Re: USPO still trying to SPAM everyone

2000-08-02 Thread Bill Stewart


On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Steven Furlong wrote:
 Subpoenas, SFAIK, don't count if they're sent by regular mail.
They don't count at all unless physicaly put in the recipients hand by the
server. There must be a witnessed transfer. One of the simplest, and
consequence free, ways to handle subpoenas is to avoid the server.

At least in California, if you rent a mailbox from a private 
mailbox provider, you have to appoint them as your agent for
service of process.  (I don't remember if the Federal PO picked this up
as well, but it was definitely in the earlier California law.)
Of course, the law didn't say _what_ you had to appoint your agent
to do for you about serving processes, because it wasn't well-written,
so I appointed my agent to deliver any subpoenas I pay her to deliver (:-)
But the intent of the law is that delivering a subpoena to your mailbox
company 
counts as serving it on you.  I don't know if that applies with
US Snail Post Office boxes or not - they don't accept package delivery
from competing mail carriers, which is one of the big things I want
a mailbox for, so they weren't in the running.  But I'd expect
that they've got some similar provisions in their service contracts.

P.S. Jim Choate left a CDR: in the Subject: line by mistake again,
but I fixed it.


Thanks! 
Bill
Bill Stewart, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF  3C85 B884 0ABE 4639




Re: USPO still trying to SPAM everyone

2000-08-02 Thread Ray Dillinger


Bill Stewart, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

The reason there's a postal monopoly is in large part because of an
anarchist lawyer, Lysander Spooner, who believed that private business
could do a much better job of anything that a government business,
and demonstrated it by running a better postal service in Rochester New York
than the US Snail could, in about the 1840s.  They couldn't beat him
at their own game, so they banned him from competing.


That's oversimplifying things a bit.  Part of the Postal Service's 
traditional mandate is to provide mail delivery *at the same price* 
for everybody.  It's completely unsurprising that they can be 
undercut in Urban markets where the deliveries are mainly short 
and the carriers are very efficient because they can pick up or 
drop off hundreds of items per hour. 

But Spooner's service (and so far every mail service ever proposed 
by a private-enterprise) refused to serve rural customers, because 
out there it takes more resources to get from A to B, and the 
carrier may spend hours just going to get or deliver one letter.  

The legal justification for shutting Spooner's mail service down 
was that by refusing to serve rural customers, he'd be taking 
the profitable markets away from the post office and therefore 
driving costs out of reach for rural customers. The alternative 
to shutting down his service would have been tripling or quintupling 
postage costs for rural delivery, and the feds weren't ready to do 
that.  

Of course, there's a valid argument that if someone wants to live 
ten miles from the end of the nearest road (like my bud Dimu, an 
american Indian living on federal land), then paying some postal-
packing person to spend the necessary six hours walking along 
game trails to deliver his weekly bag of junk mail should be a 
fact of life for junk mailers.  But the feds identified a national 
interest in having everybody pay the same rate, and that is why 
Spooner's service was shut down.

Worthy of note:  having mail everywhere be the same rate means that 
your cross-town deliveries are paying, in part, for the letters I 
send to Dimu and for contracting companies in alaska mailing 
pallets of cinder-blocks to construction sites up in the back of 
beyond -- it's the cheapest method for freight delivery.

Also worthy of note:  If you're willing to serve *EVERYBODY* at 
the same postage rate, the federal argument against having private 
competition against the USPS won't hold up in court against you.

Bear