Andy Smith wrote:
Although of course just because the registered office might be in
the UK says nothing about where the service is actually provisioned
from; ovh.co.uk - registered office in London, own site hosted in
London, customer sites hosted in France.
true, but I know where to serve the writ :-)
So do you feel confident that you could convince a non-technical
judge or jury that "http://example.com/contact"; is *not* an address
for direct contact via electronic mail making it possible to contact
example.com rapidly and communicating with them in a direct and
effective manner?
yes. Firstly I cannot put that into an email program and send a message
which suggests it is not an "electronic mail address" as per the wording
of the S.I.
The address behind a web form can be obscured and can change without the
user knowing, making continuity of communication or identification of
parties difficult.
The above I would say is similar to giving someone's name and
approximate address and saying "look them up in the phone book" rather
than giving out a phone number.
I would also rely on the countless examples of scammy websites that are
setup and disappear overnight. If I have an email address I have a route
to get hold of other information even if the website is taken down or
blocked on request of a 3rd party. A web form is a web form while it is
there, but it may not be there tomorrow. The email address could equally
well be canned but it has tends to have more of a footprint via headers etc.
I've done a bit of this on the side working to counter share frauds and
the email address has proved useful in tracking to credit cards and
hence to perpetrators, so it isn't a hypothetical.
In http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf
the DTi / OFT make comments like "We do not
consider that information on a website is durable as it can be changed
at any time after the consumer has accessed it. Technological
advances may change what we regard as durable in the future."
although their view on durability has its flaws :-
"Durable medium is not defined in the DSRs. Our view is that it
means a form in which information can be retained and reproduced
but cannot be edited, such as an email that can be printed"
they go on to say..
"The DSRs say that a notice of cancellation will be properly given if
theconsumer gives notice in one of the following ways:
...
X. by faxing or emailing the notice to you on the last fax number or
email address known to the consumer, in which case notice is said
to have been given on the day it was sent."
it's the "last email address known to the customer" that is important,
in this instance you are deemed to have cancelled if you send an email
but it doesn't say anything about filling in a web form !
Unless it is defined in law what "electronic mail" and an "email
address" actually are then I would not personally be confident it
could be done and would not technically wish it to be done since I
see no reason why a technical communications protocol (SMTP) should
be mandated by law.
it isn't mandating the communication method only that an identifiable
address is provided. I guess an X400 address would be equally compliant
legally. Or an SMS text address.
I personally find email to a role address far more convenient than a
web form as I expect would most, and I see your point in that,
however I feel that you, and out-law, are reading more into the law
than is actually present and doing so in a counter-productive way.
if SMTP goes away whatever comes next is still going to have some unique
identifier to direct email to a person or organisation, the prevailing
interpretation among trading standards bodies and others is along the
same lines as mine.
Besides, I hate web forms :-)
Phil
_______________________________________________
Peterboro mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro
