member of the Committee on Armed Services.

(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the gentleman's heard of the 9/11 Commission.

I am happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), a distinguished member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).

(Mr. HAYWORTH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), a veteran of the first Gulf War.

(Mr. BUYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), a senior member of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, very simply, this is a bill that is necessary to be dealt with in what I agree is perhaps an unconventional way, but nevertheless has caused great anxiety, great fear and concern amongst mothers, fathers, and children. This is a way to put the fear aside. That should be a primary duty of the House of Representatives. And, as I suspect even the proponents will, a ``no'' vote is the right vote.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill now under consideration, H.R. 163.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Rep. Charles B. RangelD-NY-15 · Oct 5, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire whether the proponent of this motion to suspend supports the bill, and,…

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object.

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire whether the proponent of this motion to suspend supports the bill, and, if he does not, whether or not his motion is in order.

Yes, it is.

Mr. Speaker, the question that I raised before I raised the point of order is not whether he supports consideration of the bill but whether he supports the bill.

Mr. Speaker, based on that, I raise a point of order, and I would like to claim the time in support of the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill because it gives this great august body an opportunity for the first time to discuss whether or not the administration or the party in the majority intends to have a draft.

I suspect that one of the reasons that this has to be cleared up before the election, the evidence clearly indicates that everyone in the Pentagon, the Defense Department, has indicated that we need a robust military force in Iraq. All of the evidence indicates that we have exhausted our active troops; we are exhausting the Reserves; we are exhausting the National Guard.

We have a back-door draft, where we do not let people who enlisted and have finished their term get out. In addition to that, the Army is over there in combat. Where the normal term is 1 year, the Pentagon has indicated they are going to reduce it to 6 months, to go along with what the Marines do, because of fatigue.

It just seems to me as many times as the administration says that they are against a draft, all we hear on the Internet and around the country is that, after the election, they are going to have the draft.

If they are going to have the draft, I support this legislation, even though, quite frankly, I would have preferred that the bill be referred to the Committee on Armed Services, because I think it is important enough to have hearings on this matter and for the administration to really show why they really do not need to get people through an involuntary conscription.

But since they knew I had this bill and since they knew it was election time, I rise in support of the bill, even though I would gladly yield to the committees of jurisdiction, because it just seems to me that, if we abuse the system by continually taking legislation for the purpose of embarrassment and not in order to say that it is so noncontroversial that we should put it on the suspension calendar, then, no matter who is in the majority, we are violating every principle of the House, and that is the reason why the Parliamentarian and the Speaker have decided that I am in control of the time.

This system should be used only when there is no controversy. But I am not a Member of the House that runs away from controversy. Those who run away from it are those people who have the responsibility to discuss bills in the committee with hearings and bring the legislation so the American public can see what you do believe before an election.

But now you cannot even decide who is for the bill, who is for consideration, ``I want it up; I want it down.'' It is a political thing that you are using that determines the lives of people as to who fights in wars and who is exempt from wars and who should do national service.

It is a disgrace, what is going on here today, and you cannot find anyone to put the blame on. You are against your own bill. It came out of your Committee on Rules. You have the majority. But yet you need some way, some vehicle.

And just because justice does not cave in to people who are hypocritical in nature, we got the time to tell you why we support the bill and why we oppose the bill. But, unfortunately, we are doing this on the suspension calendar. The majority, I guess, will say that this is a noncontroversial issue, because if you do not admit that it is controversial, then you are saying that it should not have been on this calendar in the first place.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).

(Mr. CONYERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to applaud the candidness and the honesty of the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services to admit that they are using the Rules of the House of Representatives to rebut the rumors on the Internet that President Bush wants to enact a draft. I thought we did this through the Republican National Committee. This is a political thing.

It may be vicious to believe that people do not trust the President when he says no, and they do not trust Rumsfeld, and they do not trust Republicans; that is a terrible political problem, but do not use my House of Representatives to correct it. Do not use the rules of this House to correct it. This place is a place for legislation and not to play political games.

If you do not have the trust of the American people when you say there is not going to be a draft, then you had better use the Republican National Campaign Committee to rebut it. But each time you think you have to run an election on the Rules of this House, after all of us are gone, we have an obligation to those who succeed us to abide by the Rules of the House that were left to us for one purpose: not to win elections, but to legislate.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) who is an outstanding member of this House of Representatives, and he is in support of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, are we allowed to use the floor of the House to campaign and specifically name the Presidential candidate that we are supporting?

Did I frame my question correctly?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to close, and so if I only have 1 minute remaining, I reserve it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

(Mr. SMITH of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

My Republican colleagues have convinced me they will not vote for a draft before this election, and I appreciate their sincerity in stating that. But I support my bill for the very reasons that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) has done so.

If the issue is the protection of our country against an enemy, then all Americans should have the opportunity to fight and defend for all our freedom so that we can sit here. And there should be a plea for the rich and the poor, which is so eloquently stated but not followed, to be volunteering and joining and having the honor to say they defended our country at a time of war.

Mr. Speaker, that is not going to happen before the election, and because of my 34 years in the House and my respect for the rules, as much as I appreciate the fact that the leadership has brought my bill up, even though they did not support it, they have brought my bill up because they have a problem with the President's integrity on this issue.

So as much as I appreciate that, what I appreciate more are the standing committees that we have in this House, and so I would hope that my bill will be referred to the committee process for hearings so that the entire House of Representatives would understand the necessity for this legislation.

But on this I will vote ``no''.

Rep. John P. MurthaD-PA-12 · Oct 5, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I hate to rise in opposition to both leaderships on both sides of the aisle. I am probably the only one that is going to vote for a draft. I believe we have to start looking at this…

Mr. Speaker, I hate to rise in opposition to both leaderships on both sides of the aisle. I am probably the only one that is going to vote for a draft. I believe we have to start looking at this right now. And I will tell you why it is a serious problem. We have 135,000 troops in Iraq right now. We are going to have to have 135,000 there for at least 2 years. We are training people, the Iraqis about 4,000 a month, and a lot of them are deserting. So there is no way that we have had cooperation with the international community. There is no way we are going to be able to do the fourth round of replacement without some kind of a draft.

Now, I remember the President of the United States asking to extend the National Guard in 1941, just a few months before the attack on Pearl Harbor. He extended it by one vote, and this is serious business here. We can get up and talk politics, we can get up and blame each other for what we are involved in here, but we have to have the personnel to do this job.

I go out to the hospitals every week, and I see these young people who are in their second and third tours in Iraq. I see them without legs and without arms, and I know how hard this is.

Now, let me tell you, on the street that I lived on when I was a kid, four people in my family, my father and three of his brothers, were involved in World War II. Some of them were drafted, and some of them were volunteers. And in the next house, there were seven from the same family. In the next house from that, there were six from the same family that went into World War II. Now, they went; some drafted, and some not drafted. We had 15 million people. We are in a war. And not only a small segment of the population should fight in that war.

I voted against the volunteer army in the first place because I said that I did not believe that, if we got into a crucial situation, we would be able to sustain our national security. This is a national security problem. This is something we have to face now.

I remember standing right over here when Jack Kemp was a Member, and he did not want to vote to extend registration because he believed it was not necessary. I said, Jack, we have to be prepared here. We have to be prepared in case something happens.

They have advertisements for the volunteer army, and they say, we want you to come in. We want you to get an education. We want you to better yourselves. We want you to come in, and you will have a steady job, and an

awful lot of people joined the military with that in mind.

I was talking to a father the other day. He said his father was in World War II. His uncle was in the Battle of the Bulge, and another uncle served in the Pacific. And he was in the Reserves, and his boy was just killed in Iraq. And he was so worried because they were sending people back for the second and third time.

I mean, we have got people in the National Guard who they have stopped letting out. His son was supposed to come home in August, and he was killed.

Now, that is the kind of thing we are facing. This should not only be borne by people who are volunteering because they could not find a job. This is something that every one of us across the board, rich and poor, everyone should be willing to serve in the armed services of the United States.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we would take this seriously. I would hope that we would not get into a political debate about whether this is politics or not. I would hope we would look ahead.

What I said before, my colleagues have got to remember we have got 135,000 troops on the ground. We have sent some of these people back a couple of times. The Army is looking at the possibility of having a 6- month tour, and that will not help the situation because they are going to have to send them back sooner. Some of the people who are supposed to be home for a year are unable to stay home for a year.

I remember being in Europe talking to General Jones, and they extended the 1st Infantry Division. He was worried that the families, because they extended them, how many people would be killed and what a pressure that would put on the families. All of us worry about that. All of us have to worry about that. That is our job, and we have to look ahead.

We cannot just look ahead to the election. We have got to look ahead after the election at what it is going to mean to our troops.

I think that we make a mistake when we get up here and accuse each other when we are in a war. When we were in a war in World War II, we were attacked here, and everybody ought to be willing to serve. I mean, a draft is a fair way to cut, no deferments for anybody. We pick it by lottery; we take the number of people we need and send it down to the Armed Forces.

Let me tell my colleagues something. They are already taking category fours, and I think that is good for the country. I think it is good because the best training people will get in the world today is the military training. They will take category fours, and they will make those people into good citizens. They will work them, and the Army does not like it. The military does not like category fours because it is too much time to train those people.

Let me tell my colleagues something. All of us need everybody to go into the Armed Forces. From every level, from the rich and the poor, from the middle class, everybody needs to go, and we have to, and there is no question about it. If we are going to be there, if what the leaders on both sides are saying, both candidates are saying, we are going to be there. We are not going to leave there until the Iraqis can take over. They cannot take over overnight. It is going to take time to train those people; and if we are going to train those people, we have got to have somebody in the United States who can replace them.

It takes us a year to train. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the chairman, and I put in the money for the extra 30,000 people because we knew they needed 30,000 people this year. I asked the personnel guy, are you going to ask for this in the budget this year? He said, no, sir, we are going to expect a supplemental to take care of it.

The point is, we needed an extra 30,000 people. We have got to face that we are in a war, and we have got to face that everybody should be bearing the burden of this war, not just the few volunteers that are time after time sacrificing and the young people are being so mangled by this war. Their spirit aside, they are doing a marvelous job and are so proud.

When I go out to the hospital every week, Bethesda one week and Walter Reed the next week, and I see these young people, and even then the fighting is so intense that they are saying to me, this is a tough war, Congressman, and we need help, we need support; and we are giving them support. In this Congress, we are giving them everything they need except we are not looking ahead to the very thing that we are going to need down the road and that is additional troops, and we are not meeting the requirement of the National Guard, and that is the first step.

So I would ask Members to reconsider this, and I would hope that a number of us would vote for a draft as a serious business rather than talking of politics and the whole thing.

Rep. Joe WilsonR-SC-2 · Oct 5, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the bill we are voting on today has been used by Democrats to scare young voters and their parents with the lie of an impending draft. As a retired veteran of 31 years' service in the…

Mr. Speaker, the bill we are voting on today has been used by Democrats to scare young voters and their parents with the lie of an impending draft.

As a retired veteran of 31 years' service in the Army National Guard, with three sons serving today in the military, including one serving in Iraq, I agree with the Newsweek magazine expose of October 12 which discredits the rumor has having no basis in fact. Crying wolf about the need for a draft causes doubt about the ability of our Armed Forces and hurts our morale and recruitment.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote against H.R. 163 and end this false rumor.

Mr. Speaker, the bill we are voting on today has been used by Democrats to scare young voters and their parents with the lie of an impending draft.

In South Carolina, the Democratic Party sent out a

despicable campaign letter, disguised as a draft notice. The

Democratic Presidential Candidate John Kerry speaks

disingenuously about a ``back door draft.'' He has said to

elect him President because he ``will give us a foreign

policy that absolutely makes it unnecessary to have a

draft.'' Democrats' false rhetoric has helped fuel a

nationwide scare campaign.

As a retired veteran of 31 years service in the Army National Guard, and with three sons today in the military, one of whom is serving in Iraq, I agree with the Newsweek magazine's expose (Oct. 12th) which discredited the rumors as having no basis in fact. Crying wolf about the need for a draft causes doubt about the ability of our Armed Forces, and hurts our morale and recruitment.

Let's be clear. The all-volunteer American military is succeeding in the War on Terror, and retention remains high. We have the best- trained, best-equipped, most competent military in history. We have a new greatest generation that I have visited three times in Iraq who are dedicated patriots protecting American families by taking the war to the terrorists. There is absolutely no need for a draft. Not one person in the executive branch supports or has talked about reinstating the draft.

Clearly, by resorting to the politics of fear, Kerry and the Democrats have no positive agenda for America. Americans deserve more. President Bush and Republicans have a proud record of achievement in the last 4 years: of tax relief, better education for our children, improved health care through prescription drug coverage, and a strong national defense against terrorism.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote against H.R. 163, and end this false rumor.

[From Newsweek, Oct. 11, 2004]

The Draft: Rumors, and That's All They Are

For months, Democratic operatives have muttered that news

about a revived military

draft could become the silver bullet that stops President

George W. Bush's re-election campaign. But the White House

and Pentagon emphatically deny any intention to reinstitute

conscription: in the first presidential debate last week,

Bush made sure to include a reference in his closing remarks

to the ``all-volunteer Army.''

Democratic presidential contender John Kerry carefully

limited his debate remarks to a factually supportable charge

that current Bush policies may constitute a ``backdoor

draft'' because some soldiers' tours of duty are being

involuntarily extended. But some Kerry supporters--and

prominent Kerry surrogates--are spreading more alarming

rumors about a reinstated draft. ``You do not have the draft

hanging over your heads--not yet. But pay attention, boys and

girls, to what you've got going on in Iraq,'' disabled

Vietnam vet and former U.S. Senator Max Cleland, an important

Kerry backer, recently told a student audience. At the

University of Colorado-Boulder last week, cafeteria tables

were littered with cards signed by self-described Students

for Kerry, warning YOU'RE GONNA GET DRAFTED. (In an ``open

letter'' to America's students, independent candidate Ralph

Nader recently claimed the ``machinery for drafting a new

genration of young Americans is being quietly put into

place.'') The most explicit claims about a Bush plan to

revive conscription have come from onetime Kerry rival Howard

Dean, who charged in a recent newspaper column that draft

boards ``have already been notified that 20-year-olds and

medical personnel will be called up first.'' Laura Gross,

Dean's spokeswoman, says Dean spoke with two draft-board

officials in different parts of the country who told him they

had been ``put on notice there is going to be a draft . . .

Bush has not denied that there's going to be a draft.''

Rumors about a new draft were sparked when a Pentagon Web

site earlier this year posted a solicitation for volunteers

to man local draft boards. But officials say the ad has

appeared every year since 2001, and didn't signal a plan to

reactivate the draft. Two bills in Congress propose reviving

conscription, but both were introduced by anti-Iraq-war

Democrats to highlight the fact that the burden of military

service falls disproportionally on poor people. The bills

have no chance of approval. Selective Service spokesman Dan

Amon says he has fielded ``hundreds'' of calls about the

possibility of a renewed draft, which he calls an ``urban

legend . . . If the White House is planning a draft, you'd

think they might have told us about it.'' The uniformed

military are among the last people who want to see the draft

revived. While U.S. forces are stretched by current

commitments--including Iraq--Army leaders don't want a draft,

don't think they need one and recognize that, politically, it

would be virtually impossible. Two-year waves of unwilling,

unskilled soldiers would contribute little except, the brass

fear, the same discipline problems the Army spent years

purging after Vietnam. Army lobby spokesman John Grady says:

``Nobody wants to go there again.''

Show 8 more

Bill Text

4 versions available

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF

Received in SenateIssued October 6, 2004

        [Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2929 Received in Senate (RDS)]

2d Session
H. R. 2929

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

October 6, 2004

Received

_______________________________________________________________________

AN ACT

To protect users of the Internet from unknowing transmission of their
personally identifiable information through spyware programs, and for
other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Securely Protect Yourself Against
Cyber Trespass Act'' or the ``SPY ACT''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES RELATING TO SPYWARE.

(a) Prohibition.--It is unlawful for any person, who is not the
owner or authorized user of a protected computer, to engage in
deceptive acts or practices that involve any of the following conduct
with respect to the protected computer:
(1) Taking control of the computer by--
(A) utilizing such computer to send unsolicited
information or material from the protected computer to
others;
(B) diverting the Internet browser of the computer,
or similar program of the computer used to access and
navigate the Internet--
(i) without authorization of the owner or
authorized user of the computer; and
(ii) away from the site the user intended
to view, to one or more other Web pages, such
that the user is prevented from viewing the
content at the intended Web page, unless such
diverting is otherwise authorized;
(C) accessing or using the modem, or Internet
connection or service, for the computer and thereby
causing damage to the computer or causing the owner or
authorized user to incur unauthorized financial
charges;
(D) using the computer as part of an activity
performed by a group of computers that causes damage to
another computer; or
(E) delivering advertisements that a user of the
computer cannot close without turning off the computer
or closing all sessions of the Internet browser for the
computer.
(2) Modifying settings related to use of the computer or to
the computer's access to or use of the Internet by altering--
(A) the Web page that appears when the owner or
authorized user launches an Internet browser or similar
program used to access and navigate the Internet;
(B) the default provider used to access or search
the Internet, or other existing Internet connections
settings;
(C) a list of bookmarks used by the computer to
access Web pages; or
(D) security or other settings of the computer that
protect information about the owner or authorized user
for the purposes of causing damage or harm to the
computer or owner or user.
(3) Collecting personally identifiable information through
the use of a keystroke logging function.
(4) Inducing the owner or authorized user to install a
computer software component onto the computer, or preventing
reasonable efforts to block the installation or execution of,
or to disable, a computer software component by--
(A) presenting the owner or authorized user with an
option to decline installation of a software component
such that, when the option is selected by the owner or
authorized user, the installation nevertheless
proceeds; or
(B) causing a computer software component that the
owner or authorized user has properly removed or
disabled to automatically reinstall or reactivate on
the computer.
(5) Misrepresenting that installing a separate software
component or providing log-in and password information is
necessary for security or privacy reasons, or that installing a
separate software component is necessary to open, view, or play
a particular type of content.
(6) Inducing the owner or authorized user to install or
execute computer software by misrepresenting the identity or
authority of the person or entity providing the computer
software to the owner or user.
(7) Inducing the owner or authorized user to provide
personally identifiable, password, or account information to
another person--
(A) by misrepresenting the identity of the person
seeking the information; or
(B) without the authority of the intended recipient
of the information.
(8) Removing, disabling, or rendering inoperative a
security, anti-spyware, or anti-virus technology installed on
the computer.
(9) Installing or executing on the computer one or more
additional computer software components with the intent of
causing a person to use such components in a way that violates
any other provision of this section.
(b) Guidance.--The Commission shall issue guidance regarding
compliance with and violations of this section. This subsection shall
take effect upon the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this
section shall take effect upon the expiration of the 6-month period
that begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION OF COLLECTION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION WITHOUT NOTICE
AND CONSENT.

(a) Opt-In Requirement.--Except as provided in subsection (e), it
is unlawful for any person--
(1) to transmit to a protected computer, which is not owned
by such person and for which such person is not an authorized
user, any information collection program, unless--
(A) such information collection program provides
notice in accordance with subsection (c) before
execution of any of the information collection
functions of the program; and
(B) such information collection program includes
the functions required under subsection (d); or
(2) to execute any information collection program installed
on such a protected computer unless--
(A) before execution of any of the information
collection functions of the program, the owner or an
authorized user of the protected computer has consented
to such execution pursuant to notice in accordance with
subsection (c); and
(B) such information collection program includes
the functions required under subsection (d).
(b) Information Collection Program.--For purposes of this section,
the term ``information collection program'' means computer software
that--
(1)(A) collects personally identifiable information; and
(B)(i) sends such information to a person other than the
owner or authorized user of the computer, or
(ii) uses such information to deliver advertising to, or
display advertising, on the computer; or
(2)(A) collects information regarding the Web pages
accessed using the computer; and
(B) uses such information to deliver advertising to, or
display advertising on, the computer.
(c) Notice and Consent.--
(1) In general.--Notice in accordance with this subsection
with respect to an information collection program is clear and
conspicuous notice in plain language, set forth as the
Commission shall provide, that meets all of the following
requirements:
(A) The notice clearly distinguishes such notice
from any other information visually presented
contemporaneously on the protected computer.
(B) The notice contains one of the following
statements, as applicable, or a substantially similar
statement:
(i) With respect to an information
collection program described in subsection
(b)(1): ``This program will collect and
transmit information about you. Do you
accept?''.
(ii) With respect to an information
collection program described in subsection
(b)(2): ``This program will collect information
about Web pages you access and will use that
information to display advertising on your
computer. Do you accept?''.
(iii) With respect to an information
collection program that performs the actions
described in both paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subsection (b): ``This program will collect and
transmit information about you and your
computer use and will collect information about
Web pages you access and use that information
to display advertising on your computer. Do you
accept?''.
(C) The notice provides for the user--
(i) to grant or deny consent referred to in
subsection (a) by selecting an option to grant
or deny such consent; and
(ii) to abandon or cancel the transmission
or execution referred to in subsection (a)
without granting or denying such consent.
(D) The notice provides an option for the user to
select to display on the computer, before granting or
denying consent using the option required under
subparagraph (C), a clear description of--
(i) the types of information to be
collected and sent (if any) by the information
collection program;
(ii) the purpose for which such information
is to be collected and sent; and
(iii) in the case of an information
collection program that first executes any of
the information collection functions of the
program together with the first execution of
other computer software, the identity of any
such software that is an information collection
program.
(E) The notice provides for concurrent display of
the information required under subparagraphs (B) and
(C) and the option required under subparagraph (D)
until the user--
(i) grants or denies consent using the
option required under subparagraph (C)(i);
(ii) abandons or cancels the transmission
or execution pursuant to subparagraph (C)(ii);
or
(ii) selects the option required under
subparagraph (D).
(2) Single notice.--The Commission shall provide that, in
the case in which multiple information collection programs are
provided to the protected computer together, or as part of a
suite of functionally-related software, the notice requirements
of paragraphs (1)(A) and (2)(A) of subsection (a) may be met by
providing, before execution of any of the information
collection functions of the programs, clear and conspicuous
notice in plain language in accordance with paragraph (1) of
this subsection by means of a single notice that applies to all
such information collection programs, except that such notice
shall provide the option under subparagraph (D) of paragraph
(1) of this subsection with respect to each such information
collection program.
(3) Change in information collection.--If an owner or
authorized user has granted consent to execution of an
information collection program pursuant to a notice in
accordance with this subsection:
(A) In general.--No subsequent such notice is
required, except as provided in subparagraph (B).
(B) Subsequent notice.--The person who transmitted
the program shall provide another notice in accordance
with this subsection and obtain consent before such
program may be used to collect or send information of a
type or for a purpose that is materially different
from, and outside the scope of, the type or purpose set
forth in the initial or any previous notice.
(4) Regulations.--The Commission shall issue regulations to
carry out this subsection.
(d) Required Functions.--The functions required under this
subsection to be included in an information collection program that
executes any information collection functions with respect to a
protected computer are as follows:
(1) Disabling function.--With respect to any information
collection program, a function of the program that allows a
user of the program to remove the program or disable operation
of the program with respect to such protected computer by a
function that--
(A) is easily identifiable to a user of the
computer; and
(B) can be performed without undue effort or
knowledge by the user of the protected computer.
(2) Identity function.--With respect only to an information
collection program that uses information collected in the
manner described in paragraph (1)(B)(ii) or (2)(B) of
subsection (b), a function of the program that provides that
each display of an advertisement directed or displayed using
such information when the owner or authorized user is accessing
a Web page or online location other than of the provider of the
software is accompanied by the name of the information
collection program, a logogram or trademark used for the
exclusive purpose of identifying the program, or a statement or
other information sufficient to clearly identify the program.
(3) Rulemaking.--The Commission may issue regulations to
carry out this subsection.
(e) Limitation on Liability.--A telecommunications carrier, a
provider of information service or interactive computer service, a
cable operator, or a provider of transmission capability shall not be
liable under this section to the extent that the carrier, operator, or
provider--
(1) transmits, routes, hosts, stores, or provides
connections for an information collection program through a
system or network controlled or operated by or for the carrier,
operator, or provider; or
(2) provides an information location tool, such as a
directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link,
through which the owner or user of a protected computer locates
an information collection program.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT.

(a) Unfair or Deceptive Act or Practice.--This Act shall be
enforced by the Commission under the Federal Trade Commission Act (15
U.S.C. 41 et seq.). A violation of any provision of this Act or of a
regulation issued under this Act committed with actual knowledge or
knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances that
such act is unfair or deceptive or violates this Act shall be treated
as an unfair or deceptive act or practice violating a rule promulgated
under section 18 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a).
(b) Penalty for Pattern or Practice Violations.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a) and the
Federal Trade Commission Act, in the case of a person who
engages in a pattern or practice that violates section 2 or 3,
the Commission may, in its discretion, seek a civil penalty for
such pattern or practice of violations in an amount, as
determined by the Commission, of not more than--
(A) $3,000,000 for each violation of section 2; and
(B) $1,000,000 for each violation of section 3.
(2) Treatment of single action or conduct.--In applying
paragraph (1)--
(A) any single action or conduct that violates
section 2 or 3 with respect to multiple protected
computers shall be treated as a single violation; and
(B) any single action or conduct that violates more
than one paragraph of section 2(a) shall be considered
multiple violations, based on the number of such
paragraphs violated.
(c) Exclusiveness of Remedies.--The remedies in this section
(including remedies available to the Commission under the Federal Trade
Commission Act) are the exclusive remedies for violations of this Act.
(d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the date of
the enactment of this Act, but only to the extent that this section
applies to violations of section 2(a).

SEC. 5. LIMITATIONS.

(a) Law Enforcement Authority.--Sections 2 and 3 of this Act shall
not apply to--
(1) any act taken by a law enforcement agent in the
performance of official duties; or
(2) the transmission or execution of an information
collection program in compliance with a law enforcement,
investigatory, national security, or regulatory agency or
department of the United States or any State in response to a
request or demand made under authority granted to that agency
or department, including a warrant issued under the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure, an equivalent State warrant, a
court order, or other lawful process.
(b) Exception Relating to Security.--Nothing in this Act shall
apply to--
(1) any monitoring of, or interaction with, a subscriber's
Internet or other network connection or service, or a protected
computer, by a telecommunications carrier, cable operator,
computer hardware or software provider, or provider of
information service or interactive computer service, to the
extent that such monitoring or interaction is for network or
computer security purposes, diagnostics, technical support, or
repair, or for the detection or prevention of fraudulent
activities; or
(2) a discrete interaction with a protected computer by a
provider of computer software solely to determine whether the
user of the computer is authorized to use such software, that
occurs upon--
(A) initialization of the software; or
(B) an affirmative request by the owner or
authorized user for an update of, addition to, or
technical service for, the software.
(c) Good Samaritan Protection.--No provider of computer software or
of interactive computer service may be held liable under this Act on
account of any action voluntarily taken, or service provided, in good
faith to remove or disable a program used to violate section 2 or 3
that is installed on a computer of a customer of such provider, if such
provider notifies the customer and obtains the consent of the customer
before undertaking such action or providing such service.
(d) Limitation on Liability.--A manufacturer or retailer of
computer equipment shall not be liable under this Act to the extent
that the manufacturer or retailer is providing third party branded
software that is installed on the equipment the manufacturer or
retailer is manufacturing or selling.

SEC. 6. EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.

(a) Preemption of State Law.--
(1) Preemption of spyware laws.--This Act supersedes any
provision of a statute, regulation, or rule of a State or
political subdivision of a State that expressly regulates--
(A) deceptive conduct with respect to computers
similar to that described in section 2(a);
(B) the transmission or execution of a computer
program similar to that described in section 3; or
(C) the use of computer software that displays
advertising content based on the Web pages accessed
using a computer.
(2) Additional preemption.--
(A) In general.--No person other than the Attorney
General of a State may bring a civil action under the
law of any State if such action is premised in whole or
in part upon the defendant violating any provision of
this Act.
(B) Protection of consumer protection laws.--This
paragraph shall not be construed to limit the
enforcement of any State consumer protection law by an
Attorney General of a State.
(3) Protection of certain state laws.--This Act shall not
be construed to preempt the applicability of--
(A) State trespass, contract, or tort law; or
(B) other State laws to the extent that those laws
relate to acts of fraud.
(b) Preservation of FTC Authority.--Nothing in this Act may be
construed in any way to limit or affect the Commission's authority
under any other provision of law, including the authority to issue
advisory opinions (under Part 1 of Volume 16 of the Code of Federal
Regulations), policy statements, or guidance regarding this Act.

SEC. 7. ANNUAL FTC REPORT.

For the 12-month period that begins upon the effective date under
section 11(a) and for each 12-month period thereafter, the Commission
shall submit a report to the Congress that--
(1) specifies the number and types of actions taken during
such period to enforce sections 2(a) and 3, the disposition of
each such action, any penalties levied in connection with such
actions, and any penalties collected in connection with such
actions; and
(2) describes the administrative structure and personnel
and other resources committed by the Commission for enforcement
of this Act during such period.
Each report under this subsection for a 12-month period shall be
submitted not later than 90 days after the expiration of such period.

SEC. 8. FTC REPORT ON COOKIES.

(a) In General.--Not later than the expiration of the 6-month
period that begins on the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Commission shall submit a report to the Congress regarding the use of
tracking cookies in the delivery or display of advertising to the
owners and users of computers. The report shall examine and describe
the methods by which such tracking cookies and the websites that place
them on computers function separately and together, and the extent to
which they are covered or affected by this Act. The report may include
such recommendations as the Commission considers necessary and
appropriate, including treatment of tracking cookies under this Act or
other laws.
(b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``tracking
cookie'' means a cookie or similar text or data file used alone or in
conjunction with one or more websites to transmit or convey personally
identifiable information of a computer owner or user, or information
regarding Web pages accessed by the owner or user, to a party other
than the intended recipient, for the purpose of--
(1) delivering or displaying advertising to the owner or
user; or
(2) assisting the intended recipient to deliver or display
advertising to the owner, user, or others.
(c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 9. REGULATIONS.

(a) In General.--The Commission shall issue the regulations
required by this Act not later than the expiration of the 6-month
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act. Any
regulations issued pursuant to this Act shall be issued in accordance
with section 553 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 10. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act:
(1) Cable operator.--The term ``cable operator'' has the
meaning given such term in section 602 of the Communications
Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 522).
(2) Collect.--The term ``collect'', when used with respect
to information and for purposes only of section 3, does not
include obtaining of the information by a party who is intended
by the owner or authorized user of a protected computer to
receive the information pursuant to the owner or authorized
user--
(A) transferring the information to such intended
recipient using the protected computer; or
(B) storing the information on the protected
computer in a manner so that it is accessible by such
intended recipient.
(3) Computer; protected computer.--The terms ``computer''
and ``protected computer'' have the meanings given such terms
in section 1030(e) of title 18, United States Code.
(4) Computer software.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph
(B), the term ``computer software'' means a set of
statements or instructions that can be installed and
executed on a computer for the purpose of bringing
about a certain result.
(B) Exception for cookies.--Such term does not
include--
(i) a cookie or other text or data file
that is placed on the computer system of a user
by an Internet service provider, interactive
computer service, or Internet website to return
information to such provider, service, or
website; or
(ii) computer software that is placed on
the computer system of a user by an Internet
service provider, interactive computer service,
or Internet website solely to enable the user
subsequently to use such provider or service or
to access such website.
(5) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal
Trade Commission.
(6) Damage.--The term ``damage'' has the meaning given such
term in section 1030(e) of title 18, United States Code.
(7) Deceptive acts or practices.--The term ``deceptive acts
or practices'' has the meaning applicable to such term for
purposes of section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15
U.S.C. 45).
(8) Disable.--The term ``disable'' means, with respect to
an information collection program, to permanently prevent such
program from executing any of the functions described in
section 3(b) that such program is otherwise capable of
executing (including by removing, deleting, or disabling the
program), unless the owner or operator of a protected computer
takes a subsequent affirmative action to enable the execution
of such functions.
(9) Information collection functions.--The term
``information collection functions'' means, with respect to an
information collection program, the functions of the program
described in subsection (b) of section 3.
(10) Information service.--The term ``information service''
has the meaning given such term in section 3 of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153).
(11) Interactive computer service.--The term ``interactive
computer service'' has the meaning given such term in section
230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)).
(12) Internet.--The term ``Internet'' means collectively
the myriad of computer and telecommunications facilities,
including equipment and operating software, which comprise the
interconnected world-wide network of networks that employ the
Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, or any
predecessor or successor protocols to such protocol, to
communicate information of all kinds by wire or radio.
(13) Personally identifiable information.--
(A) In general.--The term ``personally identifiable
information'' means the following information, to the
extent only that such information allows a living
individual to be identified from that information:
(i) First and last name of an individual.
(ii) A home or other physical address of an
individual, including street name, name of a
city or town, and zip code.
(iii) An electronic mail address.
(iv) A telephone number.
(v) A social security number, tax
identification number, passport number,
driver's license number, or any other
government-issued identification number.
(vi) A credit card number.
(vii) Any access code, password, or account
number, other than an access code or password
transmitted by an owner or authorized user of a
protected computer to the intended recipient to
register for, or log onto, a Web page or other
Internet service or a network connection or
service of a subscriber that is protected by an
access code or password.
(viii) Date of birth, birth certificate
number, or place of birth of an individual,
except in the case of a date of birth
transmitted or collected for the purpose of
compliance with the law.
(B) Rulemaking.--The Commission may, by regulation,
add to the types of information specified under
paragraph (1) that shall be considered personally
identifiable information for purposes of this Act,
except that such information may not include any record
of aggregate data that does not identify particular
persons, particular computers, particular users of
computers, or particular email addresses or other
locations of computers with respect to the Internet.
(14) Suite of functionally related software.--The term
`suite of functionally related software` means a group of
computer software programs distributed to an end user by a
single provider, which programs are necessary to enable
features or functionalities of an integrated service offered by
the provider.
(15) Telecommunications carrier.--The term
``telecommunications carrier'' has the meaning given such term
in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153).
(16) Transmit.--The term ``transmit'' means, with respect
to an information collection program, transmission by any
means.
(17) Web page.--The term ``Web page'' means a location,
with respect to the World Wide Web, that has a single Uniform
Resource Locator or another single location with respect to the
Internet, as the Federal Trade Commission may prescribe.

SEC. 11. APPLICABILITY AND SUNSET.

(a) Effective Date.--Except as specifically provided otherwise in
this Act, this Act shall take effect upon the expiration of the 12-
month period that begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Applicability.--Section 3 shall not apply to an information
collection program installed on a protected computer before the
effective date under subsection (a) of this section.
(c) Sunset.--This Act shall not apply after December 31, 2009.

Passed the House of Representatives October 5, 2004.

Attest:

JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.