Quote:
Originally Posted by raymor
CAN-SPAM is weak as hell. It does say you can't falsify your identity. Don't read it and start thinking what's in CAN-SPAM are the rules. You ISP, payment processor, etc. will shut you down way before CAN-SPAM. Not to mention karma.
We've had no problems with double opt-in, easily identifiable unsubscribe, and automated removal after several bounces. Yahoo is kind if a bitch. They want you to use DKIM or Domain Keys. Reverse DNS is required.
|
Raymor, maybe we're looking at different versions of the CAN-SPAM Act? You should take a look at this page:
http://www.xxxlaw.com/articles/can-spam.html The Act actually _starts out_ with prohibitions on misleading header information - including falsified originating email addresses. Section 5. (a) (1) (A). Here goes:
(a) REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSMISSION OF MESSAGES.—
(1) PROHIBITION OF FALSE OR MISLEADING TRANSMISSION
INFORMATION.—It is unlawful for any person to initiate the
transmission, to a protected computer, of a commercial electronic
mail message, or a transactional or relationship message,
that contains, or is accompanied by, header information that
is materially false or materially misleading. For purposes of
this paragraph—
(A) header information that is technically accurate but
includes an originating electronic mail address, domain
name, or Internet Protocol address the access to which
for purposes of initiating the message was obtained by
means of false or fraudulent pretenses or representations
shall be considered materially misleading;
(B) a ‘‘from’’ line (the line identifying or purporting
to identify a person initiating the message) that accurately
identifies any person who initiated the message shall not
be considered materially false or materially misleading;
and
(C) header information shall be considered materially
misleading if it fails to identify accurately a protected
computer used to initiate the message because the person
initiating the message knowingly uses another protected
computer to relay or retransmit the message for purposes
of disguising its origin.
Now look, this statute hasn't worked, and I don't disagree with any of the posters here that the "real world" practical and pragmatic sanctions of the hosting companies put more of a dent in spam than the CAN-SPAM Act does. But, no, it does flatly outlaw deceptive/misleading/false email addresses.
At least one webmaster, Jeff Killbride is in prison for spam. It was a jury in Phoenix that put him there.
http://www.xxxlaw.com/cases/killbride.html Fraud in transmitting spam is one of the things that put him behind bars.