Spot the CAN SPAM violations

I received this piece of unsolicited email today, to an address harvested off a website. How many CAN SPAM violations can you count?

Return-Path:
Received: by m.wordtothewise.com (Postfix, from userid 1003)
  id 166562E196; Wed,  5 Oct 2011 13:50:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [164.193.177.203] (86.sub-75-248-121.myvzw.com
  [75.248.121.86]) by m.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with SMTP id
  850862E185 for <MUNGED>; Wed,  5 Oct 2011 13:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [164.193.177.203][127.0.0.1] by [164.193.177.203]
  [127.0.0.1] (SMTPD32); Wed, 5 Oct 2011 13:49:44 -0700
  Message-ID: <275a6de8fff734e0abd353db00143bb7@g2gm.com>
From: "Ashley Anderson"
To: <MUNGE>
Subject: Do You Want Access to NEW Customers?
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 13:49:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
Does you company need access to fresh databases that can be used
for E-mail Marketing, Direct Mail & Telemarketing?
We have access to 200 Million Consumers & 45 Million
Businesses.=09
Some of our most popular lists are:
> U.S. Realtors - 1,281,916 Full Records=09
> U.S. Lawyers - 269,787 Full Records=09
> U.S. Financial Planners - 265,425 Full Records=09
> U.S. Businesses - 4.8 Million Full Records=09
> U.S. Manufacturers - 1,057,119 Full Records=09
> U.S. Homeowners - 1,326,620 Full Records=09
> U.S. Physicians - 741,809 Full Records=09
> Worldwide Investors - 8,562,140 Emails Only=09
*Much More Available Upon Request=2E
Call us to get a FREE quote!
Thank You,
Ashley Anderson
Data Specialist
Business Networking Services
1 (800) 841-5070

I’m counting at 4 violations, plus aggravated damages because the address was harvested.
How many violations can you find?
Would you trust this company to sell you actual opt-in addresses?

Related Posts

CAN SPAM and the first amendement

From Venkat at Eric Goldman’s blog we find the federal court has rejected an attempt to claim spam was “protected anonymous speech.”
 
 

Read More

Spammer prosecuted in New Zealand

Today (well, actually tomorrow, but only because New Zealand is on the other side of the date line) the NZ Department of Internal Affairs added a 3rd statement of claim against Brendan Battles and IMG Marketing. This third claim brings the total possible fines to $2.1 million.
Brendan is a long term spammer, who used to be in the US and moved to New Zealand in 2006. His presence in Auckland was noticed by Computerworld when a number of editors and staffers were spammed. When contacted by the paper, Brendan denied being involved in the spam and denied being the same Brendan Battles.
New Zealand anti-spam law went into effect in September 2007. The Unsolicited Electronic Messages Act 2007 prohibits any unsolicited commercial email messages with a New Zealand connection, defined as messages sent to, from or within New Zealand. It also prohibits address harvesting.
The Internal Affairs department also appears to be investigating companies that purchased services from Brendan Battles.

Read More

TWSD: breaking the law

I tell my clients that they should comply with CAN SPAM (physical postal address and unsubscribe option) even if the mail they are sending is technically exempt. The bar for legality is so low, there is no reason not to.
Sure, there is a lot of spam out there that does not comply with CAN SPAM. Everything you see from botnets and proxies is in violation, although many of those mails do actually meet the postal address and unsubscribe requirements.
One of my spams recently caught my eye today with their disclaimer on the bottom: “This email message is CAN SPAM ACT of 2003 Compliant.” The really funny bit is that it does not actually comply with the law. Even better, the address it was sent to is not published anywhere, so the company could also be nailed for a dictionary attack and face enhanced penalties.
It reminds me of the old spams that claimed they complied with S.1618.

Read More