12 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
12 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Are these political e-mails in violation of Can Spam Act?

by JasonParker
10 replies
I don't know if you are all on these political e-mail lists to watch some of the best copywriters in the world try to win the election through e-mail...

But... I could be wrong, but it seems like they're in violation of the Can Spam Act since they keep changing the From line.

Rule #1 of the Can Spam Act... "Don't use false or misleading header information. Your "From," "To," "Reply-To," and routing information - including the originating domain name and email address - must be accurate and identify the person or business who initiated the message."

Since they are the government, I guess the government isn't going to crack down on them anyway if it were true
#act #emails #political #spam #violation
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    I'm not sure, but I thought email from politicians/candidates was exempt from Can Spam?
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7202470].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Martin Luxton
      Jason,

      What is wrong with changing the "From" info providing it is "accurate" and does "identify the person or business who initiated the message."?

      Not necessarily agreeing with it, just asking why you have a problem with it?

      Martin
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7202560].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JasonParker
        Originally Posted by Martin Luxton View Post

        Jason,

        What is wrong with changing the "From" info providing it is "accurate" and does "identify the person or business who initiated the message."?

        Not necessarily agreeing with it, just asking why you have a problem with it?

        Martin
        I've got no problem with it. Just discussing it.

        On the Mitt Romney list you get communications from Lamar Echols, Matt Rhoades, Paul Ryan, Ann Romney, Marco Rubio, Kerry Healey, Katie Packer Gave, and Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

        That's a lot of different from names.

        So you can use that many different from names and not be in violation of Can Spam Act?

        Those many from names don't exactly "identify the person or business who initiated the message."
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203301].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by JasonParker View Post

          I've got no problem with it. Just discussing it.

          On the Mitt Romney list you get communications from Lamar Echols, Matt Rhoades, Paul Ryan, Ann Romney, Marco Rubio, Kerry Healey, Katie Packer Gave, and Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

          That's a lot of different from names.

          So you can use that many different from names and not be in violation of Can Spam Act?

          Those many from names don't exactly "identify the person or business who initiated the message."
          The name isn't a requirement, or static. It is the email that counts. The idea is that the receiver should be able to easily see who it is from, and it should be trackable by physical address(Can spam requires the pysical address to be in the email, and for it to have the email address), and tracked in the header(Can spam prohibits changing that).

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203644].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by Martin Luxton View Post

        Jason,

        What is wrong with changing the "From" info providing it is "accurate" and does "identify the person or business who initiated the message."?

        Not necessarily agreeing with it, just asking why you have a problem with it?

        Martin
        Changing the from EMAIL is ILLEGAL, at least if it isn't otherwise identified! A person signing up for a list generally does for THAT list! The emails I get ALSO have MANY names, but they are from the SAME EMAIL!

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203631].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KirkMcD
    Spam: Unwanted Text Messages and Email | FCC.gov
    The FCC's ban also does not cover non-commercial messages, such as messages about candidates for public office
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203252].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author PerformanceMan
    Our politicians don't have to follow the same rules we do. Pretty sweet, eh?
    Signature
    Free Special Report on Mindset - Level Up with Positive Thinking
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203298].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by PerformanceMan View Post

      Our politicians don't have to follow the same rules we do. Pretty sweet, eh?
      Yeah, technically a congressman could commit MURDER, and the police are unable to interrupt him if he is on the way to congress!!!! INCREDIBLE! I thought being a felon was supposed to PROHIBIT you from participating. Lately....

      And the false advertising guidelines? They DON'T APPLY to politicians! In Rhode Island, there are two people running, and they are saying that the challenger did or didn't do SPECIFIC things! There is NO gray! It is only one way or the other.

      The SAME exact thing is happening in MA! Of course, in MA, there is an OBVIOUS and INTENTIONAL omission! In school, at least 35-40 years ago, they TAUGHT about it, but who knows TODAY. People often put garbage in with bills that talk about something people WANT to pass. Removing it takes time, and may be near impossible, so it goes to the floor. LATER, a politician may claim that an opponent voted against the meat of the bill, when they REALLY voted against the secret garbage.

      All the guy in MA can say is he is for the meat and that, if he weren't, it would adversely affect his entire loving, and loved, family.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203747].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    I got on one politicians email list, that would make you laugh. I figured it out! They send me about 1.8 emails a day! They are breaking a LOT of laws! As for the can spam, I never heard politicians were exempt!

    As for the emails I get? They LOOKED like they failed with the unsubscribe requirement. It is TINY! It is almost at the VERY VERY VERY end! It is BARELY visible! But it IS there! I don't remember ever giving them my email! But I DID go to their site. Three days ago, they told me it would be ILLEGAL to do what they did yesterday, and that I should pay them THEN. Even if it WEREN'T illegal, telling me it was would make it illegal under FTC guidelines, because they did it. One basic rule of the FTC is to NEVER tell a falsehood to get a person to pay for something that they wouldn't otherwise have paid for at that time. Of course, that wasn't the ONLY law they broke. I first went to the site after I heard that some OTHER laws were broken. H, and the server company has an interesting name! I'm going to have to check THEM out. If they are associated with GOOGLE, for example, that could explain how I got on the list.

    A friend told me that it is likely not from them, but I checked out the names, addresses, etc.... And they check out! The domain is the same one I went to. They started IMMEDIATELY! And even what I went there to check proved to be true. So they ARE "legit".

    But, as you said, WHO can you complain to?

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203607].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author contentwriting360
    Banned
    It's so ironic that politicians exempt themselves from the Anti-Spam act.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7203659].message }}

Trending Topics