![]() |
|
|
NO ALTERNATIVE
Jan 26, 2006 3:30 PM
In “Wineries Scrub E-mail Addresses” (Newsline, Oct. 15), Ken Magill describes a method of suppressing e-mail addresses of Utah or Michigan residents instead of using the scrubbing mechanism provided by the states. This in no way protects a company from criminal or civil liability if it's found to have accidentally contacted someone on the registry. The correct approach for companies that cannot afford to comply with the registry would be to discontinue any e-mail marketing whatsoever until the situation is resolved. Although Direct doesn't explicitly endorse the method described in the article, the mention of it at all as an alternative to the state-sanctioned scrubs gives it credibility where it shouldn't have any. Direct is potentially leading its readers down a very costly road. As someone who has looked into this and has to jump through many hoops to protect my clients, I would recommend accurately describing the risks Bryan St. Amant [CEO of Windsor, CA marketing agency VinterActive] is taking with his [winery] clients. His attempt to create his own suppression list is in fact in direct violation of the laws and punishable by heavy fines. I'm surprised he doesn't know this, and would allow Direct to publish a story describing these actions. I wonder how many others will consider this a viable alternative to registry compliance. Chris DiBenedetto |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||
| July 1, 2007 | June 1, 2008 | May 1, 2008 | April 1, 2008 | March 1, 2008 | February 1, 2008 | January 1, 2008 | ||
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||
| Subscribe | View Sample | Subscribe | View Sample | Subscribe | ||
| © 2008 Penton Media, Inc. | Home | Penton Media Inc. | Contact Us | For Advertisers | For Search Partners | Privacy Policy |