Making junk mail illegal
June 06, 2003She held the letter up and loudly asked, "I really want to know how you can find this offer for free mortgage insurance to be erotically arousing". Customers turned and stared. The lady at the register next to me blushed, and a silence fell over the postal clerks who had clustered around. A fly buzzed idly in a corner of the window.
"Ma'am," I calmly replied, "I don't think that's an appropriate question, considering that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a clothing catalog could be considered provocative, and federal law requires you to accept the form."
That was the scene at the Redmond Post Office today. A few weeks ago, I send out letters to twenty companies, requesting that my name be removed from their mailing lists. I followed up by phoning a few of the companies, requesting that they stop sending me unsolicited mail. Several of those companies claimed that there was no way to unsubscribe. I had fired a warning shot over their bow.
Today, I fired the warning shot through their bow.
A little-known Federal law allows individuals to send a Prohibitory Order against companies that are sending unsolicited sexually provocative or erotically arousing mail. The Supreme Court went one step further, allowing individuals to decide what constitutes "erotically arousing" mail. The law makes it illegal for a company to send mail to an individual within thirty days of receiving the Order.
This law is realized through US Postal Service Form 1500 (PDF format), which allows an individual to issue a Prohibitory Order. Thanks to the fine advice from JunkBusters, I'm going to put an end to this junk mail problem. Here's how it works:
1. Download Form 1500 and print it out.
2. Fill out the single page form with your mailing address, and the senders mailing address. PO boxes aren't accepted, so you may need to spend a minute looking up the real mailing address for the company in question.
3. Attach the opened piece of junk mail to the form. It's very important that the junk mail is opened - law prevents postal employees from opening the mail.
4. Put it all in an envelope and mail it to the address listed on Form 1500.
If you're feeling particularly mischievous, take the completed form to your local Post Office. I'd also recommend that you print out page 13 of Postal Bulletin 21977 (PDF format). Circle the first paragraph on the right side of the page, which states "Postmasters may not refuse to accept a Form 1500 because the advertisment in question does not appear to be sexually oriented. Only the addressee may make that determination."
I handed the postal clerk Postal Bulletin 21977, and there was a brief conference behind the counter as she read it aloud for the assembled clerks. The Postmaster came out to see what the commotion was about. He patiently explained that they would accept the form, and suggested that I mail the forms in next time. They don't see many of these requests. He also helpfully gave me another copy of the form (in triplicate) and suggested that I write to the Direct Marketers Association (DMA).
I've printed out a small stack of these forms. From now on, every piece of junk mail that I receive will generate a Prohibitory Order. I might even visit other Post Offices to send in the form, to see what type of reaction the clerks have. My goal is to receive no unwanted mail by the end of summer.
Comments:
Go you!
I'm gonna go check if we've got anything to match this in our own statutes and regs. I doubt it, but it's worth a look.
Posted by: at August 7, 2003 12:29 PM
It's a Federal statute, hence it will cover you if you live in the US.
Posted by: at August 8, 2003 11:34 AM
This works.
I had posted about it on my blog roughly 2 years ago, when music retailer Sam Ash was going insane with junk mail to me. I found the aforementioned Form 1500 and brought it to my local post office. At first they were skeptical, but they soon took the form.
Since then, I've received not one drop of junk from Sam Ash - and if they ever choose to send me one, I can sue them.
Form 1500 is wonderful. Use it if you have to.
Posted by: at August 11, 2003 06:32 AM
I tried doing this around 6 months ago. The Post Office refused to deal with the forms I mailed in to them. It seems you can't file their form against companies that don't provide any address at all. So I'd have to call their stupid phone number, ask their address, then file the form. They also refused to accept the form against political candidates. Well, let me try to do the form again. I'll keep better records this time. Mike
Posted by: at August 12, 2003 05:28 AM
you just have a lot of time on your hands
Posted by: at September 1, 2003 04:07 PM
I have had my own personal battle with a high volume of the mailbox spew. Most companies will take me off their list. About 10% of the time, a care less company will get a form 1500. And of those care less companies, so far only two have repeatedly violated the Prohibitory Order. Today, I only get perhaps one or two pieces of spew per week, of which are mostly new ones I've never seen before.
Posted by: at September 9, 2003 11:17 PM
If the companies will harass me with mail i don't want, i will harass them back and waste their time.
Posted by: at October 11, 2003 06:50 AM
Here's the scoop - all of this, and I mean ALL - is a gross violation of our Constitution. 1st of all, there is never a legal violation under our Constitution until there is someone who has a violation of life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. This has to have an injured party proven by property loss or some measurable loss of repute; income or such. Now sexual content fits but that's about it. A word of caution about all this Do Not Call, Do Not Email, Do Not Mail crap that's constitutionally ILLEGAL is that with this stuff implemented it will utterly destroy the small independent businesses and only benefit the corporations with annual billions in advertising budgets. That's exactly what the Constitution was for - to protect the individuals and their commerce! The Constitution was set up to allow people to be responsible for their own conditions and only monitor those who injured their neighbors - a phone call, letter or email does not injure anyone unless they're already a "victim". Claiming protection from the Government is both dangerous and not responsible when no one is injured but merely "inconvenienced". This tends to trash the legal proceedings and foundations of our government and sets up this "Big Brother/1984" thing that has to educate our children (Dept. of Education), invest our savings (Social Security), manage our healthcare (Medicare), etc., all because we are not responsible enough in their eyes. If you believe that any group can manage your affairs better than yourself then take a close look at how our educational system, social security system and medical industries have been "managed" by the government. All of these are the most expensive endeavors in recorded history and either present us with no product or a very, very poor product in terms of return. All because the constituency of this country cried "victim" in one way or another and the good old benevolent government had to take over what we refused to do for ourselves. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves - Pres. A. Lincoln. Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country - Pres. J. Kennedy. Point being, this "protection" will only be more costly and cause lower quality in the long run - be trying to think of making our country a smarter, happier, more productive place for our children to inherit instead of more difficult, costlier and "asleep". We need LESS laws, not MORE.
Posted by: at October 30, 2003 06:12 PM
Hello,
Thanks for taking the time to write up a lengthy stream-of-conciousness document. Unfortunately, your argument isn't as coherent as it is long. Spouting off irrelevant quotes and prancing about the Constition does not make for an effective argument.
This has nothing to do with the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court upheld the law that allows consumers to determine what constitutes junk mail. This law allows consumers to protect themselves against intrusive, unwanted advertising. The worst advertisers are the large corporations who don't have individuals interests in mind.
It's a law. You can use it or choose not to use it. I'm providing information for people who are sick of the non-stop barrage of privacy-invading advertising. Which also means that this URL isn't illegal, as you erroneously claimed.
Posted by: at October 30, 2003 08:49 PM
can any one tell me how i can find out if e mails and regular mail i recive that claims i can make money is illegal as well just a scam or is legit just curious. if someone can help me out with some info can e mail me thank you
Posted by: at December 6, 2003 04:18 PM
Kayne,
Posted by: at December 9, 2003 10:43 PM
I beleive Kenn's statement(10/30/03) to be true. All of this whiney little crap about my inbox ,my mailbox, my phone is just pure sissyness. Just throw it away, delete it whatever! Turn the damn page and move on with your life. Further more this new anti-spam legislation may have more to do with the millions of dollars being lost by the US Postal system to email. Before you know it we will be paying for each email will send. We all ready pay for TV.
-J
Your deft mastery of the English language nearly leaves me speechless. It was quite difficult to stop laughing. At least it's pure sissyness, which I would assume is somehow better than a watered-down sissyness. The best insults are really the ones that aren't limited by actual words.
Perhaps you're not motivated to take action against the torrent of advertising in your daily life. But don't throw your lot in with Kenn, who's ranting and incoherent argument about the constitution had nothing to do with the subject. Once again, it's a law, it's a free country, and it's your choice to use the law. Advertising makes you stupid, and it's not my problem if you're too lazy to permanently stop the advertising.
Regarding the urban legend of paying for email, there is no central authority that would be capable of forcing you to pay for each email. If you still don't believe me, check out http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/bill602p.asp for the full details.
Posted by: at December 10, 2003 06:49 AM
Kayne,
Posted by: at December 10, 2003 03:49 PM
You are a funny man.I'm not here to compare brain pans with you.
But please educate me on how advertising can make someone stupid? This is a weird comment to make. And as far as "Perhaps you're not motivated to take action against the torrent of advertising in your daily life" who says these things. It is mail! That's it. What is missing in someones life to go as far with this as you have. My motivation is with my family and friends not junk mail.
just wondering????
j
Wow, excellent work. very interesting. Hope toread more.
Posted by: at January 11, 2004 08:38 AM
Just started using 1500 last December. Dropped it all in my mailbox with the flag up and away it went. Three weeks later... a nice letter from the local postal manager wrapping my junk came back, telling me that this form does not apply to 'unwanted' mail and that I should contact the DMA.
"Rowan vs. USPS" and USPS 21977 in hand... I took it down with a firm, but polite letter thanking the manager for her time, assuring her I'd already pursued the DMA and the major list brokers and asking her to re-review carefully the Postal Regulations about who determines what is a pandering advertisement.
She accepted the junk and told me it would be forwarded to the Memphis center as per the Form 1500 instructions...
I find "ADVO" (ShopWise coupons and have you seen this kid) to be the most persistant. I called them directly and was assured within two months the mailings would stop.
Yeah... it is kinda petty, but the other side of the coin is... what all are these guys doing with your demographics. Check out Junkbusters.com to see just how much somebody knows about you.
HZ
Posted by: at January 18, 2004 03:42 PM
There has to be a better outlet for your time than viewing the contents of your mailbox. C'mon guys....there is a life out there, form 15** what? How does a person even find these forms? It is quite crazy if you ask me.
Posted by: at January 22, 2004 09:47 PM
I have to pay for trash service. I wouldn't have trash to throw away if I didn't have junk mail. Unwanted commercial mail requires a trash bin and trash service to get rid of it. Junk mail is causing me to spend money on trash service I wouldn't have spent otherwise. Therefore, they are injuring me in a quantifiable way. It is an injury to have to pay to clean up someone elses junk, not just an inconvenience. As a society, we are all paying to clean up this mess, it is just not as obvious, as we pay a few cents here and there for the taxes. For example, the extra gas it takes the postal truck to lug tons of unwanted paper around town causes pollution, which we then pay to clean up or monitor, using a few dollars of extra income tax allocated to the EPA, etc.
Posted by: at January 31, 2004 04:59 AM
Darn, I was hoping to respond to Kenn and J, but Teresa already nailed it! All I can add is that I pay for my internet access and have a limited number of hours for the price. If I have to spend extra time deleting dozens of unwanted emails every day, who pays for that time???
I think Kenn should read his own email ;"there is never a legal violation under our Constitution until there is someone who has a violation of life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. "; my pursuit of happiness includes my personal privacy which does not inclued unsolicited mailings.
Michael
Posted by: at March 10, 2004 06:08 PM
Kayne,
Keep up the good work. I am considering writing a polite letter to my postmaster asking nicely to stop sending the Advo junk, or should I go to defcon 1 and send the form 1500 as my first strike? What do you think?
I sent the form Advo requests you to send, if you want off their list. I still get the "shopwise" ad, distributed by Advo, but there is no address card/missing kid. Incidentally, it's offensive to me that anyone seeks to profit, even indirectly, from a tragic situation like a missing child.
Address card or not, I still get Shopwise. The advo website says call your carrier. So I call my post office. I talk to the carrier supervisor. "They pay us to put one in your mailbox". I tell him I don't want it, give him my address, and he says he'll take care of it. That was last week. Yesterday, I get 2 of them in my mailbox. He took CARE of me alright. It offends me that the USPS is using my mailbox to make money, and wants me to think I have no control over what goes in there.
Does the form 1500 tactic work, when the offending mail piece does not have your address?
Posted by: at March 18, 2004 10:12 AM
It is incredibly difficult to stop shopwise (and the like) coupon junk mail from coming into your mailbox. Even if you get off their mailing list as I have, I still receive the coupons, but now I'm not getting the "have you seen me?" cards.
The post office guy I spoke with said that shopwise bulk drops the coupons to the post office and they are then blindly put into everyone's outgoing mail cubbyhole by a postal worker. There is no stopping it.
I was actually thinking of joining back up onto their mailing lists so at least they would have to pay a few pennies to mail their cards to me.
I'll try to file a form 1500. Thanks for the info.
Posted by: at April 7, 2004 01:09 PM
Related Stories
Embedded Advertising and TV - May 17, 2005
.US Domain Owners Lose Privacy - Mar 07, 2005
Blocking Google Adwords - Aug 13, 2004
Final battle in the war on junk mail - Jul 22, 2004
Dell vs. the USPS - Jul 20, 2004
77.1%
22.9%
