Altex Marketing v Tõnu Samuel part 1
Wednesday, October 21, 2009 14:33 by Robin GurneyUpdate November 2: This issue has been resolved. see altex v Tõnu Samuel 2 (lõpp)
Recently Tõnu Samuel (a respected computer security expert) made various subjective, selective, misleading, inaccurate, untruthful, unproven and damaging comments about altex’s email marketing activities on his blog (here and here), twitter and facebook.
Not only do these comments hurt us but they also hurt our clients.
The bottom line he has accused us of spamming and encouraging spamming.
The truth is we do not spam, have never spammed and certainly do not encourage spam.
People in the internet marketing and advertising industry who know altex well, also know our position on spam.
We are anti-spam.
I am not going to go into the details at this stage but in essence we (both Meelis and I) have repeatedly invited Tõnu Samuel to have dialogue (to demonstrate we are ethical email marketers) after he made his comments but so far he has refused.
So, regrettably we have had to take legal action against Tõnu Samuel to protect our reputation and the reputation of our clients.
Tamme & Otsmann are representing us and the process has begun.
As a personal comment I would say how disappointing this situation is.
· In principle we actually approve of what Tõnu is trying to do in that we agree that spammers should be named, shamed and, where possible, prosecuted.
· We would like to see a tightening of the Estonian law to protect people more against spam.
· We encourage Tõnu to continue his activities but urge him to check facts before reporting rather then jumping to conclusions.
· I would urge Tõnu that for the sake of the credibility of his opinion on spamming and the credibility of his blog that he looks deeper into who are the good guys (ethical email marketers) and who are the bad (spammers).
Tõnu, I assume you are reading this, the door is still open for dialogue and we hope you take a step back and consider the implications of what you have written and urge you to check your facts and listen, with an open mind, to our comments before the legal process reaches the point of no return.
For those of you who want to comment or ask questions feel free. I will be as open as possible but due to the legal action there may be some things I can’t answer yet.
Obviously we expect this case to attract some attention and I hope that one of the “benefits” of this case will be a closer examination of the whole issue of spamming and what needs to be done to clean things up in Estonia.
Tõnu Samuel says:
October 21st, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Mida kiun. Piinlik ei ole juba või?
Kristiina says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:39 am
With a help of a dictionary you could have added a few more to this list - subjective, selective, misleading, inaccurate, untruthful, unproven and damaging. You should start by defying spam, as obviously you have different perspectives of what spam is.
However, I would advise you to hire a consultant before going to the lawyers because: if you are a respected marketing company, then you also know other players and partners in the market, thus you also know the nature of Roosa Elevant company. If you claim that you were not aware that it was a spamming company, then you should have a serious talk with one of your employees, who failed to open your partner’s website and read the content. As far as what goes to your claim that the e-mail adresses are given voluntarily and everyone is happy, then it shows another fail from your side to understand basic spamming principles.
PS. you are not allowed to use my e-mail address, if you have comments, then post them in your blog.
Robin Gurney says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 9:03 am
Kristiina,
thanks for your comments.
I will just comment on Roosa Elevant issue.
We have NEVER used Roosa Elevant and never will.
The quote on Tõnu’s blog post is NOT from us.
Margusja says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:24 am
Hi,
I think you are spammers. It is my personal opinion . I have got lots of spam e-mails from companies like you are. Every time I asked how I included into list there was very difficult schema. All is legal you can remove your e-mail. But you have already got a spam. So it is really annoying.
Robin Gurney says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 am
Margusja,
of course you are entitled to your opinion but I can assure you have not received spam from us.
I am not sure what you mean by “people like us” but I accept that there are a lot of people spamming in Estonia but we are not one of them.
We are just as sad and annoyed about people spamming as you are.
Any spam you receive you should report immediately and take action against the spammer.
In the case of the lists we own we are able to say/show exactly when and where the person subscribed/opted in to receive the email(s).
If you believe you have received spam from altex please report the details to me or the relevant authorities. I can promise a full investigation.
Erx says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Dear altex people. I wrote a comment on no.spam.ee about you but I can’t be bothered to type it here so I’ll link it. Long story short I believe you have spammed A LOT, click and see what you think about it.
http://no.spam.ee/?p=37#comment-116
margus says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
hi altex team! Please explain this “Altex võimaldab läbi partnerite jõuda emaili kampaaniate abil Eestis rohkem kui 900,000 kontaktini.” (text from spindo.eu) How is it possible? If you order spam service from partner then everything is ok? becase you do not spam, your partner does.
Robin Gurney says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 3:59 pm
@margus
900,000 contacts refer to the number of email addresses ONLY of people who have opted in to receive emails from third parties from various list owners who have permission to send email messages from third parties.
It’s 900,000 because a number of people use more than one email address and so the actual number of people is less.
@erx I will get to your comment soon. You raise a number of points and I have not had time to deal with them all yet.
Kristiina says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 4:30 pm
I’d say opted and premission are pretty flexible terms in this context as those e-mail addresses spread faster than wildfire among different databases and removing one’s name is near impossible.
Perhaps you would be so kind and name your partners that provide you with databases that are overall more than 33 times of your own (27 000).
Robin Gurney says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 5:42 pm
@kristiina
No-one provides us with any databases. We do not have access, nor should we for privacy reasons of the email address owner, to any lists of email addresses.
When we conduct a client’s email marketing campaign with an optin email list owner they are the ones who forward the message, not us.
We provide the content.they distribute the message.
Perhaps you would like to share the names of lists that you have trouble removing your name from?
In the meantime I will consider sharing our partners names.
I am a little reluctant only because our competitors (ethical and non.ethical ones) are watching and declaring those may create a competitive disadvantage for us.
Certainly privately I would not mind sharing but I am less certain about putting the list in the public domain.
Not a 100% satisfactory answer but the best I can do right now.
mike says:
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Enamik Tõnu blogis listitud firmadest on sinna sattunud Kredinfo baasile e-posti saatmise tõttu.
Ka Altex on korduvalt saatnud Kredinfo baasile. See on õiguspärane tegevus. Õiguspärane ei ole Kredinfo baasile saadetud kampaaniatega seotud firmade juhtide mõnitamine. Eesti Vabariigis tuleb lähtuda seadusest.
Vastavalt võlaõigusseaduse § 1046 lõikele 1 on isiku au teotamine, muuhulgas ebakohase väärtushinnanguga, isiku nime või kujutise õigustamatu kasutamine, eraelu puutumatuse või muu isikliku õiguse rikkumine on õigusvastane.
Altexi samm on tervest mõistusest lähtudes tobe. Aga kui Tõnu lihtsalt ülbitseb, siis ega Altexil mõistlikumat varianti selle probleemi lahendamiseks ei ole ka.
Nils Leven says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:38 pm
@Mike. Spam to the Krediidiinfo database may well be entirely legal. But it’s important to understand that Tõnu doesn’t accuse anyone of unlawful activities. Tõnu accueses them of spam - be it legal or illegal. The concept is sophosticated, but read it twice and you’ll get the point.
@altex. 900,000 opt in e-mail addresses of Estonian recipients? With these kind of numbers, the only believing can be seeing. Read: IT’S NOT POSSIBLE. You can pretend anything but everyone understands that it’s just a legal limbo from your side. Legal limbo has it’s own name in Estonian language - “JOKK” - and oh god how it’s hated
Consider this.
Robin Gurney says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:58 pm
@mike
@mike all good/sensible points.
ref our usage of Krediidiinfo database: we have used it only ONCE, not repeatedly. That was for a campaign to promote an altex event in May 2008 (one and half years ago).
We carefully segmented the list, only sent to people we thought were definitely interested (yes I admit they did not request the emails).
Each email contained personalised information (name, company name, tailored message).
In hindsight it was probably not the smartest thing I have ever done (I take full responsibility personally).
Was it illegal? no, certainly not. (we have consulted lawyers on that btw)
Did it blur the boundaries of ethical email marketing? yes, at least for us it did.
After the running the campaign we decided never to send to those people again.
Their names were not added to any lists.
It was a one off and an error of judgement on my part and of course I accept some criticism for that.
Having carefully, I mean really carefully, examined all our other email activities over the past 4 and half years I am 100% confident this is the only time we crossed the line into grey territory.
We will disclose more about our one off use of Krediidiinfo database at a later stage.
Robin Gurney says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:01 pm
@ Nils. Yes I agree to a certain extent in that the definition of legal v moral spam needs clarity as does the questions of unsolicited v unwanted emails too. We do intend to promote further debate of those and related issues.
900,000 is the number I have been supplied. I will double check the “facts” and come back on that.
Robin Gurney says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:14 pm
@erks
sorry taken so long to get back to you.
I have answered in previously comment about the 900,000 and am rechecking the constitution of this “unbelievably large (to some)” number.
Krediidiinfo issue also partly addressed above.
Yes we sometimes use SAF (send a friend) mechanisms in campaigns but we do not retain the email addresses for further use. They are not added to any list and do not receive anything more than the original authorised message by their friend.
As stated before Roosa Elevant are not an altex partner. never used them, never will.
äripäev - yes we have conducted email campaigns for them but not for some time now. yes they have used Roosa Elevant AGAINST our advice. One of our jobs is to educate clients not to use spam lists but we are not always successful. I guess the Roosa Elevant salespeople are persuasive?
ALL campaigns we ran for Äripäev were ONLY to opt in lists.
margus says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:42 pm
but what if evey company listed in Krediidiinfo will send at lest one email to every company? is it ok to see thousands of e-mail in your inbox? i know it’s legal (JOKK) , but it is spam. Tõnu also said it’s spam. Selling e-mail list service is wrong way in long term. each client should build own e-mail list from zero. you can sell know-how for building own e-mail lists
Robin Gurney says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 7:35 pm
@margus 99 per cent agree with you.
its not ok and frankly Estonia should adopt the EU directive on the issue.
Spam definition is however still, perhaps unfortunately, a bit debatable.
Yes we do already regularly give clients training, consultancy and services related to email marketing including list building.
Nils Leven says:
October 23rd, 2009 at 7:52 pm
I think it’s time for you to apologize in front of Tõnu. You admit to “moral spamming” to the Krediidiinfo list and you don’t have clear certainty about the 900K list.
Tõnu is a lil’ crazy but he’s fighting for a good cause. A cause that actually helps all white hat internet marketers.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 12:55 am
You admit to sending spam (”our usage of Krediidiinfo database: we have used it only ONCE”). And then you threaten someone who lists you as a spammer (i.e. a person who has sent spam) in his personal blog with legal action. There is no grounds for any of it, except legal bullying. And that will just get you more enemies in Estonia than friends.
If you want to save some face, then you should just say “i am sorry, we will never do it again”. That is what i teach to my 3 year old son when he does something that is socially unacceptable. What would you think if i taught him to threaten everyone with legal action every time he does some mischief?
P.S. I know sending spam to company addresses is technically legal in Estonia. But it is still a spam (i.e. unsubscribed e-mail) and can be called as such.
Robin Gurney says:
October 24th, 2009 at 3:56 am
@nils @jaanus
I am not going to comment on the legal aspects of this case but pls note we have never denied that we used Krediidiinfo (once)
This case is not actually about that.
We never threatened Tõnu.
We repeatedly asked for dialogue.
He refused.
We informed (we did not say at any point anything like: if you dont do xxx then we will do yyy) him we had taken legal action.
Legal action is in motion.
If you look at Tõnus original post it is he who threatens us with listing as spammer (ref spindo promotion). Note Tõnu has publicly stated that we are NOT on his black list - I presume you are aware of that.
I have also previously stated that I will write more about Krediidiinfo in due course.
We have nothing to hide but patience is needed (please) - you will see why later.
@jaanus My son is 4 and has also been taught to say sorry btw.
Words dont mean a lot sometimes and the fact that we actually have not “done it (sent “legal” tailored, personal, segmented emails to a selective group of people based on data from Krediidiinfo database) again” and “learned our lesson” is better(demonstrates our nature) than just promising xyz isnt it?
Ref apologising to Tõnu - that cuts two ways. There is more than one issue in all this and on some points we are totally innocent/clean etc. Of course sceptics can point to our single use of the K database and avoid dealing with the other false and damaging accusations that have floated around (see various comments related to Spindo campaigns, Roosa Elevant connection etc)
I am pleased to say that dialogue with Tõnu is now happening and I hope to be able to say more on that soon but again due to the legal situation it would not be appropriate just yet.
ref spam definitions: everyone is entitled to their opinion but the fact is that even experts do not always agree.
Keep watching this space
Jüri Kaljundi says:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Good discussion on what constitutes legal vs moral spam. Most problems arise from people defining the term differently. This can be only solved by better legislation and education of both private users of Internet services as well as consultants and advertisers. Until we all agree what is spam and what is not, coming to an agreement is hard. It will take time.
One of the problems is also people accepting terms that they later forget or just don’t like anymore. So they get pissed off, although previously they have agreed to start receiving commercial messages. Again it’s a question of talking to people, communicating and educating them. Even then of course a small minority will have a negative mindset. That’s life.
For those interested in the sources of lists in Estonia regarding the 900k, some of these include (according to those sites own pages):
hot.ee - 300k
mail.ee - 100k
spindo - 75k
inbox.lv - 778k (do you use this at Altex as well?)
Is it just me on a Saturday morning, or is the comments small font on this page just too small?
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
You just answered to me: yes we have spammed (although only once you say), and that it “is he who threatens us with listing as spammer” in one post. How is that grounds for legal action was my original question which remains unanswered. He listed you on his blog, for an action you *have* done.
I also read your legal letter to Tõnu. And i see it only as legal bullying, nothing else.
Until this matter is not resolved in a reasonable manner all emails from altex.ee and bindo.ee and from any other your domain i see fit to my servers will be rejected with:
550 Your email is considered spam
But that is just because i can not be bothered to compile in a separate message just for you:
550 Your email is rejected for being an asshole
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
P.S. yeah, i know that Tõnu is an asshole in many ways too. I just do not tolerate any unsolicitated e-mail, be it legal or not.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
P.P.S And you should fire Tamme and Otsmann for being incompetent (more mistakes in one legal letter than in Tõnu’s blog) and for giving you bad advice about this case in the first place.
Robin Gurney says:
October 24th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
@Jaanus
believe what you wish but we used K DB once which some people categorise as spamming and which I have said I will explain further at a later stage. You will have to wait for more details. I will publish when I am ready.
i have also said I will not comment on legal issues as the case is ongoing. Sorry if you don’t accept that but that’s the way it is.
its spindo.eu not bindo.ee btw
By insulting me personally I have to warn you that if you do it again then I will simple delete your future comments. Keep your comments professional and civil on our blog or make your comments somewhere else.
If you think T&O have made mistakes then why don’t you list them. I sure they would be interested in your opinions.
Robin Gurney says:
October 24th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
@juri as I said in my post “Obviously we expect this case to attract some attention and I hope that one of the “benefits” of this case will be a closer examination of the whole issue of spamming and what needs to be done to clean things up in Estonia.”
It certainly has and that’s only a good thing.
Once this case is over and the heat has died down a bit I would like to see a proper debate of best practice in email marketing, I certainly hope you will participate in that.
One of the reasons that we have had to recheck our 900,000 number is that Elion (hot.ee) have revised their numbers. Their website is out of date. Their database is much larger now. We are trying to get accurate figures as they form a large share of the 900,000.
spindo in estonia is less than 75k. that figure refers to Baltic.
Yes we have arrangements with optin list owners in other countries including inbox.lv but they are not counted in the 900,000 which is Estonia only.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
It was not meant as an insult. If you take it as one, you are welcome.
About your letter and the legal team. The funniest part is that in p. 2.3 it says: “Seega on späm IÜTS kohaselt kommertsteadaanne, mis on saadetud paljudele isikutele korraga. [ .... ] Seega, pakkus Altex enda klientidele võimalust edastada kommertsteadandeid.” - “According to IÜTS “spam” is a commercial message sent to many recipients at once. [ .... ] Thus, Altex offered its client an opportunity to send commercial messages.”
In essence you admit in the same letter that you offered your clients an opportunity to send something you defined as spam two sentences earlier. And then you accuse Tõnu of namecalling you a spammer. I understand that you probably did not mean that - that is an error on behalf of the aforementioned legal team. And furthermore - the IÜTS does not define the word “spam” at all, so it is just a false statement.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Your letter to Tõnu p. 1.3.:
13. oktoobri 2009 postituses ähvardab Avaldaja [REF] tasuta lisada lisaväärtuse lisades võimaluse tekkimisel „Altex Marketing Kliendid“ lehe Timo Teder’i klientide kõrvale. Sellega viidatakse tõenäoliselt „Spam kirjade Eesti andmebaasile“5.
First you accuse him of giving you a “free promotion” - which is not a crime in Estonia last time i checked. Then you assume (and not correctly) to what Tõnu means when he refers to “List of Altex marketing clients”. Tõnu probably meant his own site. And even if he did publish them, publishing a list of your clients is also in no way a crime.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Your letter to Tõnu p. 1.6.
“Samal kuupäeval on Avaldaja lisanud sama sisuga kommentaarid Altex kodulehele vaidlusaluse kuulutuse alla kutsudes lugejaid informatsiooni levitama.”
You post something to the internet and then you accuse someone else for “spreading the word about this information”!?
Jaanus Karu says:
October 24th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
I can go on if you like, almost on every paragraph of the legalese these guys produce. As i said, it contains more errors, assumptions etc than Tõnu’s blog.
Robin Gurney says:
October 25th, 2009 at 9:12 am
@jaanus thankyou for your comments, I will pass them on to Tamme & Otsmann. Please go on if you have desire to do so.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 25th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Actually, i see no point.
The idea i am trying to get across here is that this “case” had no legal grounds, and even if it did, they are voided by the actions by your “legal team”.
But - more importantly, going to a legal crusade against Tõnu is a marketing/PR blunder on your part and it is strange that you still have not realized that, considering the business you are in.
Robin Gurney says:
October 25th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
@jaanus
ok and let’s see what the future holds. I am an eternal optimist.
Jaanus Karu says:
October 26th, 2009 at 1:03 am
Your mis-answering techniques are super! I am amazed.
Robin Gurney says:
October 26th, 2009 at 10:10 am
I am not sure what mis-answering is.
I have simple refused to discuss the legal issues as I stated in my original post.
My comment about optimism refers to the PR issue.
ap says:
October 26th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Robin Gurney says: October 24th, 2009 at 7:05 pm … [juttu on suurtest numbritest]
ma ei viisti küll altexi reklaammaterjalides tuhnida et uurida nende juriidilist korrekstust, kuid siin praegu räägitakse 900.000-st inimesest. INIMESEST, kes saavad tellitud teate? tuletame meelde palju meil inimesi maarjamaal on… ja paljud neist üdse netti kasutavad… konkreetseid arve ma jällegi ei tea, aga lõhnab selle järgi nagu keegi üritaks sellega väita et iga viimane kui eesti netikasutaja (ja natuke peale ka) on teadlikult avaldanud soovi antud meililisti “kaubanduslikke teadaandeid” saada ja nad ei ole ühel või teisel hetkel soovinud neist teadetest loobuda.
kas nii?
Jaanus Karu says:
October 26th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
I meant never answering to posts that you do not like. I am really interested wether you consider this legal case against Tõnu a marketing/PR blunder or not? Which in itself is not a legal matter that you can not discuss.
Robin Gurney says:
October 26th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
@Jaanus
Obviously we were very aware of the publicity that this would attract.
I think it’s too early for me to give a straight answer as we obviously have a strategy and we need to see if the scenarios we have predicted play out the way we imagine or not.
Good question - just too early.
Nils Leven says:
October 26th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
The most probable outcome is that Tõnu walks, his posts get tenfold the exposure they would get otherwise, and you’ll end up looking really-really stupid. The reason is that you really don’t have a case.
Otherwise I’d bet that you’ll drop the accusations soon but reading your mature, strategical, intelligent comments in the particular feed, I predict that the law firm sees an opportunity to extract some cash from you, continuing on with this pointless process.
Krediidiinfo database email campaign says:
October 26th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
[...] Posts, Internet Marketing, e-turundus // In response to comments and discussion related to Altex v Tõnu Samuel I admitted that altex used part of the Krediidiinfo database (Inspektor) during a campaign to [...]
Robin Gurney says:
October 27th, 2009 at 5:13 am
@Nils your comments are always thought provoking. Tempting though it is to produce my evidence here I am not going to. If I did not feel extremely sure of winning our case I would not have done it. Once again I cant comment on legal issues at this stage. But of course you are entitled to your opinion..
As we generally have no objection to what Tönu is doing (see my post above), in fact we applaud his anti-spam position, why would I be worried about extra exposure for him?
I hope he gets loads. np.
Our issue is only with what has been said / omitted about altex.
If my lawyers extract more cash from me it will be with my full consent and with eyes open. Whatever people think about me I am no fool and have been an entrepreneur most of my adult life - that teaches you a few things.
Robin Gurney says:
October 27th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
@ap @juri @nils
we have reaudited the numbers available from optin lists in Estonia.
The new total is 677,000
This includes:
350,000 hot.ee (hot.ee had previously quoted a larger number but NOW tell us this included dormant/old accounts)
115,000 mail.ee
27,000 Spindo.eu (thats the number of Estonians)
others make up the total but to protect our commercial advantages we are not going to disclose who they are. With many we have exclusive or preferential terms and its not in our interest to say who they all are publicly.
Note: previously we had included zuper in the list but as their list grew surprisingly large without any evidence of optin procedure we dropped them from our numbers. We are very suspicious about their list and have decided not to use it.
Note: we have never sent out 900,000 emails or even close. The vast majority of campaigns we run are highly targeted and segmented by age, location, interest or whatever segmentation the list offers. Untargeted, unpersonalised and non-customised mailings produce poor ROI usually.
Note: Not included in the 677k is the altex newsletter list - currently around 1,800 subscribers.
UPDATE: Please note that it is quite possible that some people belong to more than one list so there is duplication. It is also sure that some people have more than one email account. So 677,000 is the number of opted in email addresses (that WE are aware of) but the number of PEOPLE is likely to be significantly less.
How many people?
Impossible to say as we do not have access to the lists, no one can know the answer without cross referencing all lists which is impossible.
Robin Gurney says:
October 28th, 2009 at 6:46 am
For those who have missed it.
There more details about the altex campaign which used the Krediidiinfo database here http://www.altex-marketing.com/krediidiinfo-database-email-campaign
Robin Gurney says:
October 30th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
We will hold an E!SPAM conference in 2010 on March 9th and will invite the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication, The Data Protection Board, a lawyer, Tõnu Samuel, someone from Roosa Elevant (probably the most accused company in the question of spam), someone from mail.ee and/or hot.ee (two of the largest opt-in list owners in Estonia) and perhaps others. We welcome agenda suggestions.
@jannus @kristiina @margus @nils @erks @mike I am sending out the speaker invitations for E!Spam now and would like to know if you would consider speaking there. You have been most vocal on this post
@all if anyone wants to recommend speakers to attack, question, define or defend spam then shoot…
suggestions of names off list if you prefer to robin@altex.ee
ap says:
October 30th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
andke abi… selle peale kui Robin praegu nimetas hot’i opt-in listiks, läksin kohe kontrollima. regasin uue konto. regamise ajal EI küsitud mult kas ma “pakkumisi” soovin. sirvisinn isegi “legal jabadaba” läbi ja ei leidnud sealt juttu partnerite pakkumistest!!! (isegi kui see seal oleks olnud, ei tähendaks see et tegu oleks teadliku tellimisega). Vastava linnukese leidsin peale regamist seadete alamlehelt, kus loomulikult oli vastav linnuke tehtud ilam et ma selleks soovi oleks avaldanud!!!
minu arusaama mööda on tegu puhta opt-out variandiga. kui nii ei ole, siis palun selgitage. seni pean ma küll selle listi opt-in listiks nimetamist kliendi rämedaks petmiseks.
ps. elioni kasutajatingimustest leidsin nende definitsiooni:
3.2.5. e-posti saajatele mitteasjakohaste ja/või soovimatute sõnumite saatmine ja/või masspostitus (spam), kusjuures saajale soovimatuks masspostituseks loetakse posti, sealhulgas, kuid mitte ainult, anonüümsete ja/või parodeeritud ning ähvardavate sõnumite, reklaamimaterjalide, autoriseerimata kuulutuste vms üheaegset saatmist enam kui 10 adressaadile, kes ei ole antud posti saamiseks soovi avaldanud (välja arvatud Elioni poolt kasutajatele saadetud Elioni tooteid/teenuseid tutvustav materjal);
Robin Gurney says:
October 30th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
@ap I think you make an excellent point. There are a number of lists who technically opt you in as some form of condition of purchase or participation and give you a chance to easily (usually) opt out later. Certainly its not best practice and i think one reason to get hot.ee there would be to hear them talk about this and perhaps for people like you to pressure them to adapt their practice. I hope you will be at E!SPAM with your questions.
ap says:
October 30th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Thanks for admitting this and I hope you will not act so loosely with those words in the future.
Although your wording implies that you would still like to call them “opt-in” in the future although you seem to admit that there is nothing to do with opting in by the recipient.
As you mentioned “easily opting out”, I did another research:
1) you have to log in to hot.ee web interface and surf some menus there to get opted out. Call this “easy”? Easy opt-out is a single-click on email footer. I’m sure you know this.
2) I checked my hot.ee inbox and found that the last “commercial” email with clear (but not easy) unsubscribe instructions is received in september 2008. Maybe I’ve deleted something, please correct me if I’m wrong here.
Call hot.ee opt-in list again. I dare you.
Robin Gurney says:
October 30th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
@ap oi oi oi.
I was speaking generally and the reason I put (usually) was because I agree its not so easy with hot.ee.
It was an attempt at jokey-diplomacy.
I am not going to defend hot.ee or anyone else.
That’s their job.
Hei anyone from hot.ee reading this?
care to comment?
Personally I don’t use hot.ee at all btw.
altex v Tõnu Samuel part 2 (lõpp) says:
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:25 pm
[...] I stated in my original post about the legal case: “..we actually approve of what Tõnu is trying to do in that we agree that spammers should [...]
Robin Gurney says:
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:45 pm
The case with Tõnu Samuel has now been resolved: http://bit.ly/5eSu
Tõnu Samuel says:
November 6th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Tuleb välja, et kohtuga teisitimõtlejate ähvardamine pole esmakordne http://tehnokratt.net/2008/12/05/veel-spammist-osaleee-ja-laupne-kratt/