From spamcop at prodigy.net Wed Sep 9 01:44:10 2009 From: spamcop at prodigy.net (Bill) Date: Wed Sep 9 01:45:09 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Where to report major corporation for spamming? Message-ID: Where would I report a major US/International company for spamming (someplace or someone who can get action)? They have multiple brands, and I have proof that once you sign up for email at one of their brands, they use it to send email from their other brands. I do not believe they ask permission to do this at signup and I know that the email only includes a link for getting you off that new brand's list -- you will remain on the master list unless you search their website for a "remove me from all brands" link on their "contact us" page, and I'm not even sure that works since I just got a new round of emails and am sure I removed (or tried to) at least some of those ids from their master list over a month ago. And it's not just me who thinks they are spamming -- all of their emails ended up in my spam folder on Verizon, so clearly they're in the Brightmail list as spammers. I emailed their customer service people about this a month ago when the last round of spam came out. They told me "As per your request we are removing you from any further mailings" but obviously did not report this to anyone else there. I just sent them email telling them to send my complaint to their supervisor so it can be sent to someone who can take care of it. We'll see if they do anything. I tend to doubt it, which is why I want to find someone who has more clout than me who can force them to take a look at it. Thanks.. Bill From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Sep 9 10:52:23 2009 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Sep 9 10:55:08 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? References: Message-ID: Bill wrote: > Where would I report a major US/International company for spamming > (someplace or someone who can get action)? IMO there is an important philosophical impasse that an 'antispammer' (hereafter anti-) must recognize. That is, what an anti- calls spam is generally not a crime. In the US, the only significant law is the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (hereafter the Act), which is an act very permissive to what most anti-s call spam. In your rant, you failed to provide an illustration of what you allege is spam, but I suspect it is not in violation of the Act. Since by my scenario, your argument would be classified as the rant of an anti- while the argument of the major company would be considered within the guidelines defined by the Act; you would /not/ be in the right, while the company /would/ be in the right. Then in my scenario, your wish for something like a 'Spam Cop' to report the 'violator' to would be misguided and you would be the misguided anti- while the company would be the righteous mailer according to the Act. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From spamcop at prodigy.net Thu Sep 10 10:02:59 2009 From: spamcop at prodigy.net (Bill) Date: Thu Sep 10 10:05:08 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4AA90713.6030507@prodigy.net> On 9/9/2009 10:52 AM, Mike Easter wrote: > IMO there is an important philosophical impasse that an 'antispammer' > (hereafter anti-) must recognize. That is, what an anti- calls spam is > generally not a crime. In the US, the only significant law is the > CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (hereafter the Act), which is an act very > permissive to what most anti-s call spam. > > In your rant, you failed to provide an illustration of what you allege > is spam, but I suspect it is not in violation of the Act. So I guess I deserved your reply. Here are the details.The company is GlaxoSmithKline. One of their brands is Ecotrin. If I go to their website (http://www.ecotrin.com/Coupon_Registration/Coupon_Registration.aspx) to download a coupon, it tells me: > By submitting this form you are giving GlaxoSmithKline Consumer > Healthcare permission to provide you with health information, > promotional offers, relevant product news and surveys that request > your feedback. In the future if you do not wish to receive this > information, you will be given the opportunity to opt-out. Please > click here to read our Privacy Statement > . OK so they do tell me that they will send me future information (without a way to opt out, which is probably legal, if nasty, especially since in practice they use it for several of their other brands). But then when that other email comes, the unsubscribe link only has a way to remove yourself from that brand. There is no way in the email to remove yourself from the master GSK list. Only when you search the GSK site and go a couple of links deep in the "contact us" area do you find this page: https://www.imgw.com/servlet/Landing which has a link for "Remove Me From GSK eMail List ". Sadly, I've tried that link, and it does not seem to do what it says -- I keep getting mail from their other products. So, does their lack of providing the link to remove the user from their corporate mailing list in the subsequent emails (as they say they will when you sign up) make them a spammer? Does their not honoring the request to remove me from their corporate list when they say they have make them a spammer? Does Brightmail classifying all of their mail as spam (and having it end up in my Spam folder on Verizon's server) make them a spammer? It not under the strict definition of the law, then almost definitely in practice. Bill From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Sep 10 16:45:49 2009 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Sep 10 16:50:08 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? References: <4AA90713.6030507@prodigy.net> Message-ID: Bill wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> IMO there is an important philosophical impasse that an 'antispammer' >> (hereafter anti-) must recognize. That is, what an anti- calls spam is >> generally not a crime. > GlaxoSmithKline. >> By submitting this form you are giving GlaxoSmithKline Consumer >> Healthcare permission >> you will be given the opportunity to opt-out. Please >> click here to read our Privacy Statement The GSK 'privacy' statement is a non-privacy statement by which you give GSK and all of the entities it wishes access to the information. That is, there is a cookie, there is your private information including eml and thus there is all kinds of salable information which one marketing empire can sell or trade with some other marketing empire. > OK so they do tell me that they will send me future information (without > a way to opt out, which is probably legal, if nasty, especially since in > practice they use it for several of their other brands). But then when > that other email comes, the unsubscribe link only has a way to remove > yourself from that brand. There is a very very close resemblance between permission based direct marketing and spam, with the exception that permission based starts with permission followed by a zillion optout opportunities which work in a limited fashion and non-permission based starts without permission followed by a lot of bogus optout opportunities and being canspam illegal. You have involved yourself with permission based direct marketing mailing lists for which it is generally recommended that you use the optout process and not report as spam. > There is no way in the email to remove > yourself from the master GSK list. You are correct, Sir. > Sadly, I've tried that link, and it does not seem to do what it says -- > I keep getting mail from their other products. I was having some kind of trouble with your links, so I found my own, which looks like this: http://www.imgw.com/forms/gwirrf.html That looks to me like one can optout of any or all of the 28 related 'products' listed. There's a box for all of them and individual boxes for any of them. > So, does their lack of providing the link to remove the user from their > corporate mailing list in the subsequent emails (as they say they will > when you sign up) make them a spammer? It certainly makes them 'rude'. I can't remember exactly what the terms are in the canspam act about what is supposed to happen when a direct marketer fails to comply with the optout process. > Does their not honoring the > request to remove me from their corporate list when they say they have > make them a spammer? I suspect there's a place where canspam noncompliance comes into effect. > Does Brightmail classifying all of their mail as > spam (and having it end up in my Spam folder on Verizon's server) make > them a spammer? Only a 'spammer' in the definition of an anti- or in the definition of brightmail -- besides whatever term you might choose to indicate something that is attempting to be canspam compliant but not succeeding. I think the canspam act allows quite a lot of latitude between 2 parties who have a business relationship, such as you and GSK. > It not under the strict definition of the law, then > almost definitely in practice. In practice, anti-s deal with good spammers (legal marketers and other legal bulk emailers) and bad spammers (canspam noncompliant direct mail marketers) in pretty much the same way. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From spamcop at prodigy.net Fri Sep 11 01:59:32 2009 From: spamcop at prodigy.net (Bill) Date: Fri Sep 11 02:00:09 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? In-Reply-To: References: <4AA90713.6030507@prodigy.net> Message-ID: <4AA9E744.6020805@prodigy.net> On 9/10/2009 4:45 PM, Mike Easter wrote: > I was having some kind of trouble with your links, so I found my own, > which looks like this: > > http://www.imgw.com/forms/gwirrf.html > > That looks to me like one can optout of any or all of the 28 related > 'products' listed. There's a box for all of them and individual boxes > for any of them. > That page does not look familiar to me, so maybe they changed it from the time I used it (I only got the link to post here, I did not go back to it). However, if you look at that list of 28 items, it appears that they are all related to prescription medications or ailments. I am not sure which one of them would prevent me from getting the Aquafresh toothpaste coupon that I got mailings for this week. I think the lesson I've learned here is that the next time I give them an email so I can print one of their coupons, make it a bogus one so I don't get their spam. Right now I use a brand-specific email address at my own domain, so when I get email to tums@xxx.us, I know EXACTLY how they got the address. Anyway, thanks for your analysis of the situation. I still haven't heard back from GSK. I'm sure they will give me some BS excuse. Bill From V at nguard.LH Fri Sep 11 20:28:05 2009 From: V at nguard.LH (VanguardLH) Date: Fri Sep 11 20:30:08 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? References: Message-ID: Bill wrote: > Where would I report a major US/International company for spamming Is the name of this source to remain a secret so no one else can review their TOS or privacy policies regarding use of their customer data by their "affiliates"? > They have multiple brands, > and I have proof that once you sign up for email at one of their brands, > they use it to send email from their other brands. Then YOU established a business relationship with the source. It is likely that the policies at this source states it will share its customer information with its other corporate persona or affiliates. But no one else can check their published TOS or privacy policies because you chose not to identify them. > And it's not just me who thinks they are spamming -- all of their emails > ended up in my spam folder on Verizon, so clearly they're in the > Brightmail list as spammers. That a source runs afoul of a public or private blacklist or algorithms used for anti-spam filtering hardly proves they are a spammer. It merely means the blacklist or algorithm included that source. Are YOU a spammer? Have YOU never been blacklisted despite never sending spam? It happens. Some users suddenly get blacklisted because their dynamic IP address changes and the one they got for a new one was used before by a spam source. Could be some keywords in the e-mails triggered a spam filter. If you defined a rule looking for "dollars" in the Subject, an e-mail from your friend telling you that they'll sell their car to you for Ten Dollars would run afoul of your spam filter. Despite any protest, I'm sure you HAVE heard of false positives. Also, spam filters all have their own bias. Just because Verizon marks it as spam doesn't mean it is spam to YOU. After all, you *did* agree to have a business relationship with this source. Without knowing what are their published TOS or privacy policies, nothing can be said about what you agreed to. You may not have agreed to anything because they don't have any such policies which also means they are under no constraint as to how they use or distribute your data. If you don't read their terms, and you check off that you agree, then you've agreed. "once you sign up for email at one of their brands". So you DID signup. Without reading their terms, or finding they didn't have any, you get stuck with an ignorant action and the reaction therefrom. In the future, unless you have high expectation of trust from the other party, like your bank (but even be careful there to read their policies), you do NOT dole out your true e-mail address just because someone asks you for it or just because you want whatever they seem to be doling out. Learn to use aliases, like from sneakemail.com, spammotel.com, or spamgourmet.com, or use disposable accounts, like from Hotmail, Gmail, or Trashmail.net, until sufficient time has elapsed (like 3-6 months) where you see only e-mails from the subscribed source is the only e-mails coming through those aliases or disposable accounts. Then you can also eliminate having to read their terms because you can delete an alias or disposable account whenever the abuse starts. >From your reply to Easter, you submitted your e-mail address to GlaxoSmithKline. That is a company. Just because you focused on a particular brand or product of theirs doesn't preclude that you subscribe for information from that *company*. You agreed to a business relationship with GSK along with any of their affiliates or collaborative entities. http://www.gsk.com/yourprivacy.htm They claim not to share their customer with 3rd parties. So instead they share them will non-3rd party sources, like their affiliates. As with most, if not all, pharmaceutical entities, they are a conglomerate business. Note that the only restriction they place on your info that they have is: "GSK will not sell or rent personally identifiable information to any third party for any purpose." Well, if they don't /sell/ or /rent/ that info, they are still free to distribute it at no-charge (or possibly in exchange for likewise valued services or products) to 3rd parties. That statement does NOT bar them from freely distributing your info. Don't you ever do your buddy a favor for no charge? Well, then don't you feel like you can later ask your buddy for a no-charge favor? One hand washes the other. From g.hyde at bigNOSPAMpond.net.au Fri Sep 11 21:50:05 2009 From: g.hyde at bigNOSPAMpond.net.au (Geoffrey Hyde) Date: Fri Sep 11 21:55:07 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? References: Message-ID: "VanguardLH" wrote in message news:h8epuh$a67$1@news.spamcop.net... > Bill wrote: > >> Where would I report a major US/International company for spamming > > Is the name of this source to remain a secret so no one else can review > their TOS or privacy policies regarding use of their customer data by > their "affiliates"? Why did you leave out the fact that the OP is in fact claiming that the company is continuing to email him despite having opted out of it? >From the OP's post: > I emailed their customer service people about this a month ago when the > last round of spam came out. They told me "As per your request we are > removing you from any further mailings" but obviously did not report > this to anyone else there. I just sent them email telling them to send > my complaint to their supervisor so it can be sent to someone who can > take care of it. We'll see if they do anything. I tend to doubt it, > which is why I want to find someone who has more clout than me who can > force them to take a look at it. If the company is a dirty company, is slow to remove people from their mailing lists, doesn't remove them properly, and the person continues to receive unwanted email because of any of the above, it should be regarded as a form of spamming, regardless of whether it was originally commercial in nature. That being said, SpamCop is not always the best place to go if you're having trouble removing yourself from some commercial email you don't want to receive from some company. >From what the OP has said of this company sending him unsolicited commercial email, I'd say they are decidedly black-hat - and until proven otherwise - spamming people who have been asked to be removed from their mailing lists. If they don't wish to be considered spammers, I'd strongly suggest that they get a clue and tighten their mailing list belts. Cheers ... Geoffrey Hyde From V at nguard.LH Sat Sep 12 00:29:39 2009 From: V at nguard.LH (VanguardLH) Date: Sat Sep 12 00:30:07 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Re: Where to report major corporation for spamming? References: Message-ID: Geoffrey Hyde wrote: > "VanguardLH" wrote in message > news:h8epuh$a67$1@news.spamcop.net... >> Bill wrote: >> >>> Where would I report a major US/International company for spamming >> >> Is the name of this source to remain a secret so no one else can review >> their TOS or privacy policies regarding use of their customer data by >> their "affiliates"? > > Why did you leave out the fact that the OP is in fact claiming that the > company is continuing to email him despite having opted out of it? Because he is opting out from other lists, not so far from the one he wants to get out. Also, anyone that have ever used opt-outs (that actually worked) knows it takes time to get those lists updated. A month (what the OP stated) is not nearly enough time to determine if you have been removed from their mailing list. The CAN-SPAM law does say the mailer must remove the recipient's entry within 10 days (but may also not actually get the notice until the 30-day period after when they sent their e-mail). "It requires that your email give recipients an opt-out method. You must provide a return email address or another Internet-based response mechanism that allows a recipient to ask you not to send future email messages to that email address, and you must honor the requests. You may create a "menu" of choices to allow a recipient to opt out of certain types of messages, but you must include the option to end any commercial messages from the sender. Any opt-out mechanism you offer must be able to process opt-out requests for at least 30 days after you send your commercial email. When you receive an opt-out request, the law gives you 10 business days to stop sending email to the requestor's email address. You cannot help another entity send email to that address, or have another entity send email on your behalf to that address. Finally, it's illegal for you to sell or transfer the email addresses of people who choose not to receive your email, even in the form of a mailing list, unless you transfer the addresses so another entity can comply with the law." http://www.cybertelecom.org/spam/canspam.htm > If the company is a dirty company, is slow to remove people from their > mailing lists, doesn't remove them properly, and the person continues to > receive unwanted email because of any of the above, it should be regarded as > a form of spamming, regardless of whether it was originally commercial in > nature. Many companies use marketing companies to compile the mailing lists. Many do not update their database(s) until maybe 3 months when they present a new version of the mailing list to their users. Yes, the sender of the spam has removed the recipient from their mailing list but that could simply mean that they submitted a list of opt-outs to the mailing list service and won't get a new mailing list from that service for a couple months from when they sent in the update list. > From what the OP has said of this company sending him unsolicited commercial > email, I'd say they are decidedly black-hat - and until proven otherwise - > spamming people who have been asked to be removed from their mailing lists. Feel lucky if you request for opt-out gets implemented in under 6 weeks. Like the Do-Not-Call phone list, it can be a l-o-n-g time before the request actually gets effected. That they're slow is to their benefit and their legal risk analysis shows they are showing sufficient faith in complying with the law to avoid any legal repercussions. The OP is posting from a Verizon host. They mention Verizon's anti-spam filter is catching the e-mails from these sources and moving them into the Junk folder. So the OP is not seeing these e-mails (unless he purposedly defeats the anti-spam filter by using the webmail interface to view the contents of the Junk/Spam folder at short regular intervals). It is likely that Glaxo is using a service company to compile the mailing lists and even ending out the coupons or other promotional e-mails. The opt-outs might be going to the service provider rather than Glaxo. For awhile, Comcast was using a service company to send out their notification e-mails but looking at the headers showed they did not originate from the Comcast domain. I notified Comcast if they did not want their customers to perceive these e-mails as phish mails that they must have those e-mails branded as coming from Comcast actually come from a Comcast host, even if it was a relay specifically assigned for use by that service provider to spew out the so-called "notifications" from Comcast. Every time I got one of those Comcast notifications that came from their service provider's domain, I'd report it as spam and also as a phish mail to Comcast. As I recall, they changed the setup so those notifications sent by their service provider now do look like they come from Comcast. If the OP believes that Glaxo (via their service provider) is not complying to CAN-SPAM law then he should use the Contact Us links at Glaxo to notify them of the violation and that he will report the abuse to the FTC and FBI and, if applicable, file a complaint at the Internet Crime Complaint Center (http://www.ic3.gov/complaint/default.aspx). Without the complaints and exhibits (which will require a collection of them to provide sufficient proof of violation), they'll have nothing on which to act. I hardly believe that just a month (or even two) is a sufficient time to wait to find out if your opt-out has been received, processed, honored, and implemented. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Sep 23 07:57:33 2009 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Wed Sep 23 08:05:08 2009 Subject: [Schelp] Leaving SpamCop Message-ID: Hi folks -- tomorrow is my last day at SpamCop. After 7 or 8 years it's going to be strange to wake up in the morning, stumble over to the computer (I telecommute) and not tell people that yes, yes they are sending spam. Thanks for the support over the years! Richard, Don and Kelly are still deps so I know I leave you in good hands! Ellen