Here's what I've done about the fax spamming (I've
received 3 in the last 15 minutes to start the day)...I purchased a fax program,
Symantec Winfax (but any will do) & set it to receive faxes after 1 ring
& my fax machine is set to receive after 3 rings. As long as the
computer is on, the fax program receives all faxes & I can view them before
printing. This way I end up deleting all the junk faxes without
printing.
Here's what a client did to a spam faxer who took
the same attitude with him as he did with you, Swerve. He took a few
pieces of paper & wrote some obscenities on the them with a dark thick
marker, taped them together & faxed them to the offender, but while doing
so, taped the front end to the back end, creating a "loop", so that it faxed
continuosly to the offender. After about an hour or so, the offender
called him & asked him to stop (ironic, eh). Needless to say, he never
received another fax from that company.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 7:44
AM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Spamming
Thanks. U folks are lucky.
In Canada, no such
lack. SPAM faxing is legal.
It's especially fun if you have an
inexpensive fax machine with expensive
ribbons. Costs me like 35
cents everytime i get a fax SPAM.
> From: "Chris Sweeney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed,
30 Jan 2002 05:15:51 -0500
> To: "William X Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Swerve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Spamming
>
> You know in the US unsolicited
faxing is illegal. It falls under the TCPA
> and you the consumer
can enforce it or on enough complaints the FCC will.
> Check out this
address http://www.fcc.gov/eb/tcd/ufax.html
for updated info
> on FCC fillings.
>
> Chris
> -----
Original Message -----
> From: "William X Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
To: "Swerve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 4:45 AM
> Subject: Re[2]:
Spamming
>
>
>> Tuesday, Tuesday, January 29, 2002,
7:42:25 PM, Swerve wrote:
>>
>>> SPAM should be
illegal.
>>> FAX SPAM should be illegal.
>>
>>> Opt-in emailing with activation that requires email
confirmation from
> the
>>> person signing up should be
required for all companies and people
> creating
>>> and
using mailing lists.
>>
>> No thanks, I don't want
the government, any government, dictating how
>> email should be
used. As much as I agree with your statement that
>> companies
should use activation required subscription mechanisms, I
>> would
oppose any legislation that tries to legislate the issue of
>> email
like that.
>>
>> What I do support is adding some postal
mail like restrictions on
>> email, and I would support laws to
accomplish this:
>>
>> 1) That "adult/pornographic"
emails/ads are NEVER to be sent
>> unsolicited, and that a set of
tags be developed that they must use to
>> identify the email, so
that filtering can be done by families with
>> children, etc.
Establish strict consequences for violations, just
>> like in the
postal world (in the postal world, you can never send a
>> sexually
explicit advertisement unsolicited, and all such mailings
>> must be
identified as such before the recipient is exposed to the
>>
material, either on the outer envelope or on an inside envelope to
>>
protect their privacy).
>>
>> 2) Mandatory list removal,
same as in the real world for mailing
>> lists, and telemarketing
call lists.
>>
>> 3) All advertisements must contain
correct headers and correct contact
>> information and removal
instructions.
>>
>> But for any of this to work, the
vigilantes must stop their crusades.
>>
>> But like with
any extremists, there is no negotiating with them, they
>> don't
recognize that they can accomplish a lot more through
>> compromise,
then by their all or nothing approach. It's too bad too,
>>
since it would stand in the way of any real reform of the issue.
>>
>> But, as Chuck will probably come along now and say, I guess none
of
>> this is ontopic. Oh well :)
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> William X Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
--
>>
>> "There is no better way to exercise the
imagination than the study of
>> the law. No artist ever interpreted
nature as freely as a lawyer
>> interprets the truth."
>> --
Jean Giradoux
>>
>
>
|
