Double opt in email and CAN-SPAM
 

I noticed double opt in mail places like join4free are now following all CAN-SPAM rules including requiring that the subject have the words "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" as well as having all images in the email be softcore.

Now according to the FTC website "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" subject marks are only required for unsolicited spam emails.

No where does it say that double opt in email needs this. However J4F claims that they need to comply with the "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" requirement too based on what their attorneys said.

The funny thing about this is that a week ago they told me they didn't need to do "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" even though real spam does so I'm not sure why there's a sudden change now.

So why is this a big deal?

Well I'm noticing that all of J4F's "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" are being caught by yahoo, AOL, and hotmail filters. Honestly I'm not sure how they can be making money with their double opt in email problem which makes me a little uncomfortable.

Now since I don't directly deal with double opt in mail, I didn't have my legal counsel at Devine Milimet & Branch investigate the validity of J4F's statement but I would like to hear a "general" statement from others whether there is any truth in what J4F said or if they are simply taking extra precautions.

Anyone know if free ezine bucks and others do this?

All I have to say is I am going to be a little pissed if it turns out legit double opt in mailers have to comply with bullshit laws that rogue email spammers to this day still do not comply with. It's like the legit mailers are being punished and for shit that spammers have been doing.

^^^What was the point of this? If you're going to post bullshit, don't post at all.

what would be great is if they stoped selling the emails 10000000 times over. I mean damn I tested out their program on a special email and get 125 emails a day on it

whats a g-men ?

as far as i knew double opt-in mailers were exempt from all of the can spam rules. maybe J4F are just afraid of legal problems? i don't know. im not any authority on it but just would like to add that i think its bullshit as well. the whole 'sexually-explicit' idea is worthless anyhow. much like 'explicit lyrics' stickers on cds, if anything it will just help the kids find the xxx easier.

Probably just them being safe rather then sorry. :)

Let's meet up in Bedford, I'll drive there tonight and knock your teeth out

Where do you want to meet

Then I can have something funny to post about

Well if double opt in mailers are exempt I really don't see why J4F is doing it.

Maybe it doesn't make that big of a difference with filters. I haven't checked to see if they were getting filtered so bad before the sexually explicit crap.

I would play it safe and comply with all the rules.You don't want to be the first big test case. I noticed the FEB emails are labeled as well

just for the record candidpublishinginc is a scammer and spammer


:321GFY

Fuck off you idiotic troll. You're the one offering proxies, BP Hosting, Mailer, and Bulk Sponsers.

That makes no sense to me. I think all of these double opt in mailers are totally over reacting.

I just found the rule on the FTC website.

http://www.ftc.gov/os/2004/04/040413...lfinalrule.pdf

"The Rule also exempts situations where a recipient has given his or her prior consent to receipt of a sexually oriented message."

That is clear as day to me that double opt in mail does not require the "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" message. The FTC would not go after you if you are not only doing opt in mailing but DOUBLE opt in mailing.

But hey if these double opt in mailers want to get filtered by AOL, hotmail, and yahoo......they can go right ahead. Somebody smart will start a double opt in program that doesn't follow these rules because they are unnecessary.

lol

this from you?

fuckin spammer.

^^^
Hah and this is coming from you?

You've already made yourself look like a total idiot several times on this board, nobody cares what you think.

just for the record

http://www.candidclicks.com/

allow spam traffic

Spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam.


Sorry, I had a Monty Python moment.