Skip to comments.
Anti-spam law may benefit some e-marketers
San Francisco Chronicle ^
| 01/02/04
| Carrie Kirby
Posted on 01/02/2004 6:33:41 PM PST by Holly_P
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:45:22 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
The nation's first anti-spam law took effect Thursday, but that doesn't mean e-mail boxes throughout the nation will be free of offers for "herbal Viagra" or travel bargains today.
Far from being pushed out of business, several Bay Area e-mail marketing firms said they expect to prosper under the new law, known as the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; US: California
KEYWORDS: canspam; spam
1
posted on
01/02/2004 6:33:41 PM PST
by
Holly_P
To: Holly_P
Pssst!
This law (??) only applies to American companies, does it not?
99%+ of SPAM comes lately from Red-China!
Do you think they give a dammed about our stinking SPAM laws?
Hip-hip-horray?
2
posted on
01/02/2004 6:49:11 PM PST
by
steplock
(www.FOCUS.GOHOTSPRINGS.com)
To: All
Rank |
Location |
Receipts |
Donors/Avg |
Freepers/Avg |
Monthlies |
|
South Korea |
|
|
|
|
|
10.00
|
1
|
Thanks for donating to Free Republic!
Move your locale up the leaderboard!
3
posted on
01/02/2004 6:49:14 PM PST
by
Support Free Republic
(I'd rather be sleeping. Let's get this over with so I can go back to sleep!)
To: Holly_P
Pssst!
This law (??) only applies to American companies, does it not?
99%+ of SPAM comes lately from Red-China!
Do you think they give a dammed about our stinking SPAM laws?
Hip-hip-horray?
4
posted on
01/02/2004 6:49:20 PM PST
by
steplock
(www.FOCUS.GOHOTSPRINGS.com)
To: steplock
I've been fighting with SPAM filters for years. No matter how I configured the filter some would still get through. It was a losing battle. About 3 weeks ago I switched tactics. I deleted all my SPAM filters and just let it all go straight into the Inbox. I then set up new filters to redirect the emails I expect to see from friends, family, etc. Not a single SPAM gets into my real email buckets and I just glance at and trash the inbox daily.
5
posted on
01/02/2004 7:22:38 PM PST
by
Dutch Boy
To: Holly_P
One thing companies should be aware of is that the new law puts liability on the company whose products are actually being advertised, not the e-mail advertising company, Ward said. This is the only good part (if true!) Everything else in this law is protection for the SPAMmers.
6
posted on
01/02/2004 7:27:40 PM PST
by
Revolting cat!
("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
To: Holly_P
Is this article correct in that the federal law supercedes (does this mean voids) any State laws? Does it in effect establish a federal right to send unsolicited mail?
7
posted on
01/02/2004 9:11:52 PM PST
by
azcap
Comment #8 Removed by Moderator
To: azcap
Does it in effect establish a federal right to send unsolicited mail? That's the way I read it.
Some states already had stricter laws but this one tops all of them.
9
posted on
01/02/2004 9:18:50 PM PST
by
Holly_P
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson