RE: [nznog] Anti-spam legislation update
The bill will apply to e-mails, text messaging and instant messaging requiring that senders of multiple commercial electronic marketing messages only send them to people who have agreed to get them. Senders of promotional electronic messages will be required to stop sending messages if recipients decide to opt out.
Won't this result in most people getting more spam? 1. Spammer sends spam 2. You 'opt-out' 3. He tells his 20 spam buddies (who may or may not be in NZ and come under fancy new law) that it's an active email address with a real person at the other end 4. His 20 spam buddies give you 20 times the spam Even worse: 1. International spammer sends spam looking like it comes from NZ 2. Joe public 'opts-out' 3. International spammer spams twice as hard and tells his buddies Or am I missing something???
Jonathan Woolley wrote:
Won't this result in most people getting more spam?
1. Spammer sends spam 2. You 'opt-out' 3. He tells his 20 spam buddies (who may or may not be in NZ and come under fancy new law) that it's an active email address with a real person at the other end 4. His 20 spam buddies give you 20 times the spam
Even worse:
1. International spammer sends spam looking like it comes from NZ 2. Joe public 'opts-out' 3. International spammer spams twice as hard and tells his buddies
Or am I missing something???
"The bill will apply to e-mails, text messaging and instant messaging requiring that senders of multiple commercial electronic marketing messages only send them to people who have agreed to get them." That "only" is supposedly enforced by the DIA, which can fine companies half a million and individuals $200k. How they'll be able to catch and prosecute US spammers operating through botnets and hosters in different countries etc, remains to be seen. A clause penalising ISPs that knowingly host spammers and/or refuse to take action against them would be welcome in the new law. -- Juha
The bill will apply to e-mails, text messaging and instant messaging requiring that senders of multiple commercial electronic marketing messages only send them to people who have agreed to get them. Senders of promotional electronic messages will be required to stop sending messages if recipients decide to opt out.
Won't this result in most people getting more spam?
1. Spammer sends spam 2. You 'opt-out' 3. He tells his 20 spam buddies (who may or may not be in NZ and come under fancy new law) that it's an active email address with a real person at the other end 4. His 20 spam buddies give you 20 times the spam
Even worse:
1. International spammer sends spam looking like it comes from NZ 2. Joe public 'opts-out' 3. International spammer spams twice as hard and tells his buddies
Or am I missing something???
I don't think you're missing much at all, based on my read. The wording in one part of the document (which requires 'opt in') implies that the intentions are sound, but the statement "Senders of promotional electronic messages will be required to stop sending messages if recipients decide to opt out" is a biiiig can of worms. Anyone know if a Draft of the bill itself is available for viewing yet and if not, when it will be available and whether submissions are being accepted?
Mark Foster wrote:
I don't think you're missing much at all, based on my read. The wording in one part of the document (which requires 'opt in') implies that the intentions are sound, but the statement "Senders of promotional electronic messages will be required to stop sending messages if recipients decide to opt out" is a biiiig can of worms.
Fax spam will remain legal as well.
Anyone know if a Draft of the bill itself is available for viewing yet and if not, when it will be available and whether submissions are being accepted?
Google broken for you, or no 1337 br0wZ3r sk1llZ0rZ? http://www.med.govt.nz/pbt/infotech/spam/index.html :p -- Juha
Mark Foster wrote:
I don't think you're missing much at all, based on my read. The wording in one part of the document (which requires 'opt in') implies that the intentions are sound, but the statement "Senders of promotional electronic messages will be required to stop sending messages if recipients decide to opt out" is a biiiig can of worms.
Fax spam will remain legal as well.
Hmm. If they diversify it much more, 'Direct Marketing' will become illegal. (Not that I disagree, but that changes the scope of the legislation substantially) I noted the following, FYI 40. Facsimile message services also provide some scope for the sending of unsolicited marketing and promotional messages but there does not presently seem to be a problem in this area and it is proposed that, like Australia, such messages be excluded by way of regulation. [from http://www.med.govt.nz/pbt/infotech/spam/cabinet/paper-one/paper-one-03.html...]
Anyone know if a Draft of the bill itself is available for viewing yet and if not, when it will be available and whether submissions are being accepted?
Google broken for you, or no 1337 br0wZ3r sk1llZ0rZ?
http://www.med.govt.nz/pbt/infotech/spam/index.html
:p
You out-leeted me. Unfortunately i'll need to wait untill i'm not on the back end of an ancient machine on a tiny wee internet link to follow up ;-)Did have a quick look and notice that submissions were taken months back on it, suprising that I didn't see this mentioned on NZNOG? (or has my memory failed?) On the issue of opt-in and opt-out I did notice this: [Also from http://www.med.govt.nz/pbt/infotech/spam/cabinet/paper-one/paper-one-03.html...] The Issue of Consent - Opt-Out or Opt-In? 63. One of the main characteristics of spam is that it is unsolicited and/or unwanted. To address this issue anti-spam legislation has either provided that electronic messages can only be transmitted if the recipient has expressly or implicitly consented to such transmission (opt-in), or that such messages cannot be transmitted if the recipient has already taken action to indicate to the sender that such messages are unwanted (opt-out). 64. The difference between these 2 approaches is that opt-in places the burden of determining whether an email can be legitimately sent on the message sender, whereas the opt-out approach effectively legitimises the initial email and places the burden of determining whether it is legitimate for subsequent emails to be sent on the recipient through the availability of an "opt-out" response. --endquote-- Given they have nominated 'Opt-in' i'd say (or hope?) that they've gone with 'the first email whether it provides opt-out or not is still illegal' and that the phrasing of the quoted article is slightly misleading. Mark.
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:36, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Fax spam will remain legal as well.
Here's how to get off fax spam lists: Disclaimer: Don't actually try this. I take no responsibility if you do. It's not guaranteed to work at all and my get you into trouble. This is only intended for humor. Local fax spammers still have to provide full contact details, usually a fax number, so you can opt-out. Here's how to make it clear: You will need: * An older fax machine that scans the document slowly as it sends it * A vivid marker * Some sellotape Scrawl over the recieved fax using the vivid that you do not wish to continue recieveing fax spam (be rude), then fax it to the advertising company that sent it, and/or to the advertiser. As the fax goes through, tape the bottom of the sheet of paper to the top so that it becomes a continuous loop. Either it will waste masses of paper at the other end or at the very least will clog a line - of course it clogs yours too, so start it as you leave the office before you go out for a beer (to keep sorta on-topic) and let it run overnight. Okay, so technically it's a DoS butt it seems to work for me!
:)
A
participants (4)
-
Andrew Walters -
Jonathan Woolley -
Juha Saarinen -
Mark Foster