List Mail User wrote:
<whacked out some more stuff that I've condensed below>
To NOT be "spam" and be *cough* condoned UCE, it must
1) Tell you that you're going to get it when you sign up; or
1a) Send you a notification that you are now being signed up for it. (Southwestern Bell doesn't seem to do this either, btw. They created a new list and signed me up for it. Yahoo has also done this before. I had to figure out that they had created new lists, then unsubscribe, before they could start)
2) Give you the option to opt-out, either when you sign up, or in the initial email.
3) Give physical contact information about the company
and
4) Have a publicly, and easily, available set of privacy statements.
This company did not follow 1), 1a), or 4). Thus, it's spam. (2 is debatable. If they don't check it, it's not really a way to get out, is it?). 3) is unknown - he hasn't said.
BW
BW,
If only that were true, I'd love to know it. To the best of my knowledge only your point "2)" is correct, and I did state that one in my message. If you have a pointer to a law regarding the others (sections of CAN-SPAM or relevant state code is enough for me - I can look them up), I *really* would like to see them. (I'll also concede "3)", but only as far as I know regarding financial companies - e.g. banks, credit card companies, insurance firms, brokerage houses, etc..)
Now, what you say *was* the law in California before CAN-SPAM superseded it; But every little bit helps. The "legal" issue I dislike the most is the allowed "sharing" with "affiliated" companies (i.e. anyone who has a co-marketing agreement in place).
Still, the best defense seems to be to use a unique email for every business relationship (which clearly not everyone can do) - I still get an unusual amount of UCE to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (it is all refused at the SMTP level), and I'm sure other companies would take advantage if I didn't tend to use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the forms they insist upon (try to fill out a rebate form without an email address sometime).
Also, I believe your point "4)" did pass the Senate (the infamous quoted Senate bill that used to be common in spam), but was never adopted into any passed legislation.
In far too many ways, the law treats spam like junk email, and ignores the fact that for email the recipient pays the "postage". Different groups have many different definitions of "spam", but UCE has a "legal" definition (and unfortunately is allowed too much, in my opinion). Both SpamCop and Spamhaus have definitions on their websites that I wish were reflected by actual law.
All this is a long and wordy way of saying I'd like to agree with you - I just need a few references to convince me.
Paul Shupak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.spamlaws.com/federal/108s877.shtml
Point 1) - "Tell you that you're going to get it when you sign up"
Can Spam, Definitions. (Section 3, A)
"(A) the recipient expressly consented to receive the message, either in response to a clear and conspicuous request for such consent or at the recipient's own initiative; ..."
Point 2) Give you the option to opt out.
Section 3) a, 5,b,ii (something like that - it's hard to follow)
"(ii) clear and conspicuous notice of the opportunity under paragraph (3) to decline to receive further commercial electronic mail messages from the sender; ..."
Point 3) - Physical contact information
Same section as above. "(iii) a valid physical postal address of the sender."
Point 4) - privacy statement.
You are correct that it wasn't passed as part of a law - but it's considered part of spamming. "I'm not telling you what I'm going to do with it, and we're going to sell it to anyone and everyone"
In some ways, it comes under part B of affirmative consent -
" (B) if the message is from a party other than the party to which the recipient communicated such consent, the recipient was given clear and conspicuous notice at the time the consent was communicated that the recipient's electronic mail address could be transferred to such other party for the purpose of initiating commercial electronic mail messages."
A 'clear and conspicuous notice', to me, would be a privacy statement.