h a l f b a k e r yLike gliding backwards through porridge.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I hope this hasnt been addressed before but even if it has let me know if you think I could still succeed in getting the $$. I was continually bombarded by spam and found that when you clicked on the "Remove me" link They told you, that you would be removed within 24 hours - 2 weeks timeframe. Here
is what I did.
1. I tracked the senders IP (Headers of email)
2. searched the owner of the ip as well as the domain name owner the email was sent from. (Various Who Is databases with registrars)
3. I wrote down the company and owners addresses of the IP address and domain names and how long they said they would take to remove me in.
4. If they did not remove me I sent an email to abuse@ , spam@ , help@, and webmaster@ email addresses the following info:
This is a formal request for Their Company Name to remove this email address from ALL email lists that you control.
It is also an email forbidding you to resell my email address to ANY other organization and termination of any authority you may feel you have to my email address.
As of this moment I currently have no business with your organization.
If you choose to resell my email address to any other organization OR send anymore emails to this address. It will be an acknowledgement and agreement and acceptance of the following terms for my email reading service. My fee for email reading service is billed at a rate of $1200/Hour with a minimum of 20 hours per email sent. This consultation fee will be billed to:
Company Name
Address of Company
If you feel this email was sent to you in error then please DO NOT respond to it. Doing so will imply your tacit agreement to the above terms and subject you to the above fees.
Sincerely,
Your Name
I would then let it go if it stopped after that.
HOWEVER there was one company that still emailed me after the deadline AND then responded to me with an email saying "Sorry for the confusion you have been removed" (I do believe this equals a tacit agreement) BUT I STILL KEPT RECIEVING THEM!!!! If they had stopped I would not have taken the next steps.
It was in Sept of 2002 and right at the END too. I sent them a bill for the 2/day emails they were sending for the last few days of Sept I think it was in the nieborhood of $125, 000. The bill also said thankyou for using my email reading services here is your bill for sept. Your projected bill for Oct at your current rate of sending is (I think something like) 2.3 Million Dollars. This bill was overnighted to their offices with a copy of every email as well a copy of the email from their employee implying tacit agreement and a copy of the email and terms I had sent. (Overnighted so it had to be Signed for...Get where I am going) (OH YEAH! I also put onto the invoice that it was due in 15 days and that non payment would result in a late fee of 10 percent per month of delinquint non payment)
I think the email stopped between the 10th and 20th of OCT. Of Course I still never recieved payment....Imagine that.
I resent another invoice in Nov for the month of Oct. (Overnighted signature required) This was done in the same manner as before with everything included as well as a late fee.
Here is what I recieved in an email on Nov 22nd:
Dear Mr. "ME",
Thank you for the package of information research. We have
reviewed the information and do extend our apologies for the
unwanted email that you received.
Whether we are serving small or large customers, "Company X" takes all
steps reasonably necessary to ensure that only those who receive
the emails it sends on behalf of its customers actually desire to
receive such e-mails. Furthermore, "Company X" actively monitors its
customers to ensure they are conforming to "Company X's" Terms of
Service. When customers disregard or otherwise do not comply with
"Company X's" Terms of Service, "Company X" takes whatever action is
appropriate and necessary to remedy the situation. Sometimes this
action means termination of customer mailings.
We do appreciate your alerting us to your situation and we have
taken all steps necessary, on behalf of the customers submitted,
to prevent your email address of "MY EMAIL"from
receiving any further unwanted email. "Company X" has a strict
permission email policy and each of our publishers represents to
us that the addresses on their mailing lists have given
permission to receive email from them. We take abuse of our
permission email policy seriously and respond as necessary to
preserve our standing as a responsible email provider.
In the event that you have any questions, please contact me at
Persons Email or call XXX.XXX.XXXX.
Sincerely,
Person Replying
Their Position
Their website
Their email site
Person's email
----------------------------------
Company X
Company X Address
City, State Zip
Phone: XXX.XXX.XXX | Fax: XXX.XXX.XXXX
I responded with an email that stated: I believe your mistaken. The packet I sent you was a bill. When can I expect payment? I still have not heard back from them.
Do you all think I can still go after them 1 1/2 years later? (If they are still in business)
If not what do you think of this bit of dough? Does it have the Croisant potential?
[link]
|
| |
I couldn't actually make it throught to the end of that, but your idea won't work. For one thing, |
|
| |
//If you choose to resell my email address to any other organization OR send anymore emails to this address. It will be an acknowledgement and agreement and acceptance of the following terms // |
|
| |
Does not constitute a legall binding contract. |
|
| |
>If you feel this email was sent to you in error then please DO NOT respond to it. Doing so will imply your tacit agreement to the above terms and subject you to the above fees.> |
|
| |
Would constitute a legally binding contract if they responded and then did not stop.
Think maybe I should talk to a Lawyer to find more info about it. |
|
| |
No it wouldn't. You're wrong. |
|
| |
You can sue spammers, but you'll have to sue them under the spam laws, not because you made them enter into contracts with you. |
|
| |
Not so fast, [brekkon]. The simple fact that you've stated the terms of an agreement does not in itself make them valid or enforceable. |
|
| |
If I sent you an e-mail with the header 'Responding to this E-mail confirms your agreement to pay me a million dollars' and you wrote back and told me to get lost, would I have a legitimate claim to the money? Of course not. |
|
| |
Anyone annotating beyond this note agrees to send me a check for $50,000. |
|
| |
Furthermore, anyone deleting this annotation agrees to send me a check for $100,000. |
|
| |
By retaining their annotation to this idea after reading this annotation, the owner of any preceding annotation indicates their aggreement to pay me $100,000, or $50,000 in excess of any fees demanded by them, whichever is higher. |
|
| |
Waugs, small unmarked bills please, as usual. |
|
| |
"No means yes and yes means no. Do you want me to hit you?" |
|
| |
>If I sent you an e-mail with the header 'Responding to this E-mail confirms your agreement to pay me a million dollars' and you wrote back and told me to get lost, would I have a legitimate claim to the money? Of course not> |
|
| |
Only because you cant charge a person for their actions! You can charge them for your services that are a result of their actions. Yes an email can constitute a legal binding contract. |
|
| |
Have you heard of tacit agreements?
Look up tacit in the dictionary. |
|
| |
From a couple things I have read about the legalities of what I have stated, The only thing that would not hold up is the amount I charged. The amount constitutes an exhorbitant amount for the services I would be providing. If I had done it for less per email it would have been more realistic and more possible to accomplish. |
|
| |
jutta, that reminds me of the time I changed the voting rules. |
|
| |
>[brekkon] Then close your eyes and tap your heels together three times. And think to yourself, "There's no place like home. There's no place like home."< |
|
| |
[ tsuka], um yeah ok that actually makes sense. <-Sarcasm. Please if I am off in Oz give me a realistic reason why fining a person for their actions is the same as charging someone for a service. |
|
| |
[ waugsqueke and jutta] What you two are doing would be a "FINE" not a "FEE FOR SERVICES". |
|
| |
If you did take this to court for judgement, you'd probably receive a greatly reduced amount, likely barely enough to cover your court costs. The only one that would profit from this is your attorney. The spammer would probably consider this a slap on the wrists and just keep conducting business as usual. |
|
| |
You'd probably win your case, but you're not going to get rich off of this. |
|
| |
[brekkon]: There's no shame in not being an expert on contract law and there's no reason to get snippy. |
|
| |
The fact of the matter is that your proposal rests on a very weak legal foundation. |
|
| |
First off, [Freefall] i think I agree I was too greedy. I messed up by making it so much $ that it would not qualify for small claims. With the instance I had heard of that made me do it, I think the guy had said to keep it low so that it wouldnt be worth them to travel out to the"small claims court" in another state. |
|
| |
[snarfyguy] I was not trying to be snippy. I was trying to be frank.
I was looking for a more realistic viewpoint than one assumed by individuals who claim contract law knowledge and assume I hadnt already checked on the most critical point of my case. I have already verified this portion of it that is ignorantly challenged and know for a fact the tacit agreement part is what gives this credibility. Here is some info for those who may not understand contract law. |
|
| |
Reference: (Black's Law Dictionary 6th Ed.)
Tacit -- Existing, inferred, or understood without being openly expressed or stated; implied by silence or silent acquiescence, as a tacit agreement or tacit understanding. Done or made in silence, implied or indicated, but not actually expressed. Manifested by the refraining from contradiction or objection; inferred from the situation and circumstance, in the absence of express matter. |
|
| |
Maxim of Law -- "Tacita quaedam habentur pro expressis" -- THINGS UNEXPRESSED ARE SOMETIMES CONSIDERED AS EXPRESSED. |
|
| |
Glossary of Legal Terms:
Acceptance:
An act indicating tacit agreement. In contracts, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), section 2-606 provides various ways a buyer can accept services and goods |
|
| |
[snarfyguy] you obviously believe what they say to be true. You do have that right even if it is misinformed. This sounds like the typical person hiding behind their computer claiming to be informed in contract law. (Makes me think of all those lesbians in chat rooms that are really all dudes with beer bellys getting pleasure from another beer belly guy pretending to be a lesbian). |
|
| |
How I envision a conversation between us would go:
"You dont know it dont be ashamed to admit it" says [snarfyguy] "So you must know the answer" says[Brekkon] " Ummm well no but I can still make the claim based on..... based on..... umm ...ummmm... its a weak legal foundation" says [snarfyguy] "Ok well I never claimed the way I did it was solid. If it were I wouldnt be posting it here I would be in court collecting over a Million $. If I were to do it again I would do it on a smaller $ scale but do it to more spammers" [Brekkon] |
|
| |
I always find it amusing when people who obviously know no science whatsoever argue with the scientists and engineers of the Halfbaking crowd about some well established fact, or greatly explored theory. (I used to find it incredibly frustrating, though.) |
|
| |
At this stage, I think I can guess how the legally minded halfbakers feel. |
|
| |
The spam laws are so complicated, at least in the EU, that I don't think that there is any harm in brekkon trying it on with these people. At least he's adding to their costs if nothing else. He might be in trouble though, in any number of ways ranging from tax issues to data privacy and contractual obligations, if one of them were to actually pay up.
Note: Reading this annotation constitutes a legally binding contract with DrLegBreaker's Money Collection Service. DrLegbreaker's Money Collection Service is a registerd charity and no payment is due for any services provided by DrLegBreaker's Money Collection Service, but any voluntary gifts of money should be sent to our address within 14 days of reading this annotation. All customers are reminded that we know where you live. |
|
| |
[DrBob] Well put. The best outcome would be if many people did it on a small $ scale and were successful enough to put the idiots out of business. |
|
| |
Note: Where should I send Donations to? ;) |
|
| |
[ydyd] The town of Bedrock? |
|
| |
Nice way to get them to stop, but too much effort required for me to bother. I can just select them all and delete. |
|
| |