Attention Spam Arrest Users...
Paul Myers posted the sender agreement found on the Spam Arrest sender verification page to the Warriors forum... seems he has a little problem with it. Take a look:
SENDER AGREEMENT - By clicking the "VERIFY" button above, and in consideration for Spam Arrest, LLC forwarding your e-mail (and any e-mails you may send in the future) to the intended recipient (the "Recipient"), you agree to be bound by the following Sender Agreement:You represent and warrant to Spam Arrest and the Recipient that any e-mail you desire to send to the Recipient is not "unsolicited commercial e-mail" i.e., the e-mail does not primarily contain an advertisement or promotion of a commercial product, service or Web site; unless the Recipient expressly consented to receive the message, either in response to a clear and conspicuous request for such consent or at the Recipient's own initiative. Further, you represent and warrant that your transmission of any e-mail does not violate any local, state or federal law governing the transmission of unsolicited commercial e-mail, including, but not limited to, RCW § 19.190.020 or the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. You understand and acknowledge that it is fair and reasonable that you agree to abide by the restrictions set forth in this agreement. You acknowledge and agree that this agreement is central to Spam Arrest's decision to forward your e-mails to the Recipient. Accordingly, if you violate this agreement, Spam Arrest and the Recipient shall be entitled to (1) temporary and/or permanent injunctive relief to restrain any further breaches or violations of this agreement; and (2) damages in the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each violation of this agreement. You acknowledge that such remedies are appropriate and reasonable in light of the costs and expenses Spam Arrest incurs as a result of eradicating and filtering unsolicited commercial e-mail. You acknowledge that the $2000.00 remedy is a reasonable estimate of Spam Arrest's and the Recipient's actual damages. This agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Washington and the exclusive venue for any action related to this agreement shall be held in the state and federal courts located in Washington. You hereby waive any right to object to venue or jurisdiction based on inconvenient forum, lack of personal jurisdiction or for any other reason.
If you are a SpamArrest user and subscribe to a mailing list/ezine/newsletter whatever... be sure to whitelist the list's mailing address. (Go into your 'unverified' folder and authorize any subscription confirmation messages yourself.)
I agree with Paul. List owners who verify are basically setting themselves up to get shot in the butt by people who use this service, while making it a habit to cry "Spam!" just to cause trouble... or don't know how to unsubscribe from lists they've subscribed to.
I'm a satisfied SpamArrest user, but no way am I gonna verify myself for those who have subscribed to my ezine. If you're going to subscribe to a list, learn to use the whitelist!
| #1. | |
| #2. | |
| #3. | |
| #4. |
Let me make sure I understand this. If you're a Spam Arrest user and you have a mailing list that you run through that account, you're at risk? If so, what about using another account?
Posted by: Laurence Baker on February 4, 2005 11:49 AMHi Laurence,
My point was, Spam Arrest users who subscribe to ezines and newsletters should manually add the subscribed publications' addresses to their whitelist, instead of waiting for the editors to verify their addresses.
I doubt editors (including myself) who are familiar with this agreement will click on "Verify" when requests are sent from new subscribers.
Example. Let's say you're an ezine editor, and the Spam Arrest user happens to be a psycho who makes it a habit to make false spam accusations.
This person subscribes to your ad-supported ezine without adding you to their whitelist. You (the list owner) are then asked to verify your address after agreeing to, and giving consent to what's stated in the sender agreement.
If you do verify, you are opening yourself up to false spam accusations by this individual, who can claim they never gave you consent to send them any e-mail containing ads promoting commercial products.
And you (the list owner) are screwed because the moment you clicked on the verify button, you agreed to plead 'guilty' and voluntarily suffer the consequences, when a complaint such as this is filed against you.
~ Carmen
Posted by: Carmen Maranon on February 4, 2005 01:16 PMCarmen,
I see... when I saw "represent" I figured "you" was the Spam Arrest user "representing" Spam Arrest, which I thought was odd.
Understand, I'm not challenging anyone on this, but bottom line, if you can show that they were at your site and opted in, isn't that pretty solid?
One thing that comes to mind is if they are on dial up, where their IP address changes each session, and their ISP doesn't keep track of what addresses they've been assigned and when, you would have nothing. But I don't know how that actually works.
Assuming this doesn't present a problem, I've always understood that if you've got the IP address, you're safe.
And a complaint from one of their users alone shouldn't give them the right to do anything, and the contract doesn't seem to indicate that it does.
Laurence
Posted by: Laurence Baker on February 4, 2005 08:09 PMHi Laurence,
"I've always understood that if you've got the IP address, you're safe."
That's what I thought too... but, since there's money for them (Spam Arrest) to gain, even if it doesn't hold up in court, they just might be ready and willing to make a big stink about it - enough to push your web host or listserver company into suspending/closing your account.
Better safe than sorry...
~ Carmen
Posted by: Carmen Maranon on February 7, 2005 07:04 PMhttp://www.marketingchick.com/blog/mt-tb.cgi/135
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Attention Spam Arrest Users...' from A Marketing Chick Diary.
