[UK] Evesham Technology slapped on wrist by ASA for spamming

In article ,
Andy writes:

And what do I find amongst today's bodily-extensions? promotions at
eveshamtechnology dot info seeking to extend my knowledge of the
Evolution Blue Beast.

Ooo. Me too.

--
Andrew Bangs Demon Internet
http://www.demon.net/ http://www.demon.nl/

Anthony Edwards wrote in
:

It is actually quite likely (I think probable) that Evesham have
purchased (or obtained in some way) a new list.

The ASA seemd quite clear; be more careful when buying lists.

At least one, and
I believe two, of the three email addresses to which Unsolicited
Commercial Email was sent yesterday were in all probability removed
from Evesham's previous list as a result of GXN's assistance with
listwashing,

The IC says that numbers (and I assume this also means email addresses)
should not be deleted when people opt out, but they should be supressed.

It is possible, perhaps, that Evesham Technology Ltd have interpreted
the Advertising Standards Authority adjudication of 17th December
2003 to mean that only the original list should not be re-used,

Sorry for wrapping this stupid long link:-

http://www.asa.org.uk/adjudications/...udication.asp?
adjudication_id=37119
&from_index=show_advertisers&dates_of_adjudication s_id=all

"The Authority concluded that the promoters had not checked
the bona fides of the database supplier and thus the integrity
of the data. It told them to take greater care to ensure the
integrity of the data in future."

but that Evesham Technology Ltd were and are free to obtain and use
additional lists. That isn't my understanding of the adjudication
as written, but it could be a perceived loophole which Evesham are
attempting to exploit.

They deserve a kicking if that's what they are doing.

Why hasn't GXN told them that they must build their own confirmed opt-in
list?

Edwin Petree wrote:
Why hasn't GXN told them that they must build their own confirmed
opt-in list?

Because as long as they pay Matt won't cut them off/care what they do?

Anthony Edwards writes:

[...]

It is actually quite likely (I think probable) that Evesham have
purchased (or obtained in some way) a new list. At least one, and
I believe two, of the three email addresses to which Unsolicited
Commercial Email was sent yesterday were in all probability removed
from Evesham's previous list as a result of GXN's assistance with
listwashing, since it/they received Unsolicited Commercial Email at the
commencement of Evesham's initial campaign of Unsolicited Commercial
Email during 2003, but no further examples once GXN had forwarded my
complaints (without my permission, of course) to Evesham themselves.

Could be. The only copy of the spam I got was to an email address
(well, message id) that they'd used previously.

It is possible, perhaps, that Evesham Technology Ltd have interpreted
the Advertising Standards Authority adjudication of 17th December
2003 to mean that only the original list should not be re-used,
but that Evesham Technology Ltd were and are free to obtain and use
additional lists. That isn't my understanding of the adjudication
as written, but it could be a perceived loophole which Evesham are
attempting to exploit.

I don't see how they could read it to say that. It seems clear to me.
What it doesn't seem to say is that they shouldn't reuse the existing
list, even though they know (and the adjudication says) it's
unsuitable.

In message , Andrew Bangs
wrote
In article ,
Andy writes:

And what do I find amongst today's bodily-extensions? promotions at
eveshamtechnology dot info seeking to extend my knowledge of the
Evolution Blue Beast.

Ooo. Me too.

Welcome to the club
--
Andy
For Austria & its philately, Lupus, & much else visit
URL:http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk/

"Edwin Petree" wrote in message
...
..

This is the post where Matt Edwell says that GXN ignore the LINX BCP:


http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?selm=vovi53qq93g16f%40corp.supernews.com

"...then we would be expected to cancel a customers service based on two
complaints?....huummm do I lose £30k in revenue or do I slap them on the
wrist a second time...that, whether you like it or not, is the reality."

Re-reading that thread, I like this little gem from Mat(t),

Quote
"I've dealt with evesham, it's done. No they have not had their account
terminated - if they attempt to send out UCE/UBE from our network again
then I'll filter out all smtp traffic at the CPE."
/Quote

So there is hope /Sarcasm mode

And you want to work with them? Just a reminder here, spammers lie.

*I* don't want to work with them; I want GXN to enfore their AUP and
terminate Evesham's account.

Take it as a rhetorocal question.

Other people have told me that stopping the spam is important and that
it does not need a TOS. I beleive those people should accept that
Evesham are unrepentant spammers and that GXN do not care.

Amen, brother.


Predictions for ASA action when they find out that Evesham are
continuing to use a poisoned list after being told not to?

Absolutely *fsck* all

Edwin Petree wrote in
:

Various people, who I trust and respect[1], have told me that the
important thing is that the abuse stops. It isn't about dramatic
gestures (terminating Evesham's contract) but about working with
Evesham to stop them spamming.

Evesham has had months to stop their spamming. Evesham doesn't care,
obviously; Evesham has knowingly and deliberately chosen to use theft and
trespass to augment their advertising budget, and has *lost* business as a
result.

The Directors of Evesham are wroking very hard to destroy their own
business.

--
Want SPEWS-filtered and SBL-filtered email?
http://www.spamblocked.com/index.html
"Mammals are far more intellectually advanced than most people think.
A gopher gave me the finger once." - Cynthia of Syracuse

Morely Dotes wrote:

Various people, who I trust and respect[1], have told me that the
important thing is that the abuse stops. It isn't about dramatic
gestures (terminating Evesham's contract) but about working with
Evesham to stop them spamming.

Evesham has had months to stop their spamming. Evesham doesn't care,
obviously; Evesham has knowingly and deliberately chosen to use theft and
trespass to augment their advertising budget, and has *lost* business as a
result.

Ok, I hate spam, but isn't the above (and this thread in general) a
bit melodramatic?

At the end of the day it's the modern equivalent of the junk mail
which has been dropping through our letter boxes for decades. I
welcome SPAM no more than the mailings from readers digest no more but
I wouldn't call either "theft and trespass".

Yes, it's a nuisance, but companies like Evesham are not really the
crux of the problem. In the last couple of days alone I've received
almost 700 SPAM e-mails and 300 viruses at my domain so the fact the
e-mail from Evesham is about something I'm vaguely interested in and
isn't offering me drugs, sex, ways to enhance parts of my anatomy or
attempting to trash my computers is actually something of a relief!

Ok, maybe they deserve to get their hands slapped, but I'm a busy
person. Maybe if I had sod all to do I'd go to the trouble of writing
to someone about it because surely it's worth spending 15 minutes or
more trying to stop a single source of UCE, from a legitimate UK
company, which would reduce the amount of sh*t I get in a month by
approximately 0.01%. Alternatively, for all the trouble it's worth I
could press the "Delete" key, so it's gone from sight and mind, and
get on with my life!

Tough call, eh?

--
iv Paul iv

Paul Hopwood wrote:

Morely Dotes wrote:

Various people, who I trust and respect[1], have told me that the
important thing is that the abuse stops. It isn't about dramatic
gestures (terminating Evesham's contract) but about working with
Evesham to stop them spamming.

Evesham has had months to stop their spamming. Evesham doesn't care,
obviously; Evesham has knowingly and deliberately chosen to use theft and
trespass to augment their advertising budget, and has *lost* business as a
result.

Ok, I hate spam, but isn't the above (and this thread in general) a
bit melodramatic?

At the end of the day it's the modern equivalent of the junk mail
which has been dropping through our letter boxes for decades. I
welcome SPAM no more than the mailings from readers digest no more but
I wouldn't call either "theft and trespass".

Yes, it's a nuisance, but companies like Evesham are not really the
crux of the problem. In the last couple of days alone I've received
almost 700 SPAM e-mails and 300 viruses at my domain so the fact the
e-mail from Evesham is about something I'm vaguely interested in and
isn't offering me drugs, sex, ways to enhance parts of my anatomy or
attempting to trash my computers is actually something of a relief!

Ok, maybe they deserve to get their hands slapped, but I'm a busy
person. Maybe if I had sod all to do I'd go to the trouble of writing
to someone about it because surely it's worth spending 15 minutes or
more trying to stop a single source of UCE, from a legitimate UK
company, which would reduce the amount of sh*t I get in a month by
approximately 0.01%. Alternatively, for all the trouble it's worth I
could press the "Delete" key, so it's gone from sight and mind, and
get on with my life!

Tough call, eh?

Who do you spam for again?

Morely Dotes wrote:
Edwin Petree wrote in
:


Various people, who I trust and respect[1], have told me that the
important thing is that the abuse stops. It isn't about dramatic
gestures (terminating Evesham's contract) but about working with
Evesham to stop them spamming.


Evesham has had months to stop their spamming. Evesham doesn't care,
obviously; Evesham has knowingly and deliberately chosen to use theft and
trespass to augment their advertising budget, and has *lost* business as a
result.

The Directors of Evesham are wroking very hard to destroy their own
business.



At the risk of /aol I agree - I had an evesham micro spam this week to an
email address that it is impossible for them to have had any other way then
webscraping a political parties website. I've sent the relevant IC complaint
document to their sales team, and if I wasn't such a nice person it would have
included a turd in a box.... but hang about, thats what they sell IIRC.

Isn't someone on here giving them a kicking? Do they want a copy of the newest
turdlet from me?

a

--
alpha / omega
NOSPAM to reply