Anti-Spam Laws are Upheld in California Appeals Court

[Jason]

"California's anti-spam law requires unsolicited messages to include a viable return address or a toll-free phone number that recipients can use to tell the sender to stop sending documents. The statute also requires unsolicited e-mail to include "ADV:," for advertisement, in the subject line of the message--or in cases where the advertisements relate to adult material, "ADV:ADLT." Violating the law is a misdemeanor."

http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8365021.html?tag=mn_hd

It seems the big debate is that without federal regulation, all 50 states could each impose their own laws, making businesses jump through hoops in order to send out mailings. Personally, I've never sent out mail that was unsolicited, so I say make em jump through hoops. Maybe someone will finally be fined for flooding my inbox with over 100 spam messages daily.

[SteveS235]

What kills me are the number of messages I get that say that it is a one time mailing, but display unsubscribe insturctions. :rolleyes:

[Jason]

I've noticed that the new laws seem to actually be affecting some of the spam that I get. Some of the subject have been ADV: and ADV ADLT. I think this is great, I've already set up some filters, and I've noticed a slight reduction in the volume of spam that reaches my mailbox. It'll be great if other states adopt this law. Has anyone else seen these new subject titles in effect?

[Dr. Web]

Ive seen those titles for quite a while now.

[postitlord]

My junk-E-mail has been rising exponentially in recent months, I have never seen a ADV header in my life, and am considering abondoning my email for something like postitlord2@yahoo.com, or postitking@yahoo.com, and advising all my friends and that's it.

But granted, my scale is much less than yours Jason. I average say 3 mails a day, 2.5 being junkmail.