Forum Moderators: open
For example this morning I received two emails from a plant and industrial hire company here in the UK. Neither of my email addresses are for businesses that could be remotely interested in what they offer. Clearly they are using a list that they have obtained from spammers and sending out email indiscriminately to many thousands (millions?) of people.
They may be legal since they clearly display their address and company registration number. They also have an unsubscribe via a URL within their own domain.
This practise really riles me because I have to deal with it on a daily basis, legal or not.
Is there anything we can do to combat it? Is it legal? Is there any means of reporting them?
They also seem to deal with only the usual suspects. I am talking about legitimate companies who spam me. These have full address, contact details and company registration numbers available.
First, a reminder of the rules now. This government, in all it's attempts to smooch up to businesses, allows the free spamming to company individuals but not to personal individuals.
If I ran a construction firm and emailed Gordon Brown at his hotmail address I am spamming.
If I send exactly the same email to Gordon but at his work address (.gov.uk) then I am not spamming.
That's the crazy rules we have here at the moment and this is why I get loads of UK spam for company cars to water coolers sent to me at my business email but not my personal email.
I did not enquire about any of those products so IMO they are blatant spam and no tainted spam law is going to stop me reporting them.
All UK business spam sent to any of my business / website / work addresses (where I have never asked for info or made contact) are spamcopped.
[edited by: Frank_Rizzo at 11:49 am (utc) on April 5, 2007]
Over the years I've received many pens, calculators, and even a set of Blue Men Group drum sticks :)
It should surely be illegal to send emails offering products and services that are totally irrelevant. To me this proves conclusively that they are using harvested email lists, which are sent indiscriminately. It should not be allowed.
Any ideas on how best to report it?
aaaaand I continued to receive spam after I had unsubscribed. surprise surprise, spammers ignore rules. I couldn't even go through the unsub process again because my account truly had been deleted... from everything except their email lists I guess.
wayn has a 'we dont spam' trust.e button on their site, so I filed a full and formal spam report with them. I had to go the extra mile, but it worked. I no longer get wayn spam.
But I've never had any other success 'reporting' spam... and the spammers themselves even being identifiable, much less having a trust.e account, is likely pretty rare.
But make sure you hide your domain before reporting as spamcop is instant, and can inform the spammers directly as well as the webhost, isp etc.
A couple of years ago I had a spam from an office supplies company. I'm not interested in their stuff - I didn't ask for it and IMO it was spam.
I reported them via spamcop and within half hour I had this guy phoning me up complaining that I had him blacklisted.
The mistake I made was to paste the full email and headers in the spamcop report. It seems that the spammer was a contact for the domain and thus received a copy of the full headers.
I think spamcop are / were supposed to mung the info so that the reporter is not identifiable but clearly spammers can get around this by individualising emails such as click here?something=12314515152
Anyway, I got a nasty phone call from this dude (he got the phone # from my contact details) and that made me ensure that I always "search and replace" all spam reports before I submit them.
My point is that there should be a formal complaints process against "legitimate" companies who do this. I don't mind if they know it was me who made the complaint. In fact I would be proud of it!
search for
spamlegalaction
Nigel Roberts became the first person to win a court judgment over a company's breach of the UK's anti-spam law.
Then search for
scotchspam
Gordon Dick was the next to sue.
This needs to snowball like the bank charges claims. If more people filled in spam reports and threatened to sue then spam here will dry up quicker than a spam fritter on a hotplate.
Having said all that.. eventually I found that the satisfaction of taking one of these creeps offline (it only takes them a few hours to get back in business) did NOT outweigh the time and trouble it took to report them so I've pretty much given up on it and now rely almost totally on banning and filtering. I can't beat them and I don't want to join them so now I try to ignore them. If it's a good day and everything's running smoothly and my attitude is positive, they don't bother me at all.
My point is that there should be a formal complaints process against "legitimate" companies who do this.
Report them in to their host.
You can look at the headers of the spam email. If they're not forged you can ascertain (sometimes) which ISP or website it was sent from.
Thanks but there is no need to do this. As I said previously the email points directly to their website domain name and it was sent from that domain. trheir identity is not in any doubt.
This is not the male enhancement / casino / stock share type spam which are sent out via botnets, and open proxies from overseas countries.
This is spam from numpties who have bought email lists (or crudely gathered them themselves with a $29.95 harvesting tool) and then procede to spam UK businesses.
The problem is that they probably don't even think they are doing anything wrong. Not only that but reporting them to their webhost won't do much because the webhost know that these sites are established businesses which pay bills and were not created yesterday to do a spam run today.
This is why people like the two listed above have sued and won.
I'm waiting for my next spam email sent to 'Frank' offering me a BMW for £99 per week, or a water cooler for my office. I have an email template standing by ....
[edited by: Frank_Rizzo at 4:51 pm (utc) on April 6, 2007]