Spammer Sues List Broker 351
BuckMulligan writes: "This article describes a lawsuit brought by a spam company against a list brokerage warehouse for selling e-mail addresses of persons who didn't opt-in. What this means is that those marketing lists created by data brokers aren't even accurate enough for sending spam."
Spammers? What? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Um.... (Score:2, Interesting)
How many grandmas couldnt even read that small print?
Re:Um.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I suspect that most "Opt-In" mailing lists are derived from people who click through an online service agreement without reading the whole thing or the privacy policy.
The real trouble comes when trying to determine which of the spam that says I can opt-out actually means it, and which of the spam is just harvesting/validating my address.
Thankfully, most of the web sites I use only send me their own spam (which I generally don't mind, especially if I can tell them to stop) but occasionally I get one site that sold my name to a list and voila... instant opt-in on a technicality.
That's why I normally make a new email alias when providing my address to a new site so I can at least attempt to see who sold my name in the first place.
Trying to do the RIGHT thing, it seems... maybe. (Score:5, Interesting)
A more cynical hypothesis is that it was a "wink wink" situation where the marketer knew that the list was probably not what it was purported to be, and held the "sue the list provider" approach as another angle to deflect blame just in case the heat was too much. But that would be a tricky game to play.
Question (Score:4, Interesting)
rm -rf *.spamer
Maybe they did opt in? (Score:2, Interesting)
Just a thought
Maybe these people did opt in for spam.
Only when the clueless AOL newbies realised this ment Hot Teen Sluts twenty times a day did they kick up a fuss and deny everything?
Treeloot (Score:3, Interesting)
There is no such thing as an opt-in mailing list. You can pay other people to send mail to THEIR list of people who have opted in, but no reputable marketer will ever sell you a list with actual e-mail addresses. Nobody, if properly informed, will willingly sign up for e-mail from "anyone who wants to buy my address." Your address could be re-sold unlimited times, and you'd receive a deluge of spam.
3rd party confidential list. (Score:3, Interesting)
It'd be interesting to have an agency that you could send your e-mail address and preferences to that could be checked by potential buyers of e-mail lists.
It could serve as a free service to the people who care enough to act on their need not to recieve spam. Any reputible company would check their databases with the 3rd party database and remove the e-mail addresses of people who opted out of all spam. Maximizing their direct marketing costs of sending out mailings.
Re:Um.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, this is off-topic. Mod me down if you must.
Am I the only one who forsees a day when URLs and hyperlinks as we know them are superceded by Google search strings?
The Google database changes dynamically, of course, but that's currently a small problem. If I'm looking for info on the IBM FAStT700 disk array, as I was this morning, I'm a lot more likely to type "ibm fast700" into Google than I am to navigate through IBM's maze of a web site.
If I don't know exactly what I'm looking for, Google can usually help me find it, or at least something sufficiently close to it to get by.
But if I know exactly what I'm looking for, but don't know where to find it, Google is even more helpful.
Who needs URLs anymore?
Re:Um.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Mandating
a) a confirmation request sent via e-mail, that requires POSITIVE confirmation (the response must include a unambiguous not-readily forged reference to the original message) before "real" addition to the list
b) a simple, obvious, free removal mechanism, which works within a reasonable period (say, 48 hours?)
would help.
Re:the owner's 22? (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh great, I can see the new spam scheme now...
Sigh.
Re:Um.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Step 1: Forge "from" so that bouncebacks won't be an issue. Step 2: Use software to auto-generate half a million email addresses using a dictionary and random "common" numbers such as dates, "69", "1", etc. Step 3: send email. Sit back and enjoy not having to deal with bouncebacks or angry replies.
I used to have an AOL account with the string 'Sara' in it. Every month or so I'd recieve an email with 100 names in the 'to' field and out of curiousity I'd try pulling up a profile on a bunch of them, most would return the results that the user did not exist.
I'd be curious to see who would recieve more spam-- BOTH accounts being equally inactive and on notorious 'spam' email hosts such as yahoo, AOL, MSN, etc. ba56ugnu0i99845@domain.com or saragirl69@domain.com All bets are on the latter.
-Sara
Re:Um.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Another issue. I get quite a few spams that claim that they are not intended for receipients of xx list of states, and they are filtered to prevent residents of those states "to the best of their ability". I can tell you that they have NO ability to filter that --> thats the best ability.
It is all a scam and just another way for spammers to try to fool you or justify they are providing a useful service.
The "Opt in/out" debate pertains to a lot of things and not just emails. The phone company comes to mind on this one. Don't want your phone number published in the phone book or given out in directory assistance? That is an option that they charge for and on a monthly basis. Yes, you have to pay to prevent getting dinner time calls for a motor club.
How about the financial institution debacle last year with the information sharing? I noticed ONE opt out notice that was clearly marked as such. All others were buried inside filler ads and in back of not returned sections of the monthly bill and required a seperate mailing to a different address. On one hand these companies appear to be your consumer oriented friend to get your business and then they jam it up your ass when they think they have you. No wonder there are so many frustrated people in the world today.
Re:I dont wonder (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I dont wonder (Score:2, Interesting)
If they really wanted to stop thier users from getting spammed, they would not have all of their users listed in the member directory by default.
Isn't it nice to have your email instantly published to a list for a spam bot to pick up?
My client did something like this... (Score:5, Interesting)
Several days later, several billable hours of my answering to spam cop and other garbage, they may $50 or $100...
They were totally shocked that there were complaints, they felt that it wasn't spam because it was opt-in...
They do another experiment, this time they PAID for the list and the e-mail being sent... It appears to be a legitimate opt-in list... very few complains, they made almost half their money back...
The only success they had was with a really above board company sending a list to their customers explaining why this service was relevant...
The real joke is that spam DOESN'T make money. The only people making money are the ones selling the lists, or the ones with some real scams and no costs... They are single person operations with really scummy services that they just spam the same people each time...
Oh well...
Most marketting people REALLY believe that there are warehouses of people that REALLY want to be contacted (because they didn't uncheck a box or whattever) and aren't going to be unhappy when you send them e-mail...
Argh...
Alex
They are spammers. (Score:3, Interesting)
It does sound that way, but think about it. You can't buy an opt-in list. Anyone who's running a direct marketing company either realises that or is criminally incompetent. You can pay someone else to send mail to their opt in list, but you simply cannot buy the list from them. When people opt-in for marketing, they opt in for mail from a specific company, not for mail from anyone and everyone.
Think about it. I opt in for marketing from xyz corp., because I like their products. Now they sell their list to a half dozen other companies... have I opted in for the mail that results in? No. Not at all.
And, even if these people are really just that stupid, and really didn't mean to spam, they did, nonetheless, spam, so the term spammer fits. If you spam, you are a spammer, whether you spammed through malice or stupidity.
Re:Always "Opt-In" (Score:3, Interesting)
abuse@[Upstream Provider of website]
Let's see them talk their "we didn't spam" asses out of that mess, shall we?
Re:Question (Score:2, Interesting)
A long time ago, some do-gooders made it illegal to send 'obscene' mail using the USPS. This law made it all the way to the Supreme Court, which arrived at a wacky idea: The law was legal, but obscene can only be determined by the mailbox owner.
Ergo, anyone who has mail delieved by USPS can go down to their post office and declare they find Radio Shack catalogs obscene, or all third class mail obscene, or mail addressed to 'resident' obscene, and the USPS doesn't deliever them anymore.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)