California Spam Law: Won't Stop Spam, Will Increase Lawsuits
from the fun-fun-fun dept
I hate spam and would like nothing better than to see an effective anti-spam law put on the books. However, as I’ve said before, the California anti-spam law is not the right law. Plenty of others seem to agree, and everyone believes that the law won’t stand up if tested in court. The problem is what do people do until it’s been tested? The other question is who is going to take on this law. Luckily, it won’t be the Direct Marketing Association, who I don’t trust in the slightest. They say they’ve burned up all their resources fighting the “Do Not Call” list. At a conference among email marketers, some were suggesting that they should file their own lawsuits under the bill in order to purposely clog the court system with such lawsuits. This seems like typical bad marketing thinking that overburdening a system somehow gets extra attention. The right response is that someone who gets sued for doing something that clearly is not spam is going to have to go to court and get the law overturned. Maybe (and this would be the best) it happens to someone who is not associated with an “email marketing” company, but just someone who sends a perfectly reasonable email and gets hit with a lawsuit.
Comments on “California Spam Law: Won't Stop Spam, Will Increase Lawsuits”
Holding the responsible party accoutnable.
I think the company/business/whatever who’s advertisement is being dispersed via spam should be held responsible. It is, after all, their marketing department (directly or indirectly) who are hiring the spamers to send spam.
Cut off the roots, and you kill the plant.
Re: Holding the responsible party accoutnable.
If you do that, the spammers will start sending spam for random companies just to get them in trouble…. They’ll especially focus on anyone who’s an anti-spammer.