Slashdot Mirror
Circumventing CAN-SPAM
Dekortage writes "The iMedia Connection newsletter is running a story on how some politicians are violating CAN-SPAM with impunity. Apparently so-called 'political speech' e-mails do not fit the legal definition of spam, even if they are wholly unsolicited and unwanted. In this particular case, the spammer is the attorney general of Florida, who considers himself an anti-spam crusader."
He'll get the message.
... and the fact that american politicians have created a loophole just for them is almost normal from that sad scene ...
Is it spam or not?
Spam is often referred to as UCE "Unsolicited Commercial Email", which his emails were not. We tend to apply a broad label to spam. Often "Any email I don't want.", which may not be fair in all cases. In any case the law seems fairly clear that he was not technically breaking it.
However, as someone who says they are a proponent of anti-spam, engaging in "spam like" behavior can only undercut their position.
There is no invention in the history of mankind that has allowed him to make more mistakes quicker than the computer.
Is,
That if you get on the phone and call these idiots often enough to complain they sometimes get the message.
Just tell them that you will call each time you receive that unsolicited email or phone call from them.
Make absolutely certain that you put the poor staffer on the hotseat. Make sure they fully understand that who they represent is invading your privacy and that you will not tolerate it.
If they try to hang up on you then simply tell them that if they don't hear you out that you are a constituent that will be walking through their front door to give them the piece of your mind in person otherwise. That usually really gets their attention.
Being a bit obnoxious can have it's benefits.
Don't accept crap from those boneheads, you bought and paid for them to be there, get your money's worth!
Caution: Contents under pressure
CAN-SPAM was never designed to prevent spam. It was designed to codify what could legally happen, provide a way for web-sites to harvest e-mail, and finally, to prevent the states from enacting new laws against these companies. For all purpose, it was a giveaway to BIG money that does spam (and inheritenly, the lobbyists). SO anybody who voted for it, supported spam, but could declare that they were fighting against it i.e. bait via name, but switch via action (think patriot act).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
One of the basic premises of government is "do as I say, not as I do". After all, government is the organization holding the unique right to employ coercion as a means to an end; anyone else who does so is a criminal. Do as I say, not as I do.
How much spam can CAN-SPAM can
If CAN-SPAM can can spam?
Not very much, evidently.
I'm seeing a lot of comments here about how "those dirty politicians put a loophole in the law to exempt themselves." I, for one, am glad! This is called freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is extremely annoying...especially to those people who don't want to hear it. Guess what...Its one of the U.S.'s founding principles, so get over it. If there wasn't a loophole in the law for political speech, the ACLU would be up in arms about it, and rightly so!
On a different note, it is stupid that they are trying to redefine the word "Spam". In my mind, Spam isn't limited to email. If you're playing WoW and someone shouts "Lvl 30 Warrior LFG!" 30 times in a row, then they are spamming. "Spam" covers a wide range of annoying actions in the electronic media.
I don't trust politicians to define what "spam" is, and I don't trust them to make laws restricting any kind of online use. They simply don't understand the medium.
EVERY incumbent should be thrown out of office. This is the ONLY way to get anything useful, meaningful, honest or good accomplished: all of the elected congresscritters know that no matter what they do they'll be back in office. Three cycles of single term US Reps will solve the problem nicely and convince them that they had better start staying the course or they won't get those annual raises-that-aren't-raises.
This sounds good, and it seems like a hopeful sign that general approval ratings of congress are at 30% (plus-or-minus), and as a result one might be willing to believe that a "throw-the-bums-out" movement is building.
Unfortunately, it won't happen. As Tip O'Neil pointed out, "all politics are local." Unless a particular congresscritter has gotten up the nose of his or her constituents, it will be pointed out that "why, yes, all of those other no-good, lying, cheating, votes-for-sale politicians should be thrown out! But you need ME to keep the pork-barrel projects coming into our district!" Much as we might like to, we can't vote against Tom DeLay unless we're in his district.
Which isn't to say "don't bother," but rather to say, "don't expect a totally-wiped-out Congress in one election."
Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
Just wait until stuff written like this starts flooding people's mailboxes:
Vote for Hot Hot Cocks
Write-in a vote for Ron Jeremy this November! http://videos.hothotcocks.com/
Join other supporters of hot hot cocks on our campaign website at http://singles.hothotcocks.com/
Our political platform is the right to huge erections and unlimited C1ALIS for all citizens. http://canadianpharmacy.hothotcocks.com/
Yes indeed, we CAN spam! God Bless America!
This is so ridiculously not news. All such legislation has loopholes that protects politicans and their lobbying interests. For example, it's not illegal for AARP to ignore the "do not call list," and as such, the only annoying telemarketing I get is from sham "clothing donation" groups (where the telemarketing firms take 50% or so of the "donation"). Anybody bitching or even insinuating that politicians are somehow "circumventing" CAN-SPAM is an idiot. Such use was pre-ordained in the legislation.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom