kcjames1138pt2
@kcnet.com
| Its really simple
This law is fine, as long as they allow you to sue the people who cause the mail to be spammed.
For instance, the companies that offer "affiliate" programs with no spam rules, knowing full well people will spam for them. These companies not only get free spamming, they also get to not pay the affiliate. Berry Trim is one of these nice fellows.
Or how about any of the million Equity Loan Guys. Fill out one of these junk spams about loan rates and watch your phone ring off the hook for days from loan companies all over the country who bought your name from another company who bought it from a spammer. Also so they can claim they didn't spam you.
Once you can sue these companies, the once who are actually benefiting from spam, not necessarily the spammers themselves, only them will you have something. If these companies are so afraid they will be sued by 10 million people for $6 million each, they will be too damn afraid to buy questionable lead lists and doing non-sense affiliate programs.
But, Idiot Tauzin and the rest of the for sale lackies on capital hill won't give us that. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| quote:
But, Idiot Tauzin and the rest of the for sale lackies on capital hill won't give us that.
That would require standing up to industry, are you mad?! I query thee, where would these fine men get ad revenue for re-election? |
|
Kalford
Seems To Be An Rtfm Problem.
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-20
Ontario
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Huh?
said by Karl Bode  in his article:
Sure thing. Provided you can find them. Provided they aren't hidden in the bowels of a country that laughs at U.S. legal guidelines.
Florida's a country??????
--
"There are 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't." |
|
elvey
Spamassassin
join:2001-02-17
San Francisco, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
 ·Cogent Communicati..
| reply to kcjames1138pt2
Re: Its really simple
said by kcjames1138pt2:
This law is fine, as long as they allow you to sue the people who cause the mail to be spammed.
...
But, Idiot Tauzin and the rest of the for sale lackies on capital hill won't give us that.
It's worse than that. For me in California, and others with strong antispam laws, like Washington, it takes away the right to sue the spammers and in CA, the advertisers! That's why the DMA is supporting the bill. If/when the bill passes, I plan to send every spam I get to my elected representatives; they can help me deal with it. |
|
