| Home-based business consultants often advice | | | | act. This means subject lines such as, “You |
| their clients to use email marketing as a way to | | | | just won a trip,” “Mark where have you |
| increase their prospect list because it is fast, | | | | been,” or “Mark your order |
| convenient, and has a low CPI (cost per | | | | confirmation” are illegal because they are |
| impression). These “experts” will also | | | | blatantly misleading. We can enter a grey area |
| usually tell you that when done correctly, you will | | | | with subject lines such as “Mike, here is |
| earn thousands and thousands of dollars. Worse | | | | something for you” or “Mike something |
| still, they invariably have the perfect email service | | | | you might be interested in?”. These may or |
| and address list available—and for just this low | | | | may not be frowned upon. In my opinion, if we |
| price, they will do it all for you. | | | | are using a legitimate list, then a subject line like, |
| In my experience, these so-called experts are | | | | “Mike, I was told you wanted this.” or |
| using old lists and are not following the Can-Spam | | | | “Mike, is this what you were looking for?” |
| Act of 2003. This means that in most cases you | | | | should be in line with the act. But again, I am not |
| will not see a good ROI (return on investment). In | | | | a lawyer, so what is and what is not a misleading |
| the worst-case scenario you could be contacted | | | | subject line may be different to someone |
| by the DOJ and fined penalties of up to $11,000 | | | | representing the Consumer Protection Agency. |
| per incident. Why you and not the service you | | | | 3. It requires that your email give recipients an |
| used? Since you contracted the service, it is your | | | | opt-out method. You must provide a return email |
| responsibility to make sure that it is following the | | | | address or another Internet-based response |
| CAN-SPAM ACT. | | | | mechanism that allows a recipient to ask you not |
| So what exactly do we need to do as marketers | | | | to send future email messages to that email |
| to ensure we are not going to get a visit by | | | | address, and you must honor the requests. You |
| UNCLE SAM? Well, the good news is that the act | | | | may create a "menu" of choices to allow a |
| doesn’t preclude marketing emails. So for | | | | recipient to opt out of certain types of messages, |
| those of us using honest, legal email marketing, | | | | but you must include the option to end any |
| this is great news! Before the CAN-SPAM Act, | | | | commercial messages from the sender. |
| states and ISPs were trying to kill or block all | | | | Any opt-out mechanism you offer must be able |
| emails that they determined were promoting | | | | to process opt-out requests for at least 30 days |
| anything. I personally had emails blocked that I | | | | after you send your commercial email. When you |
| was sending to my customers who very much | | | | receive an opt-out request, the law gives you 10 |
| wanted to read my messages. Now that the | | | | business days to stop sending email to the |
| federal government has defined spam, or more | | | | requestor's email address. You cannot help |
| importantly what is not spam, we have recourse | | | | another entity send email to that address, or |
| if an ISP blocks a legitimate marketing email. | | | | have another entity send email on your behalf to |
| I want to make it clear that I am not a lawyer | | | | that address. Finally, it's illegal for you to sell or |
| and if you have any questions or doubts about | | | | transfer the email addresses of people who |
| what you or your service is doing, contact a | | | | choose not to receive your email, even in the |
| lawyer immediately. | | | | form of a mailing list, unless you transfer the |
| The first question you need to ask is, “Is this | | | | addresses so another entity can comply with the |
| email spam?” Luckily the CAN-SPAM act | | | | law. |
| defines for us which commercial ads are and are | | | | 4. It requires that commercial email be identified |
| not considered spam. | | | | as an advertisement and include the sender's valid |
| A "transactional or relationship message" – | | | | physical postal address. Your message must |
| email that facilitates an agreed-upon transaction or | | | | contain clear and conspicuous notice that the |
| updates a customer in an existing business | | | | message is an advertisement or solicitation and |
| relationship – may not contain false or | | | | that the recipient can opt out of receiving more |
| misleading routing information, but otherwise is | | | | commercial email from you. It also must include |
| exempt from most provisions of the CAN-SPAM | | | | your valid physical postal address. In my opinion |
| Act. | | | | this is the number one violation of the act. Lets |
| If you are sending an email to an existing | | | | first look at the valid physical postal address. It is |
| customer, or confirming or announcing the | | | | my belief, according to the new rule provisions, |
| completion of an action taken by the customer or | | | | that a USPS mail box is sufficient to fulfill this |
| prospect, then, other than item number 1 below, | | | | requirement (remember I am not a lawyer), . If |
| these emails would be exempt from the act. I | | | | you are working from home, using your actual |
| believe examples of these types of emails are | | | | home address, in my opinion, not a safe practice. |
| order confirmations, emails sent from web based | | | | I strongly suggest a USPS mailbox. |
| forms when the prospect clicks on a submit | | | | If you are going to purchase desktop emailing |
| button and active members of web site forum | | | | software, you need to know how the law applies |
| subscribers or blog subscribers. So these would all | | | | to Emailers. I will not cover these regulations |
| be exempt. I strongly suggest, even though as I | | | | other than to say, as a person who contracts |
| read the act it’s not required, to always | | | | these types of services, I always send an email |
| include a simple opt out section (item 4 below) in | | | | asking “Does your company comply with the |
| your email. | | | | CAN-SPAM act which became law on January 1, |
| As best as I can determine, this is what the law | | | | 2004, United States of America?” The only |
| requires (reference | | | | way I will do business is if the question is |
| 1. It bans false or misleading header information. | | | | answered affirmatively and the email is signed |
| Your email's "From," "To," and routing information | | | | with the name of a real person, with a phone |
| – including the originating domain name and | | | | number so I can validate that the person does |
| email address – must be accurate and identify | | | | exist. I SAVE THESE EMAILS as proof that I |
| the person who initiated the email. This means | | | | have done what can be considered as |
| that the practice of bouncing emails off of out of | | | | “reasonable” to ensure that I, and the |
| country servers that hide the point of origin of | | | | service I am using, is in compliance with the act. |
| the email is in violation of the act. If you have | | | | The above information is not complete; there are |
| created a legal email there really isn’t any | | | | additional types of emails with additional regulation |
| reason to go through the added expense of using | | | | that I didn’t write about. |
| a hidden server. | | | | The bottom line is that emails do work, when |
| 2. It prohibits deceptive subject lines. The subject | | | | written well; but there are pitfalls both from a |
| line cannot mislead the recipient about the | | | | financial and legal aspect and you need to beware. |
| contents or subject matter of the message. This | | | | The best way to build your list is by creating your |
| is usually where most of the emails I receive | | | | own list, using your own capture pages, search |
| from home based business companies or | | | | engine placement, and pay for click advertising. |
| promoters first fail to be in compliance with the | | | | |