Let's talk CAN SPAM

CheckboxEarlier this week I posted about the increased amount of B2B spam I’m receiving. One message is not a huge deal and I just delete and move on. But many folks are using marketing automation to send a series of emails. These emails often violate CAN SPAM in one way or another.
This has been the law for 13 years now, I find it difficult to believe marketers are still unaware of what it says. But, for the sake of argument, let’s talk about CAN SPAM.

What is CAN SPAM?

CAN SPAM is the US law regulating commercial email. It was passed and signed into law in 2003. It took effect Jan 1, 2004.
CAN SPAM is primarily enforced by the FTC, with the FCC having responsibility for email to certain domains. In 2005 FTC published clarifying rules to help businesses comply with the law.

What does it regulate?

CAN SPAM regulates commercial email. The act defines commercial email as:
The term “commercial electronic mail message” means any electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service (including content on an Internet website operated for a commercial purpose).
Commercial electronic mail messages do not include “transactional” or “relationship” messages. These messages are defined as messages related to a specific transaction (such as receipts and warranty information) or related to a membership (such as a statement or renewal notice).

What are the requirements?

CAN SPAM is pretty simple in what it regulates.

  • Commercial mail cannot have any forgeries.
  • Every email must have physical address for the sender.
  • Every email must provide a way for the recipient to unsubscribe. There are a number of requirements around the unsubscribe process.
    • Users must be able to unsubscribe over the internet, either by replying to the mail or clicking on a link.
    • The reply address or link must be active and functional for at least 30 days after the email is sent.
    • Senders must not require payment for unsubscribes.
    • Recipients only have to provide their email address. They cannot be forced to supply any additional information.
    • Recipients cannot be required to send more than one email or visit more than one webpage to unsubscribe.
  • Unsubscribes must be effective within 10 days of receiving a request.
  • Unsolicited email is prohibited to wireless domains as defined by the FCC.
  • Advertising email must be clearly marked as advertising.
  • Sexually explicit email must be labeled with SEXUALLY EXPLICIT in the subject line.

These are pretty simple requirements. Note, that most of these apply to any commercial email, not just bulk or unsolicited email.

What are the penalties?

The law provides for fines and jail time. Fines can reach $16,000 per violation. Enhanced penalties, including treble damages and jail time, take effect if certain conditions are met. Some of these conditions include harvesting addresses, using false whois information, or making up email addresses.

Who enforces CAN SPAM?

CAN SPAM doesn’t have a private right of action. Enforcement is by federal or state agencies or commercial email providers. Some of the webmail providers have sued spammers for CAN SPAM violations. Mailbox owners, such as businesses, may have standing to sue for CAN SPAM. A series of cases brought by individuals has really killed the ability of individuals to sue under the act.

Is there more?

There is, and you can read the FTC summary if you’re interested. The FTC talks about primary purpose and what’s transactional and what happens when there is more than one sender for a message.

How can you comply?

Compliance is pretty simple. I recommend clients just follow the rules for every email they send out. The rules are so basic, that there is no harm in applying them to emails that might not be covered. I tell clients to do the following for all their commercial email:

  • Include your physical address in every email.
  • Provide a simple unsubscribe link in every email, even transactional ones.
  • Use a valid address in whois, and avoid privacy protection services for email domains.

That’s really CAN SPAM compliance in a nutshell.
For many of my B2B spammers these days, compliance seems overly difficult and complicated. Most of them don’t have unsubscribes. Almost none of them have a physical address in the mail. For the senders who harvested my address off LinkedIn, enhanced penalties apply. As a business owner I could probably successfully file suit against some of these spammers. But that seems time consuming and ineffective.
I’ve been trying to work out new ways to deal with this. I’m considering supplying links to some blog posts here. I may also include a proposal for them to hire me so I can help them send mail that complies with CAN SPAM.
 

Related Posts

Don't like opt-outs? Target your program better.

I get a LOT of spam here. Most of it is marked and trivial to get rid of. Some of it is what I would call semi-legitimate. It’s a real product, but I never asked to receive any information from this company and am not actually part of their demographic. For one time things I just hit delete and move on. Life is too short to complain or opt out of every spam I get. (Tried that, got more mail)
But sometimes if the same sender keeps bothering me, I will send back an email asking them to cease contact. I recently had an occasion where someone sent an initial email trying to sell me bulk SMS, online video and other services. I ignored it because we’re not in the market for any of these services. A week later I get a followup asking why I hadn’t provided feedback to them and if there was a better person to talk to at the company. I looked for a way to opt-out of this message stream, but there wasn’t one. I send a reply telling them we were not interested in speaking to them and to please cease all communication. (“You didn’t receive feedback because I have no interest in talking to you. Please cease all future contact.” Admittedly that was terse, but it was polite.)
My request to cease communication was not well received, nor was it honored. Mind you, they first contacted me trying to sell me services that are totally off what we offer. When I asked them not to contact me, they turned it around that we’d lost business.

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

This message cannot be considered spam

Every once in a while I get spam, usually from a foreign country, that contains the (in)famous Murkowski statement.

Read More