Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediaguy
I don't see in any of this stuff I've read now where an affiliate who doesn't spam, hasn't spammed, and acknowledges these facts by signing the "Acknowledgement" of compliance to TopBucks' compliance to no-spam policy and law will land anyone in jail (or worst? you mean worse? what would be worse than jail? they're not taking spammers to Guatanamo Bay are they?!? lol )
.
|
No they take them to Spamtanamo.
Cyberheat's attorney made this request:
"The overriding theory of the DOJ's case - absolute liability for the owners of websites advertised by email - seemed especially ominous to Cyberheat's attorney Pete Wellborn, who stated,
‘Any company with an Internet presence should run - not walk - to the office of their nearest congressperson and demand congressional action to prevent and eliminate this absurdly tortuous construction of CAN-SPAM by the government.'
I just added that we should also ask that they stop wasting our tax payer dollars to find potential
obscenity cases that are thrown out for being unconstitutional; I was not implying the two points (Spam/Obscenity) were connected in this case.
I can't be the only one concerned or interested in a proactive approach to protect my interests.
As the industry starts to feel the pressure of an economic turn and capital is diminshing it is not a coincidence that these cases are hitting now. Don't you see how much easier it is for the DOJ and AG's to go up against these Companies now that they are not as wealthy as they used to be and across boarders with the
new alliances they are not as limited as before.