-=PCTechTalk=- Re: california spam law: :VSMail mx2
- From: James LaBorde <jlaborde@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:39:20 -0700
There is a difference and when you read the long text of the actual =
bill
they explain it. The difference is that the costs are shifted to the
recipient rather than the sender. In junk mail, the costs are postage =
to
the sender and the only cost is of disposing of it. In email the =
recipient
pays for bandwidth, used HD space, used storage space on the mail =
server
etc. They try to make it equivalent to receiving junk mail with =
postage
due. =20
I find the interesting part of the law that any one of three parties =
can go
after the spammer and/or the advertiser. The three parties include:
the individual receiving the email
the ISP of the recipient
the Attorney General of California
The penalty specified is actual damages or $1000 per incident per email
address. I didn't see much as far as when which penalty is applied. =
The
great thing is that the burden of proof is all on the =
spammer/advertiser.
They have to prove they had your permission and they have to prove that =
they
provided all of the necessary steps to opt out and had the initial =
business
relationship with you to begin with.
Any bets on which ISP files the first lawsuit on January 2, 2004 when =
the
courts open?
James=20
-----Original Message-----
From: kg6ocz [mailto:kg6ocz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 3:25 PM
To: pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: -=3DPCTechTalk=3D- Re: california spam law: :VSMail mx2
Do you REALLY expect ANYTHING the Gov does to make sense????
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Danny Wilsher" <dwilsher@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 2:22 PM
Subject: -=3DPCTechTalk=3D- Re: california spam law:
> what about all the mail I get in my snail mail box? is that any =
different?
> how can they pass a law banning one and not the other? just
curious........
> =D0=E4=F1=F1=FF ..............
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "cris" <cris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "PCTechTalk" <PCTechTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:47 AM
> Subject: -=3DPCTechTalk=3D- california spam law:
>
>
> : Content-Type: text/plain;
> : charset=3D"Windows-1252"
> : Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> : from: http://www.spywareinfo.com/
> :
> : California Bans Spam. All Of It.
> : Permlink | Top
> :
> : California Governor Gray Davis has signed a law that criminalizes =
the =3D
> : sending of commercial email to people who have not explicitly =
requested
=3D
> : it. There are no exceptions to this law, no loopholes to exploit. =
If it
=3D
> : is an email sent in bulk, advertises any product and the recipient =
did =3D
> : not request it, a crime has been committed.=3D20
>
> To unsub or change your email settings:
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
>
> To access our Archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
> //www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
>
> For more info:
> //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=3Dpctechtalk
>
>
To unsub or change your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
For more info:
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=3Dpctechtalk
To unsub or change your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
For more info:
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=pctechtalk
Other related posts:
