Archive for the ‘The Spam Cops’ Category

New MAWWG Best Practices

Sunday, August 3rd, 2008

MAWWG released some new best practices for ISPs and ESPs to take a look at in June. I have been meaning to share this if you have not read it already. Worth taking a read if you have not seen it yet from the ISP and ESP side of the businesses. Email Marketers might not find too much in this release. 

Globally-Developed MAAWG Best Practices for Dynamic Address Sharing, Email Forwarding Now Available; Aimed at Botnets, Improving User Experience

Network operators and ISPs from around the world have cooperated on two new best practice papers addressing technical issues that will help block botnet-induced spam and improve the deliverability of consumers’ personal emails. The recommendations for sharing IP address space and for email forwarding were approved at a Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group (MAAWG) meeting in Heidelberg, Germany last week and are available today.

(more…)

Is Goodmail Selling Access to You?

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008

Let’s think about this expose in the NYT last week about Goodmail. Now I could agree with them in some ways, but rather if someone has a program that 1. qualifies for Goodmail and 2. Wants to pay for delivery then why is there a problem with it? Truly if the individual has opted in for your email programs you should be able to make sure that it is going to get to the inbox. If this means using a pay for delivery system (now it does not work at all ISPs as of now) then go for it. 

(more…)

Yahoo Anti-Spam Czar Taking Questions

Monday, July 28th, 2008

Do you have some questions for the omnipitent ruler of Yahoo Mail? Well here is your chance. You have a 4-5pm Window on the 30th to fire off your questions to Mark. I will be on the beach about that time just thinking about not working… again. (It is a repetitive process to take me away from work and like any good 12 step program takes repeating things to yourself). 

(more…)

The State of Spam Report

Friday, July 11th, 2008

More than 75 percent of all email today is spam, placing a significant strain on your network, budget, and employee productivity. Our objective is to leverage mail security intelligence from the Symantec Global Intelligence Network to help protect your business from spam. By offering up-to-date expert resources, such as the monthly State of Spam Report, this site gives you a central source to turn to for the latest on spam.

Overall: http://www.symantec.com/business/theme.jsp?themeid=state_of_spam

July 2008 PDF http://eval.symantec.com/mktginfo/enterprise/other_resources/b-state_of_spam_report_07-2008.en-us.pdf

What Happens When You Reply To ALL of Your Spam

Wednesday, July 9th, 2008

“For Tracy Mooney, a married mother of three in Naperville, Ill., the decision to abandon cyber-sense and invite e-mail spam into her life for a month by participating in a McAfee experiment was a bit of a lark. The idea of the Spammed Persistently All Month (S.P.A.M.) experiment — which fittingly started on April Fool’s Day — was to have 50 volunteers from around the world answer every spam message and pop-up ad they got. Mooney was game, especially since McAfee was giving a free PC to all participants. She told her story to Network World.”

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/070108-mcafee-spam-experiment.html?hpg1=bn

Now We Start Taking Hostages

Friday, June 27th, 2008

So with a release a few months back from GoDaddy telling people that they now offer an email marketing platform for GoDaddy Domain owners, they release this… basically if you get a spam complaint and you host your domain with them, they will charge you $200 and $75 to get your domain back. Now everyone (trust me here) deals with a spam complaint every now and then as consumers feel it is easier to mark as spam than it is to unsubscribe. So are they now going to hold brands and companies hostage for pay anytime some marks an email as spam or junk? Or just when they file a formal complaint? I really don’t know but I think this is a bonehead move. Maybe it is just to scare their own customers hwo are using their email marketing service whom host with them as they could be non educated email marketers just happy with paying $7/mo to send emails?

From Deliverability.com

Don’t host domains at GoDaddy if you do email marketing (who doesn’t?)
A reader forwarded this GoDaddy message to me (I have anonymized it) asking for advice. Apparently GoDaddy is now charging for handling spam complaints and has a $200 “spam tax” for clients that do email marketing. If they receive spam complaints against you, they are claiming that they will hold your domain ransom unless you pay $75 to release it.

Basically, GoDaddy is saying that if you do email marketing or have affiliates that send emails linking to your site, they don’t want your business.

http://blog.deliverability.com/2008/06/dont-host-domai.html

Locked Out of Hotmail?

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008

Hotmail users getting locked out

Imagine getting an e-mail from a friend or family member with the following subject line: “ITS IMPORTANT YOU GET BACK ME TODAY.”

CNET is aware of a couple of Hotmail users who have recently gotten locked out of their accounts. In one case, someone who had hacked into an account sent a desperate-sounding e-mail asking for money under the account holder’s name.

Microsoft had no direct comment.

Read Article

Getting Fed Up With Bad List Selection

Friday, May 23rd, 2008

Hi, My name is Dylan and I work for a company called eROI. We have an ESP product called emailROI. We use it for our own email communications and are quite happy with it. So why in the hell would you send me an offer to get a Vertical Response account? I love these third party list rentals. They never know much about anyone on their list. Just happy with the CPM of an email address, and wham bam thank you mam… here you go Dylan an offer you just can’t refuse.

Wow. When I do a list rentals for clients I make sure to suppress against know addresses of comp, etc. Vertical Response you need to do the same. I know the shot gun approach can work from time to time, but you are not displaying industry leading best practices and most likely attracting clients that will do the same.

Best part about this is they are using my emailROI email address that I stopped using over 4 years ago. And this sender is something that I have never heard from before in my life nor have I got emails from them before. Crazy. Like the line in Animal House, “Pledge him, we need the dues.”

If you do any list rentals or partnering use this as a lesson of what not to do, or call me and I will be happy to walk you through best practices.

VerticalRepiEntrySpamSm.jpg

View image

Marketing Sherpa Interview with eROI

Monday, May 19th, 2008

How New CAN-SPAM Rules Affect Marketers

The FTC has just announced it has approved four new rule provisions to the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. MarketingSherpa’s Senior Reporter Chris Heine discusses the changes with Jeff Mills, Director of Sales and Strategy at eROI. Listen to our podcast to discover how these changes will affect email marketers and what they’ll have to do differently to be in compliance. The provisions are expected to take effect this summer.

http://podcast.marketingyak.com/flash/can_spam/index.html

Can’t Unsub If You Don’t Use IE?

Monday, May 19th, 2008

Wow. This is one for the books. I was stunned this week at a client that moved to Eloqua, which I thought was a great system, when I was told that unless I was using Internet Explorer I could not unsub from the link. This is one of the craziest things I have ever seen with my own eyes in email marketing. Why would a profile system or an unsubscribe process be built to be platform or browser specific? Love that they gave me a link to download IE? I have it already but don’t use it as my default browser.

So in a world where web forms should work in any browser why can’t Eloqua make this investment to be cross browser compatible? I open this post up to any comments and explanations from them if they want. Please enlighten me? If I was a client and this happened to my email recipient I would be ticked. It is basically not allowing me to unsubscribe from an email with a simple opt out. Right? Or am I just a bit crazy?

“I’m Gonna Git You Spamma!” - Official Trailer

Friday, May 16th, 2008

The cats who brought you “SERP SERPBACKS Badass Song” and “SEO Soul” introduce you to Funk 2.0, “I’m Gonna Git You Spamma!,” the newest flick from the Calacanis Collection. Veronica Belmont stars as the foxy heroine, who fights the ringleaders of the spam underworld. Can you digg it?

More Info on FTC Can Spam Changes

Thursday, May 15th, 2008

One interesting issue is that it is in essence stating that there cannot be any barricades to removing yourself like needing a password to any other identifiable information other than your email address. So what does this mean to preference centers that are currently controlled inside of social media, news or community sites? I was thinking about all the sites I log into (is Facebook) in order to change my preferences. Will this be illegal under these new changes?

From one source:
Does the above mean that passwords will not be allowed as part of the unsubscribe process?

Yes. This provision is in direct response to some sites that would require you to login in order to process the unsub. The best example of this was something that a product group at Microsoft used to do: One of their divisions or products would send you unsolicited email and when you clicked to unsub, it would require you to put in your password.

Since you didn’t opt-in and didn’t have the password they were looking for, it would force you to register, requiring name, postal address, etc., and then email you a confirmation before it would finalize your sign-up and send you the coveted password. Only *then* would it allow you to log in and set your mail preferences. They stopped doing that after being blacklisted and having to clean up a database full of
obscene street names.

(1) an e-mail recipient cannot be required to pay a fee, provide information other than his or her e-mail address and opt-out preferences, or take any steps other than sending a reply e-mail message or visiting a single Internet Web page to opt out of receiving future e-mail from a sender;”

Accordingly, the Commission adopts final Rule 316.5, which prohibits the imposition of any fee, any requirement to provide personally identifying information (beyond one’s email address), or any other obligation as a condition for accepting or honoring a recipient’s opt-out request.

Here is the FULL Document.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2008/05/R411008frn.pdf

MySpace Wins Largest Anti-Spam Award in History

Thursday, May 15th, 2008

MySpace has informed us that on Monday it was awarded $234 million in statutory damages, the largest anti-spam sum ever made under CAN-SPAM and apparently ever under any law. This is also the first time damages have been awarded under the California Anti Phishing Act.

The case was won against two notorious spammers, Sanford Wallace and Walter Rines. Wallace earned the nicknames “Spamford” and “spam king” for having sent as many as 30 million spam messages per day during a period of time in the 1990s.

Read the full story>>

Breaking News: Can Spam Final Regulations

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

Final Can-Spam Regs Define ‘Sender,’ Preserve 10-Day Opt-Outs
Mediapost by Wendy Davis, Tuesday, May 13, 2008 8:00 AM ET

After mulling new rules for e-mail marketers for three years, the Federal Trade Commission Monday issued final Can-Spam regulations that spell out how to determine which marketer is the “sender” when more than one advertises in the same message.

The new rules provide that marketers advertising in one joint e-mail can designate which company will be considered the sender and will be responsible for Can-Spam compliance. That designated company will have to make sure that the e-mail gives recipients a way to opt-out of future ads, and also will have to put its name in the “from” line and have a valid postal address in the e-mail. The multi-sender scenario often occurs with travel marketing, where airlines, hotels and car rental companies send one combined message to e-mail recipients.

Janis Kestenbaum, an FTC lawyer in the Bureau of Consumer Protection, said the new rule aims to allow marketers who want to use joint e-mails to easily to do so, while also providing crucial information to recipients. “We were looking to help consumers to readily identify who the quote-unquote ’sender’ is within the meaning of the Can-Spam act,” she said.

The final rule marks a change from the FTC’s 2005 proposal, which said that any company that controlled the content of an email would be considered a “sender.” But the commission decided that standard wasn’t workable because all marketers typically have some input into the ad copy, Kestenbaum said.

The FTC also will continue giving marketers up to 10 days to stop sending messages to consumers who opt-out. The 2005 proposals would have curtailed the time to three days, but the agency decided that change wasn’t necessary.

“There wasn’t any evidence that people were using that 10-day period to mail bomb people, so it wouldn’t help consumers to shorten it,” Kestenbaum said.

The new guidelines also clarify that marketers may not require recipients to pay a fee or complete a survey, or provide other extraneous information when opting out of future ads.

When the FTC proposed the rules three years ago, more than 150 organizations, companies and advocates weighed in with comments, including the Online Publishers Association, Time Warner and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. The new regulations will become effective 45 days after they are published in the Federal Register, which is expected to occur later this month.

Sweet so is Google a Spammer Now?

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

Security flaw turns Gmail into open-relay server… so does this mean that they should be blacklisted? How does an issue like this when it comes from an ISP deserve to be treated by other ISPs? Do they give a courtesy to one another when this happens? I know that if it happens to a corporate mail server it gets slammed and blocked faster than me accepting and Irish Car Bomb drink on St. Pats. AND that is fast.

Security flaw turns Gmail into open-relay server A newfound flaw in Google’s Gmail allows would-be spammers to treat the service as an open-relay server. Compounding the issue is the fact that services such as Hotmail and Yahoo “trust” Gmail. This may facilitate e-mail delivery, but it also makes it easier for spammers to reach their intended targets.

Read the Full Story