HP3000-L Archives

September 2003, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:06:20 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Joe writes:
> New California law bans spam, allows for suits against senders.
>
> <snip>
> Spam is now illegal in California.

Actually the new law does not take effect until January 1 I believe.

>     The law also allows spam recipients and the state to sue
> for as much as $1,000 per message and up to $1 million per
> unsolicited advertising campaign.

It is *very* important that anyone who does *any* kind of mass mailing
review this new law very carefully.  While it's tempting to think of it
as a law that only applies to outlaw spammers, in reality the most
likely targets will end up being legitimate established companies
(because you can actually *find* them, unlike most spammers) who fall
afoul of this new law accidentally.  And the penalties are $1,000,000
per mailing (if you have over 1000 people on your distribution list),
plus hundreds of individual (small-claims?) suits from everyone and his
dog who ever gets an email from you that they don't like and sees a way
to cash in for $1,000.

Read the full text of the law here (possible wrap):

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0151-0200/sb_186_bill_20030911_en
rolled.html

G.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2