Category: Legislation & Regulation - news

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Jeremy Jaynes gets away with spamming - VA law anti-spam law overturned

The judges should be buried alive in SPAM.

These morons have the audacity to rule that I have to receive the mailings of religious nuts, politicians I hate or ANY mail I didn’t solicite.

These God damned judges enjoy their generous salaries with wonderful benefits and have clerks take care of THEIR spam at the tax payers’ expense. 

Of course I have a choice.

I’ll just go out of business.

I don’t need to have a public email address.  I don’t need to have a fax machine.  I don’t need to receive any mail.  I can just remove myself from society and I can’t wait for the day when I can afford to do just that.  No more business, just one PRIVATE email address for a few select people which I’ll just change every few months as some idiot puts my email address on some freaking chain letter and I get spammed again.

The upside is that these types of rulings GREATLY contribute to the collapse of the economy.

People are continually defrauded and waste their time on spam INSTEAD of being productive. 

The mail from prospective clients is in the SPAM trap and I sure don’t have time to go through the LITERALLY many thousands of spams I get at my public email addresses. 

You can’t imagine how many spammers submit comments at my blogs.  America is one sick country, everything revolves around marketing and it just about marketed itself to death.

It would make my day if one day these judges had to get a REAL job and find out what it’s like to WORK because the government is bankrupt and their paychecks bounce.

The way things are going, I’m hopeful ...

Top501 IT: Va. Law Struck Down, Spam Kingpin Goes Free

In reversing the conviction of spammer Jeremy Jaynes, the court said the law is unconstitutional because it restricts more than just commercial e-mails. Justice G. Steven Agee said the law “is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails, including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” the Post reported. Many other states have regulated unsolicited bulk e-mail but, unlike Virginia, have restricted such regulation to commercial e-mails. There is nothing in the record or arguments of the parties, however, suggesting that unsolicited non-commercial bulk e-mails were the target of this legislation, caused increased costs to the Internet service providers, or were otherwise a focus of the problem sought to be addressed. Therefore, viewed under the strict scrutiny standard is not narrowly tailored to protect the compelling interests advanced by the Commonwealth. The court held that the law “is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails, including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.” According to this AP report, Jaynes’ attorney, Thomas Wolf, has said sending commercial spam would still be illegal under the federal The judges ruled that because the law does not discern between commercial and other forms of mass email, it places an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. “That statute is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk emails including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” the court said in its ruling.

Even though Jeremy Jaynes is indeed guilty, people tend to have extremely different opinions with some in favor of the decision and others very upset. “That statute is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,” the ruling stated. Jeremy Jaynes is not available for comments at this time and his official statement should arrive over the weekend. Action under the Can-Spam Act may be unlikely; it wasn’t signed until December 2003, when Jaynes was already being arrested. The Virginia law “is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails, including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” Justice G. Steven Agee wrote.

...

MORE...

Thursday, April 06, 2006

The 4/5/06 FCC Report and Order regarding the Junk Fax Prevention Act

All in all, it’s not nearly as bad as it could have been.  The Existing Business Relationship is defined in detail and the junk faxers won’t be happy about this.

REPORT AND ORDER AND THIRD ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

I’m getting more mortgage junk faxes than ever.  Business must be bad.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Spamming lawyers ….

I wonder what it would cost to hire a kid to take their website down for a few days.  Any ideas?

----------------------------------------

Envelope-to:
From: To:
Subject: National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 20:22:57 -0700
X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
Thread-Index: AcVV2LoDz6pSxO6QTWKUsG+2u1N/uw==
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 May 2005 03:22:57.0218 (UTC) FILETIME=[BA060220:01C555D8]

The website of American Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (http://www.napil.com) is one of the top results when you search for the term Personal Injury Lawyers on MSN.

NAPIL offers the most reasonably priced advertising medium for Personal Injury Lawyers nationwide.

To become a member, please click http://www.napil.com/registeraspx

To unsubscribe, please click here or reply to this email and place remove in the subject line or you may copy and paste the url
http://www.napil.com/newsletter/unsubscribe.asp?email=christine@creditcourt.com &cid=66768 in your browser address bar in order to unsubscribe.

National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers
23945 Calabasas Road, Suite 106
Calabasas, CA 91302

Monday, May 09, 2005

Save those faxes!  Unclaimed $535,000 for junk faxes goes to charities

Judge Awards $535,000 To Charities From Fax Spam Settlement

(INDIANAPOLIS)—Three charities will split more than $535,000 awarded but never claimed in a lawsuit against a company that illegally sent unsolicited faxes.

The money was left over from a $4.5 million settlement reached last June in a lawsuit against APO Health Inc. The New York-based medical supply firm was accused of sending unsolicited facsimile advertisements to thousands of Indiana businesses.

Marion Superior Court Judge Robyn Moberly awarded more than $267,000 to the Boy Scouts of America. She also gave nearly $134,000 each to the Heartland Pro Bono Council and the Indianapolis Bar Foundation for programs helping needy people find lawyers willing to work for free.  ...”

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

My submission with my petition against the JFPA (S.714)

Submitted at Sign our petition against the JFPA (S.714)

I am so tired of unsolicited faxes as it is.  Once every business I have contact with can junk fax me, my fax machine will be abused just like my e-mail:

I am currently receiving about 200 - 300 unsolicited e-mails per day, thank you Congress!

I just love those exciting offers for viagra and penis enlargements, which I will no doubt receive on my fax machine as soon as you legalize junk faxes.  After all, I’ve ordered online from many companies who sell many thousands of different products and they will then LEGALLY junk fax to me.

Rather than trying to put honest and hardworking small business people out of business, I’d really appreciate it if the legislators would focus on ENFORCEMENT of existing laws.

The mortgage junk faxes are not only sent in violation of the TCPA, but they violate just about any mortgage advertising law on the book.  Notably, the California Department of Real Estate REFUSED to investigate one of my junk fax complaints and it has failed to do anything at all about several others.

Recently I received one of the most despicable mortgage junk faxes ever. It didn’t look like a mortgage advertisement, it was falsely presented as an article about how to save money.  After ordering the promised free report, I got a call from a loan agent for Central Pacific Mortgage.  The free report was a hook to get my phone number.

I subsequently contacted the Executive Office for the president of Central Pacific, Mr. John Courson.  From his bio:

“He has also been a member of the Residential Board of Governors (RESBOG) and Commercial Real Estate/Multifamily Finance Board of Governors (COMBOG). Previously, he has served as Chairman of RESBOG, MBA’s Legislative Steering Committee, MBA’s State and Local Liaison Committee and Mortgage Reform Task Force. Courson has also served as President of the California Mortgage Bankers Association and Michigan Mortgage Bankers Association, and as a Director of the Texas Mortgage Bankers Association.

Recently, he was called upon for his expertise and appointed to Chairman of the Board of Directors of the California Housing Finance Agency by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.”

Despite repeated attempts to illicit any kind of explanation from Mr. Courson, he simply ignored me.  He is rich and powerful and he doesn’t have to lower himself to respond to me.

This is what I have to put up with under the current legislation.  What am I going to do when I get ** 300 ** junk faxes per day?

Disconnect my fax?  Stop doing business?  Get a new secret fax # just for clients?

Sincerely,

Christine Baker

Saturday, April 30, 2005

FCC in 4/04 on complaints, enforcement and offshore operations

4/2/04 FCC letter

“… The Commission rejected 2 1 St Century’s claims that it was not subject to this prohibition because its faxes were sent from the United Kingdom or, alternatively, because its headquarters are within the UK. The Commission held that Section 227(b)( 1 )(C)’s language targeting activities “within the United States” covers bxes sent to the United States from off-shore locations so long as the sender has a presence in the United States, and that 2lSt Century’s systematic and continuous contacts in the United States werc sufficient to establish a presence for jurisdictional purpose. 21’‘ Century has not paid the forfeiture. In mid-2002 the Commission referred this case to the Department of Justice for collection. ...”

So, did they collect?

“… From January 2001 through mid-March 2004, the Commission received 24,243
complaints about unsolicited faxes. The Commission has initiated numerous enforcement actions against entities that have sent unsolicited fax advertisements.

From January 2001 through December 2003, Commission staff has issued 167 citations for such violations, and the Commission has imposed forfeitures against six companies totaling over $6.9 million. ...”

Thursday, April 14, 2005

Call your Senators TODAY to oppose the legalization of junk faxes!

I watched Steve Kirsch’s testimony in Washington yesterday - well, kindof, Real Audio continually timed out.  He did a great job, but apparently the Senators ignored everything he said and they are going to make it legal to fax.

I don’t understand at all what’s going on.  The FCC keeps complaining about the millions of junk faxes DESPITE their strong enforcement and rather than strengthen the legislation, the Senators want to weaken it?

Of course it makes perfect sense, it’s in line with everything else the mostly totally corrupt legislators have been doing.  Just look at the CAN SPAM Act.

HOWEVER, do you remember how MILLIONS of people made the national do-not-call list reality?

Industry STRONGLY opposed that legislation, but the people made it happen because they cared enough to make those calls.

PLEASE call your Senators TODAY!

From Junkfax.org: Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005 (S.714)

Step 1: Find your two Senators

go to:

http://www.senate.gov/index.htm

and select your state from the drop down.

Step 2: Call each one and say the following:

Call each senator at the number listed. You only have to make TWO phone calls. A staff person will answer the phone. Say the following:

“My name is john smith and I am a constituent of Senator xxxxx. I live at 124 easy street in san jose, California. I am calling to DEMAND that Senator vote AGAINST S.714 (the Junk Fax bill) unless the “EBR exemption” is REMOVED ENTIRELY.

“It is MY fax machine, and MY paper and MY ink and I resent Congress acting to allow ANYONE, including people I have done business with in the past, to use my fax machine to print THEIR ads without my consent.” (Emphasize how outraged you are.)

“I would like to suggest that the Senator read Steve Kirsch’s testimony given at the committee meeting which dispels all the lies and misinformation that is being used by the sponsors who are pushing this bill.”

Your Senator NEEDS to hear from you. The business community is VERY well organized and has been lobbying heavily to be able to open up your fax machine as the next frontier in low-cost mass advertising. Because no one has called to object, your Senator thinks consumers want the ads.”

More info is at Junkfax.org: Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005 (S.714)

I already made my calls, left my messages on their VMs.

Monday, March 28, 2005

Mortgage companies buying leads ARE liable

It gets really old to have the brokers whine that they didn’t know about the faxes.  And 99% of the times they knew exactly what was going on.

I was actually looking for something else, but ran across this real interesting excerpt from the Junkfax.org Q & A:

“Q. The mortgage company says they aren’t guilty...they just buy leads. They don’t know how they are generated.

A. They know because they signed a contract with fax.com in advance, before they got the leads. Say there are 100 companies signing up for leads. Then fax.com sends out a “generic” fax and qualifies the person who calls. The lead is transferred to the company with the best fit based on qualifying questions (or on a random basis depending on how many leads they contracted for).

Here’s what I wrote to Bridge Capital’s attorney:

For the benefit of your client, I’d recommend you discuss the meaning of agency law. Your client ratifies the acts of his agent by buying leads that were generated by junk faxes.

If you client wishes to not to be sued in the future, they should acqure leads that were legally generated. If and when you client decides to do that, please let me know and as a professional courtesy, I will let the FCC and other interested parties know.

Until then, I believe your client can be held liable for ANY unsolicited mortgage faxes sent by “fax.com” since liability is joint and several.

In other words, if 100 advertisers buy leads from Live Leads Corp. aka “fax.com”, and fax.com sends out 1 fax, then the sender of that one fax is arguably the group of 100 advertisers, rather than the advertiser that actually gets the referral on the call. This is because the sender must be determinable at the time the fax was sent, rather than after the damage is done.

This lack of knowledge about what is going on is known as “the Sergeant Schultz Defense” which is the successor the Duck Test. Here’s the citation:

No matter how many times this Court reviews the factual essence of this case, one cannot resist a comparison between the Defendants’ professed ignorance of unlawful conduct, and perhaps the most memorable refrain of Hogan’s Heroes, a popular television situation comedy of the 1960’s. For those too young to remember, each episode featured a scene in which Sergeant Schultz, always unmindful of the clandestine activities of the irrepressible Colonel Hogan and his men, would be found to explain away his incompetence to his superior, the irascible Colonel Klink, by saying, “I know n-oth-i-n-g, I see n-oth-i-n-g, I do n-oth-i-n-g.”

This dialogue, which each week delighted television viewers across the country, somehow resurfaced once again, this time in my courtroom.

Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. v. Sona Distributors, Inc., 663 F. Supp 64, 66
n.1 (S.D. Fl. 1987).”

Too funny!

It seems like every time I look at this page it got longer and I find new great stuff.

Wednesday, March 02, 2005

FCC proposes $770,000 forfeiture against Dynasty Mortgage, Phoenix, for violating do-not-call rules

FCC PROPOSES $770,000 FORFEITURE AGAINST DYNASTY MORTGAGE, L.L.C.

FCC PROPOSES $770,000 FORFEITURE AGAINST DYNASTY MORTGAGE, L.L.C.
FOR APPARENT VIOLATION OF NATIONAL DO-NOT-CALL RULES

Washington, D.C.: The Federal Communications Commission today proposed a forfeiture of $770,000 against Dynasty Mortgage, L.L.C. of Phoenix, Arizona for apparently making telemarketing calls to residential consumers in violation of the Commission’s National Do-Not-Call rules. This action, the Commission’s first proposed forfeiture in the area, follows 16 citations against non-common carriers and two consent decrees involving common carriers.

The Commission found that Dynasty apparently initiated telephone solicitations to consumers who registered their numbers on the National Do-Not-Call Registry. The Commission proposed the maximum forfeiture of $11,000 for each of 70 violations because the company apparently continued to make telemarketing calls after receiving an FCC citation warning it of potential penalties if it continued violating the Do-Not-Call rules. Further, the company apparently misinformed consumers that it was exempt from these Commission rules.

By the Commission: Chairman Powell, Commissioners Abernathy, Copps, Martin and Adelstein, FCC 05-47, February 28, 2005.
Enforcement Bureau Contacts: Janice Wise (202) 418-7450, Mary Romano (202) 418-0975 or Kurt Schroeder (202) 418-0966

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

“Further, the company apparently misinformed consumers that it was exempt from these Commission rules.”

I have heard that lie so many times from the faxers ...

Saturday, February 26, 2005

GA lawsuit: “Wall Street Investor Alert” removal number rings at another business

Of course I’ve got these faxes too.  Can’t wait to see who did the faxing:

Ex-Ga. Governor Tackles ‘Fax Case From Hell’

“… Between April and November, Gillette’s company, Soundzabound Music Library, has been beset with five waves of phone calls from outraged recipients of junk faxes that display her number.

“It’s been unbelievable, the nightmare that befalls us,” said Gillette, whose business provides royalty-free audio to schools throughout the nation. “We’d have, literally every five seconds, a phone call. Each time this happens, it completely shuts us down.”

The faxes claim to be a “Wall Street Investor Alert” touting the stock of UBA Technology, an “explosive” Nevada-based company producing Internet gaming software. According to a complaint filed on Feb. 10 in Fulton County Superior Court, an unidentified sender has faxed hundreds of thousands of so-called investor alerts to individuals across the nation. Soundzabound Music Library v. John Doe Corp. d/b/a Wall Street Investor Alert, No. 2005CV97098 (Fult. Super. Feb. 10, 2005).

The notices promise that recipients can call an 800 number if they wish to “opt out” of receiving more faxes. The number, however, belongs not to the fax sender, but to Gillette.

It’s what Gillette’s lawyer, Roy E. Barnes, calls the “fax case from hell.” This is the latest consumer-oriented case to be championed by Barnes, the former Georgia governor who has restyled himself as a consumer advocate. ...”

Thursday, February 10, 2005

Robert Braver sued Ameriquest for spamming - LowerMyBills.com ALSO buys leads from spammers

From the Ameriquest cross complaint at http://mortgagespam.com:

9. On or about January 28, 2002, Ameriquest entered into a “Lead Purchase Agreement” with Lead Extreme whereby Lead Extreme agreed to generate and provide consumer leads for Ameriquest (“Lead Extreme Agreement”). Under paragraph 5.3 of the Lead Extreme Agreement, Lead Extreme agreed to comply with any and all applicable federal, state, and local laws in the performance of its obligations under the Lead Extreme Agreement. A true and correct copy of the Lead Extreme Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “1” and incorporated herein by reference.

11. On or about March 25, 2003, Ameriquest entered into a “Lead Purchase Agreement” with Visium whereby Visium agreed to generate and provide consumer leads for Ameriquest (“Visium Agreement”). Under paragraph 5.3 of the Visium Agreement, Visium agreed to comply with any and all applicable federal, state, and local laws in the performance of its obligations under the Visium Agreement. A true and correct copy of the Visium Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “2” and incorporated herein by reference.

13. On or about August 25, 2003, Ameriquest entered into a “Lead Purchase Agreement” with PEM whereby PEM agreed to generate and provide consumer leads for Ameriquest (“PEM Agreement”). Under the PEM Agreement, PEM agreed to comply with any and all applicable laws and regulations in the performance of its obligations under the PEM Agreement. A true and correct copy of the PEM Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “3” and incorporated herein by reference.

---------------------------------------------------------

You can view the actual agreements at Robert’s site.

*Somebody* needs to take this to HUD and whoever enforces federal Reg Z. 

Since I can now prove that LowerMyBills.com also buys leads from spammers and the consumers are ONLY hurt by lead generators—ALL mortgage lead generation should be prohibited at the federal level effective immediately with no exceptions.

The damages to consumers are devastating because the companies who hire spammers are nothing but lying scammers.  Many of the victims end up suffering severe financial problems and possibly end up in foreclosure and divorce.

It’s not just about a spam - it’s about peoples’ lives.

Tuesday, February 08, 2005

My fax to the Cal. DRE mortgage loan advertising department

I’m getting tired of the “investigators” at the DRE doing NOTHING. I still can’t believe that Laura Archer, Archer Finance, told me that it’s perfectly ok for a licensed Cal. Real Estate Broker to buy these junk fax leads.

The DRE review costs $40 per ad and is ONLY available for brokers, here’s the form: http://www.dre.cahwnet.gov/forms/re884.pdf

There has to be a way to establish for the record that these faxes are NOT compliant and that mortgage brokers and bankers can NOT legally buy these leads.

I faxed the DRE my questions.

----------------------------------------------------------------

To: Department of Real Estate – MLB Advertising

February 8, 2005

Via fax to (916) 227-0777 – 7 pages

Cover letter
1/18/05 letter to DRE M.L. Brown
12/29/04 news release – 4 pages
The faxed ad

Re: Review of Mortgage Advertisements

To Whom It May Concern:

I would like to have several mortgage advertisements reviewed by your department for compliance. In December I filed my complaint with the DRE about Dana Capital Group and Pacific West Mortgage and their illegal advertising.

My attached 1/18/05 letter to M. L. Brown is self explanatory and I have not received a response.

Are corrupt DRE employees on the brokers’ or lead generators’ payroll?

I am currently litigating against several California brokers for purchasing mortgage leads obtained through noncompliant junk faxes in violation of the TCPA. Dana Capital Group and CBSK (American Home Loans) usually settle TCPA suits and then CONTINUE to purchase leads obtained through illegal means, such as junk faxes, pre-recorded calls, spam, etc. – and the DRE does absolutely NOTHING to stop them!

I’ll be happy to pay you the $40 per review of each advertisement to establish whether these faxes comply. If this is not an option, please advise how I go about getting the DRE to express an opinion about the compliance of these faxes for use in court and in my publications.

My press release about Dana Capital Group was read over 73,000 times, I got lots of feedback and it is time for an update about the Southern California mortgage cesspool.

Sincerely,

Christine Baker
http://junkfaxsuit.info/ - for much more info on mortgage lead generation and junk faxes. 

Thursday, January 13, 2005

Texas AG files suit against spammers including for illegal mortgage solicitations

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/newspubs/releases/2005/011305lawsuit.pdf

Texas AG Greg Abbot filed this suit for violations of the CAN Spam Act, the TX Electronic Mail Solicitation Act and the TX Deceptive Trade Practices Act against a spammer with over ** 200 ** DBAs.

“… Ryan Samuel Pitylak, a University of Texas at Austin student, and Mark Stephen Trotter of California, are named in the Attorney General’s federal complaint as controlling PayPerAction L.L.C., Leadplex L.L.C. and Leadplex Inc., three companies registered in Nevada. One watchdog group, SpamHaus.org, ranks the defendants as the fourth largest illegal spam operation in the world. ...”

It’s about time!  And it’s nice how they specifically describe the mortgage spam ILLEGAL lead generation. 

I really have to get my Ameriquest complaint to the AZ AG.  You never know, they might do something.

The TX AG 1/13/05 news release:

MORE...

Monday, November 01, 2004

Findlaw history, summary and current status of the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2004 (H.R. 4600)

Death of the EBR Exemption May Be “Greatly Exaggerated”

“Rep. Dingell noted in his statement that the FCC’s desire to eliminate the EBR exemption “may quickly become an onerous burden, especially on small businesses and trade associations.” He noted that under the FCC’s new rules, his favorite restaurant would be unable to fax him an updated menu.’”

With this provision is seems like EVERY junk fax is legal.  How can a plaintiff prove that they never ate at a restaurant or never called a business or its affiliates?

What am I missing?

Why should THOUSANDS of people who made the mistake of eating at Rep. Dingell’s favorite restaurant be bothered with the faxed menus just because Dingle is too lazy to sign up for the fax broadcast list while he’s there eating?

I have called restaurants and requested a faxed menu and I requested that businesses fax to me more information about their products.  But those aren’t unsolicited faxes.

When I call on a product or service and I request more info to be faxed to me, that does NOT mean that I want them to fax me their weekly newsletter, specials, menus or whatever they fax to thousands or millions.

The written permission should absolutely be required for unsolicited faxes.

I’ve read about junk faxers providing telephone records from years earlier, claiming that the recipient requested the faxes during that call.  Nobody can ever prove what was really said in this conversation, it leads to unnecessary litigation and just gives the junk faxers a way out.

It would be a good idea if people subjected to that defense brought it to the attention of Congress.