[lug] Warning about RTENet.com

[Nate Duehr]

On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 06:54:29PM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 12:53:52PM -0700, Nate Duehr wrote:
> >Get a lawyer friend to call them and read them the new Colorado law that
> >states you can charge them for each and every one of them.
> 
> Did that actually pass?  I heard it was working it's way through, but
> didn't hear that it actually passed.

Yes it did.  I followed up with the Attorney General's office. 

Any person receiving UBE in Colorado without certain criteria met can
claim, I think, $10 per e-mail in damages.  One of the loop-holes is if
they put "ADV:" in the Subject line, you can't do it, but it's also very
nice to be able to filter that with procmail/exim filters/whatever.

The new law, as I remember is rather interesting, but I have forgotten
much of the detail on it, as I haven't really had a large-scale spam
event big enough to make it worth my while.  However there was a story
in the first or second week of the enactment of the law about some guy
who believed he was the first claimant to receive money under the law
(like I said, I think $10) -- he complained to someone's legal
department and they sent him both a $10 check and a request to sign a
contract not to pursue further legal action against the company in
question in further incidents.  If I remember the story correctly, he
kept the check (to frame... free money from spam!) and did NOT sign the
requested contract.  That's the last I remember.  I may have the story
wrong -- it was on the Rocky Mtn. Internet Users "discussion" mailing
list.

I questioned the Attorney General's office about the possibility of
class action or large-scale lawsuits organized by their office for the
worst offenders, and this was their reply:

>Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 08:10:16 -0700
>From: "Office of Attorney General" <attorney.general at state.co.us>
>Subject: Re: Colorado Junk E-mail Law Question
>To: <nate at natetech.com>
>X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.3
 
We are not.  This office has been given no authority by the legislature
over prosecution of junk e-mail.  The new law passed this year by the
legislature provides only for private citizen lawsuits.  We have no 
authority to investigate or prosecute junk e-mail violations.
  
For more information to determine whether a private citizen has a valid 
cause of action upon which to bring a lawsuit against the offending sender,
log on to our web site, www.ago.state.co.us.  A description of the new law
can be found there.

>>> Nate Duehr <nate at natetech.com> 10/23/00 07:49PM >>>

What is the proper legal method of determining that one has received an
e-mail in violation of the law -- who investigates the claims?
 
 Is the Attorney General's Office collecting and categorizing so-called
 "spam" messages for cataloging and possible Class Action suits against the
 largest abusers / senders of Unsolicited Bulk E-mail?
  
  Thanks for your time,
   
   Nathan N. Duehr, nate at natetech.com    

-- 
Nate Duehr <nate at natetech.com>

GPG Key fingerprint = DCAF 2B9D CC9B 96FA 7A6D AAF4 2D61 77C5 7ECE C1D2
Public Key available upon request, or at wwwkeys.pgp.net and others.