| INTERNET
DRUGS |
 |
“Keep
Internet Neighborhoods Safe”
A
Proposal for Preventing the Illegal Internet Sales of Controlled
Substances to Minors
Drug
Strategies; the Center for International Criminal Justice and the
Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School; the
Weill Medical Center at Cornell University; and the Treatment Research
Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, created a new public-private
working group in January 2005 to deal with a largely unrecognized
problem: the sales of highly addictive dangerous drugs over the
Internet to young people. In 2004, 9.3 percent of high school seniors
reported using without prescription the highly addictive narcotic
painkiller, Vicodin, and 3.5 percent used the even more powerful
narcotic Oxycontin. Among tenth graders, 6.2 percent used Vicodin
and 3.5 percent used Oxycontin. After alcohol and marijuana, Vicodin
is now the most widely abused drug among teenagers.
Most
young people (and their parents) don’t realize that these drugs
are as addictive as heroin and that they can lead to overdose and
even death, particularly when combined with alcohol. Although there
are not yet solid data on the magnitude of internet sales of narcotic
prescription drugs without prescription, both DEA and treatment
centers report that adolescents are increasingly relying on the
internet as a source of supply. Extensive research by the Treatment
Research Institute has found hundreds of websites that market aggressively
so that a seventh-grader researching a paper for health class might
enter the term “Vicodin” in any major search engine and see sites
that sell Vicodin and Oxycontin without prescription on two-thirds
or more of the listings provided. Many of these websites are hosted
outside the United States, and drug suppliers promise to (and actually
do) replace any drugs intercepted by U.S. Customs or other law enforcement
agencies.
In
response to this emerging threat, the public-private working group
developed new strategies to curtail Internet drug sales without
prescriptions to adolescents by drug sellers who are likely to be
abroad and unresponsive to threats of increased penalties. Their
businesses depend on the unwitting cooperation of major legitimate
businesses which can readily withdraw their assistance. Thus, our
recommendations focus on such issues as online advertising, payment
transfers and delivery services, as well as U.S. and international
law, and education and prevention initiatives. To address the global
businesses unintentionally supporting this illicit drug trade to
youth, the working group sought and obtained the advice of focus
on representatives from Internet Service Providers (ISPs), search
engines, banking and credit card companies, and government agencies
such as the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the United Nations
International Narcotics Control Board. While all worked toward
identifying effective and practical strategies, not all agreed entirely
with all recommendations.
Since January 2005, the working group has involved more than fifty
participants and has held six meetings as well as a major conference
at Harvard Law School. Based on extensive discussions with participants
from both private companies and Federal agencies, the working group
has developed recommendations designed to curtail illegal Internet
drug sales by targeting key points of control in the chain of Internet
commerce that begins with a search engine, moves to a web site,
and requires a product to be produced and shipped in response to
international financing of sales. Critically important actors include
credit card companies and financial institutions that unknowingly
facilitate these purchases; Internet Service Providers and Search
engines that enable potential adolescent buyers to find drug sellers;
Federal law enforcement agencies; and private and public agencies
dedicated to education and prevention of drug abuse. Central to
the success of this endeavor is the timely sharing of detailed information
about these illegal drug trafficking websites organizations so that
their operations can be shut down. Our recommendations are described
below:
Needed
New Strategies
A.
Identify and monitor websites and other locations on the Internet
that offer to sell controlled substances without a valid prescription
or that do not display a warning that a valid prescription is required.
1. One or more independent organizations should identify on a
continuing, real-time basis websites that offer to sell, or sell,
controlled substances without prescription.
We
believe one or more independent organizations should regularly search
the Internet to identify these websites and other locations that
offer to sell controlled substances without a prescription. No
governmental action is necessary to accomplish this. We are prepared
to establish an independent nonprofit organization, the Indedpendent
Monitoring Group (IMG) that would conduct continuous monitoring
of the Internet and that would develop a real-time template to identify
and distribute regular updates of the names of these websites, including
the URL, payment mechanisms advertised (e.g., Visa, Mastercard),
and any other purchase and delivery data. Others may or may not
wish to do the same.
The
IMG, or similar independent organizations, would serve as an efficient
conduit of publicly available information to credit card companies,
ISPs, common carriers, and key federal agencies so that they could
take appropriate actions as described below.
2.
Provide the names and Internet addresses of these websites to credit
card companies and other payment systems, ISPs, search engines,
common carriers, the U.S. Postal Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration,
and other relevant federal agencies.
Today, the bulk of illicit drug sales are conducted in a relatively
open way. As enforcement increases, new ways will emerge for connecting
buyers and sellers of controlled substances without prescription.
Already there is evidence that chat rooms provide forums for drug
trafficking. Spam is an additional source of offers. As Internet
connectivity continues to expand to cellular telephone systems,
there is every reason to anticipate that these, too, will become
advertising and distribution networks for the illegal sales of controlled
substances. Independent monitoring organizations (IMOs) will have
to continue to develop new methods of tracking and identifying websites
that offer to sell controlled substances without prescription over
the Internet. On
receiving reliable information that those associated with such a
website have come into compliance with U.S. law, these monitoring
groups will relay that information to all parties that were previously
advised of its illegal practices.
3.
Congress should grant immunity to any person, corporation or other
entity for mistaken identification of such websites made in good
faith or for refusing to do business with any of the organizations
mistakenly identified in good faith as offering to sell controlled
substances without a prescription.
While the number of occasions will be limited, the willingness to
share information about locations offering to sell pharmaceuticals
illegally and to act upon that information should not be diminished
by threats of law suits. It is therefore essential to provide a
safe haven for those acting in good faith. Our proposed legislation
provides that protection.
B.
Empower Families to Limit Home Access to Websites Illegally Selling
Controlled Substances by Requiring ISPs to offer their customers
a managed service or device that could be configured to block access
to websites offering to sell controlled substances without prescription.
Parents
are deeply concerned about the safety of their children where they
live and go to school. Parents should be able to limit their children’s
access to drugs in the virtual neighborhood of the Internet, whether
the parents are technically savvy or not. ISPs should be required
to ask each of their customers if they want to have technology put
in place that blocks access to websites offering to sell controlled
substances without prescription. The technology should be easy
for customers to install and use and could be made available directly
by the ISPs or through third party providers. The largest of the
ISPs already offer parental controls which do, or could be adapted
to, serve this valuable function. (This requirement of offering
a filtering service might be waived for ISPs that do not serve minors
or households with children, such as universities and corporate
enterprises, ISPs to the extent that they provide wireless access
points for temporary connections, and ISPs with only small numbers
of clients.)
Earlier
efforts by federal and state governments to mandate filtering systems
in the area of pornography have failed because of spillovers to
legitimate areas. These schemes have most often faltered by permitting
or requiring ISPs to use Internet Protocol (“IP”) based filtering.
Where a filtering system is based on an ISP blocking designated
IP addresses, the filter can block numerous lawful sites that share
the same IP address.
Our
recommendation takes a different, more effective approach by empowering
parents and other customers to decide whether to implement filtering
as part of their ISP service. It would give the ISP the option
of providing a software or hardware filtering system implemented
on the ISP end or on the customer’s computer. Even when a filtering
system is URL or content based, if the ISP can effect the filtering
only by applying it to all of its customers and not just the ones
requesting it, the spillover effect could harm valued First Amendment
interests of otherwise lawful Internet users. If the ISP’s network
configuration does not permit customer specific, URL-based filtering,
or if it is simply more economical for the ISP, the ISP could provide
the filtering system through software on the customer’s computer,
just as many ISPs presently implement anti-virus and anti-spam filters
and Microsoft will implement parental controls that will enable
customers to request filtering of drug sites as part of the forthcoming
VISTA operating system. We do not think legislation is necessary
at this time to effect our recommendation in this area, because
we hope and expect that ISPs will implement this recommendation
voluntarily.
Government
agencies funding or conducting research in the area of sales of
prescription drugs without prescription, such as the Drug Enforcement
Administration and National Institute on Drug Abuse, should be expected
to share, with ISPs and third party providers building and provisioning
filtering systems, the results of research into characteristic traits
of illegal pharmaceutical sites, to help test the efficacy of, and
improve, current computer algorithms for detecting and filtering
them. Information about specific websites offering to sell controlled
substances without prescription would be provided to ISPs and filtering
software manufacturers by the Independent Monitoring Group (IMG),
or similar organizations, and updated constantly. ISPs building
their own lists of illegal and legal sites or purchasing this service
from third party providers would be expected to ensure that sites
identified by the IMG were contained on their lists.
If
ISPs were neither building independent lists nor purchasing them
from third party providers, they would be expected to implement
filtering systems based on those sites identified by the IMG. At
the customer’s request, the customer’s Internet traffic would be
filtered, and the filter updated in a manner similar to Microsoft’s
Windows Update, Symantec’s Live Update, and other companies’ automated
update systems. If after notifying ISPs of illegal pharmaceutical
sites those sites remained accessible to customers requesting filtering,
the IMG would notify relevant parties. In the future, as technologies
converge, similar requirements should apply to cell phone service
providers and all other distributors of electronic communications.
ISPs
alternatively may want to make a simpler and broader option available
to their customers. There is no reason why parents who do not want
to be able to purchase controlled substances over the Internet need
to have access to websites selling them in their home. An ISP could,
directly or through a third party provider such as LookSmart’s Net
Nanny, offer its customers a system that blocks access to any website
selling prescription drugs over the Internet, whether lawfully or
unlawfully.
C.
Prevent Misuse of Financial Institutions to Finance Illegal
Sales of Controlled Substances
The financial sector can and should play a pivotal role in combating
the trafficking of illicit drugs on the Internet. A number of companies
with whom we have discussed these issues deserve credit for already
having begun to address this problem. But all financial institutions,
not just some, have extensive legal obligations to ensure the integrity
of the financial system and these obligations should be clear.
Responsibilities for monitoring the international financial system
for abuse and preventing such abuse should include explicit requirements
to monitor illicit drug sales. The obligations to “know your customer”
and conduct
due diligence have been reinforced by both anti-money laundering
legislation and the USA Patriot Act. The combination provides a
powerful framework that is fully applicable to sales of controlled
substances without prescription.
With the current legal framework in mind, we recommend that the
Department of the Treasury assure itself that the financial sector,
including credit card companies, banks and emerging Internet funding
organizations, such as PayPal, adopt the following policies:
1.
All financial institutions will incorporate into their Terms of
Use and other analogous contractual agreements explicit prohibitions
on the use of their financial networks for any illicit purchase/sale
of drugs.
Most
major financial institutions already include such bans in their
standard contractual language. This practice should be made mandatory
for the industry. Financial institutions’ policies also should include
a contractual due diligence requirement for any organization, including
merchant banks, third party acquirers and other payment processors,
to monitor their networks for any use of the financial network for
illicit drug sales.
2.
All financial institutions will monitor their networks for illicit
drug sales and respond to credible outside information regarding
such activity.
Financial
institutions will ensure that the broad efforts they currently undertake
to monitor networks for fraud and other abuse, explicitly include
the threat of illicit drug sales. Financial institutions will identify
clearly the responsibility within the organization for meeting these
obligations and will report semi-annually on the identification
of threats and actions taken in response to information provided.
Upon
the receipt of credible information related to possible abuse, financial
institutions will test suspect accounts and identify those accounts
that are being abused. In addition, the financial institutions
will ensure that any merchant bank in the system is notified of
such accounts and takes appropriate measures.
3.
When financial institutions, such as credit card companies, identify
an account that is being abused, they will share such information
within their network and, consistent with legal obligations, law
enforcement. The merchant banks and other related actors in the
network should have an obligation to cut off credit to the offending
account.
Financial
networks share large amounts of information to ensure the integrity
of the financial system. All actors within the network should be
required to share information about offending accounts to ensure
that businesses that are barred from credit cannot otherwise obtain
it within the network. If merchant accounts and other third party
actors do not respect such ban, then they, too, should be blocked
from accessing the credit network.
Consistent
with legal obligations relating to customer privacy, all financial
institutions will share information with US law enforcement, regulators
and other organizations used to facilitate information sharing with
respect to all those participating in, or assisting in the financing
of, the illicit purchase/sale of drugs.
D.
Launch nationwide education and prevention campaigns
1.
Enlist key government agencies, such as the National Institute on
Drug Abuse (NIDA) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA) as well as private organizations, such as
the Partnership for a Drug Free America (PDFA), to educate adults
and youth on the dangers of using narcotic pain-killers without
prescription, including accidental injuries, dependence, overdose,
and death, particularly when used in combination with alcohol.
The
most recent national surveys report that adolescent non-medical
use of highly addictive prescription drugs is increasing. These
drugs include opiate painkillers (narcotics) such as Vicodin and
Oxycontin, sedatives such as Ambien, and tranquilizers such as Valium
and Xanax. These increases are occurring in the face of the otherwise
encouraging news that among youth ages 12 to 17, past month illicit
drug use overall has declined 19% since 2001. After alcohol and
marijuana, Vicodin (without prescription) is now the most widely
used drug among high school seniors.
Adults
and youth may not view controlled substances, like Vicodin, which
can be obtained without prescription over the Internet, as equally
“dangerous” as narcotics which can be bought from street dealers
or classmates, especially since the drugs are widely prescribed
by doctors for legitimate medical purposes. The ease with which
these drugs are obtained over the Internet, their packaging, and
their appearance of legitimacy can contribute to the belief that
such drugs are relatively safe when in fact these drugs can be lethal
when taken in high doses or in combination with alcohol. A recent
national survey by the Partnership for a Drug Free America (2005)
reported that almost half of teens said they believe that prescription
drugs, even if not prescribed by a doctor, are much safer than street
drugs and almost a third said that prescription pain killers, even
if not prescribed, are not addictive. Both beliefs are false and
should be corrected.
2.
Encourage Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to educate their customers
about new technological safeguards such as firewalls and parental
control software that can prevent the use of computers for the illegal
purchase of addictive controlled substances.
ISPs
can make technological safeguards widely available to their customers
who want to block websites that offer to sell controlled substances
without prescription. The ISPs should regularly notify all customers
of this opportunity to create a safe Internet neighborhood for their
families as well as continue to update the technology as needed.
3.
Enlist all major Internet search engines to display prominently
a warning whenever Internet users request a search for any controlled
substance that it is illegal to purchase controlled substances without
prescription over the Internet in the United States. Internet search
engines should also work closely with federal agencies to develop
effective links to drug education websites describing the dangers
of non-medical use of powerful prescription drugs, such as Vicodin
or Oxycontin.
To
buy controlled substances over the Internet, adolescents must find
sellers. Many young people use the internet to find everything from
music downloads to movie tickets. Using search engines such as Google
and Yahoo!, easily constructed searches readily lead to hundreds
of websites offering to sell controlled substances without prescription.
Internet search engines can discourage illegal purchases by placing
forceful warnings at the top of the results of any search for controlled
substances without prescription. They can also help educate Internet
users about the dangers of non-prescription use of controlled substances
by providing links to drug education websites, such as www.drugfree.org
(Partnership for a Drug Free America) when these search requests
are made.
Currently,
some search engines offer federal law enforcement agencies budgets
for free advertising links on their sites; however, the inconspicuousness
of the links and the disinterest and resistance of adolescents seeking
to buy drugs greatly limit their effectiveness. Federal agencies
and Internet search engines must work together to ensure that free
advertising links become an effective deterrent tool.
4.
Enlist web publishers that accept advertising to implement screening
or third party review processes to avoid accepting advertising from
sites that offer to sell controlled substances without a valid prescription.
Many
large Internet search companies already employ screening or review
processes to prevent advertisements for sites offering the sale
of controlled substances without a prescription. Other third party
advertisers, Internet portals, advertising networks, and marketing
affiliate companies should be encouraged to implement similar screening
or third party review processes.
E.
Strengthen Law Enforcement and International Cooperation
1.
The Department of State and DEA should each create a dedicated
internal structure of an adequate size to carry out international
law enforcement efforts to curtail illegal sales of controlled substances
without a valid prescription over the Internet. The Department
of State should be expected to act on information received from
the Independent Monitoring Group (IMG) and credit card companies
about Internet drug traffickers, and to use that information to
work with law enforcement counterparts abroad to bring about foreign
prosecution and asset forfeiture. In significant cases, DEA should
seek extradition with the goals of prosecuting these traffickers
in the United States and seizing their assets wherever they may
be.
The Department of State and DEA should each establish an office
to: receive information from the credit card companies, ISPs, IMO’s,
pharmaceutical companies and others; analyze information about illegal
websites received from the IMG or private parties; and then initiate
enforcement efforts. Each should also be organized to pass on to
cooperating private parties information about illicit drug vendors
to the extent that this is consistent with law enforcement needs.
Each office should maintain public records of the reports it receives,
the occasions on which it has requested a delay of any private action,
and the actions it and its foreign counterparts have taken.
2.
Build international cooperation and commitment to fighting this
problem on a global scale.
The Department of State should give high priority to curtailing
illicit Internet sales of controlled substances both in its bilateral
relations with other governments and in its policy positions in
international organizations. In addition, the Department of State
and the U.S. Delegation to the United Nations Commission on Narcotic
Drugs should lead an effort to strengthen enforcement of the Single
Convention on Narcotic Drugs, particularly Articles 30, 31, and
36 (which together require signatories to make criminal the distribution
of narcotic drugs without prescription). The Department of Justice
and DEA should coordinate with the Department of State to pursue
U.S. enforcement efforts under the Single Convention. These departments
and agencies should urge the International Narcotics Control Board
(INCB) to report annually to the United Nations General Assembly
on the scope and seriousness of Internet trafficking in controlled
substances.
3.
The DEA should work with U.S. and multi-national pharmaceutical
companies to identify the source of controlled substances offered
for sale without prescription over the Internet.
Whenever
DEA obtains samples of illegally sold controlled substances through
online purchases by its own agents or from U.S. Customs, the U.S.
Postal Service, or private carriers who have intercepted them, it
should send these samples to pharmaceutical companies to enable
them to determine the source of the drug (e.g., whether it is a
legitimate drug that was illegitimately diverted or a patent-infringing
copy of the company’s drug). The DEA should also obtain information
from covert online purchases and, as soon as consistent with law
enforcement, furnish that information to credit card companies so
that they can identify and shut down merchant accounts being used
for illegitimate purposes.
F.
Enhance Border Interdiction
1.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP” or “Customs”) should
seek and use information from private carrier, pharmaceutical, and
credit card companies and from the Independent Monitoring Group
(IMG) to monitor and intercept illegal shipments into the United
States of controlled substances sold without prescription.
Millions
of packages coming from abroad are processed daily through Customs
international mail facilities. Packages containing illegal controlled
substances are likely to be designed to be generally indistinguishable
from the rest. In addition to conducting random searches of incoming
packages in an effort to intercept illegal drugs, Customs officials
should use information provided by the IMG and credit card companies
regarding the names and addresses used by individuals and companies
who offer to sell controlled substances over the Internet without
a legitimate prescription. Based on this information, Customs officials
should make every effort to target and interdict these illicit shipments.
Upon
interdiction of illegal controlled substance shipments, Customs
should advise the intended recipient of the illegality of the transaction
and, for interdictions considered to be in commercial quantities,
notify the Drug Enforcement Agency for possible prosecution of the
original shipper. Customs should analyze and process data taken
from intercepted shipments of controlled substances (such as point
of origin) to improve the effectiveness of interception of future
shipments.
2.
When private carrier companies have reason to believe that certain
packages may contain illegally sold controlled substances, they
should immediately provide to Customs officials as much identifying
information as possible, including shipping account and credit card
numbers.
Since
private common carriers often receive or pick up packages directly
from shippers, they may be able to identify transactions that appear
suspicious. Under earlier recommendations, carriers will also receive
information on suspicious transactions from the IMG (or another
non-profit serving the same function) and from credit card companies.
If, on these bases, they suspect that they are transporting packages
that contain illegal controlled substances, carriers should provide
to Customs officials all identifying information, including shipping
account and any available credit card numbers. In particular, the
credit card numbers would be useful to Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) and DEA in criminal investigations of commercial shipments.
The Interagency Pharmaceutical Task Force is a vehicle to share
such relevant data about suspicious shipments among CBP, ICE, and
DEA. Private carrier companies should be encouraged to comply with
these procedures through incentive programs; for example, Customs
could use voluntary compliance in this program as a factor in determining
whether a specific carrier receives enhanced customs privileges.
Keep
Internet Neighborhoods Safe is a collaborative effort of the Center
for International Criminal Justice at Harvard Law School, Drug Strategies,
Weill Medical Center of Cornell University and the Treatment Research
Institute at the University of Pennsylvania. For additional information
please contact Philip Heymann, James Barr Ames Professor of Law,
Harvard Law School heymann@law.harvard.edu.
November
13, 2006
|