OT: New laws for e-mail to Utah & Michigan

Coursedesign wrote on 7/1/2005, 1:47 PM

From Marketing Sherpa (public access will be removed after July 10):

-------------------------------------------------
"Friday, July 1, 2005, two new state laws come into effect. Apparently CAN-SPAM can't supersede them because these laws are *not* worded as anti-spam laws. They're child protection laws.
...
o Purge files for list owners to run their lists against, to eliminate registered names from possibly-illegal mailings. Pay a fee & do it every 30 days.
o Opt-in status and "existing business relationships" have no bearing.
o Penalties include fines, jail time, and felony charges.
o Funds are being set aside to prosecute offenders, plus individual email recipients (such as parents) are encouraged to bring civil action against even one-time offenses.
o Expect similar laws in other states shortly."
--------------------------------------------------

Let's say you send out a thank-you letter to your customers including those in Michigan and Utah, with a recommendation for your favorite books, say, "Lighting for Videographers" and "How to Read the Bible", with links to the Amazon pages for these titles.

Now you risk some entepreneuring parent in these states accessing new state prosecution funds to sue your business into the ground, with "fines, jail time, and felony charges."

Why?

Because you, the Defendant, linked to a site that contained "content forbidden for minors" (meaning "information on, or ads about, any product that a young person under 18 "is prohibited by law from purchasing or possessing"), in this case the content being articles in the Wall Street Journal on how to get the best interest rate on home mortgages.

Or you link to an article about fuel efficient cars on the Christian Science Monitor web site, which unfortunately happened to have an ad for an Evangelical Christian Dating Service (minors are not allowed to use dating services!) when the parent Googled their site for lawsuit bait, knowing that their civil lawsuit would be paid for with state funds, and ditto for the FELONY criminal prosecution.

Or say the CS Monitor site has an article on credit cards (illicit information for minors, since they aren't allowed to use them).

So consider carefully if it's worth communicating with customers in UT & MI, the penalties are severe. You can't rely on underfunded police departments setting this aside, since these laws specifically encourage parents to file law suits with state funding.

I wish everybody a nice Independence Day on Monday, in celebration of our independence from oppressive tyranny.

Frankly, I'm beginning to think that Grazie's ancestors weren't so bad after all... :O|

Comments

vitalforce2 wrote on 7/1/2005, 1:54 PM

As a lawyer I hate to say this, but the lawsuit 'bounty hunters' won't likely be enterprising parents. Too many legal procedural hurdles to tempt a layperson to take on suing across state lines--even gives most lawyers a headache. Instead, the bottom feeder will be some brethren attorney looking for enough hits to assemble a class action on behalf of said parents--contacting them through the Net himself, probably.

Ironically, the Repossessicans have unknowingly discouraged such practices with their legislation limiting class action lawsuits.
.

p@mast3rs wrote on 7/1/2005, 1:55 PM

Personally, I think this will be overturned in the courts. Theres NO possible way for anyone or business to know exactly what state the recipient resides, especially if its from a paid list. Furthermore, civil actions are only good for the state of the plaintiff so if I decide to send emails to Utah, theres nothing they can do to me while I reside in Kentucky unless I step foot in those states. The downside is my lack of prescence would probably give the plaintiff an automatic judgement but its not like they would ever get their money to begin with.

What this actually does is create an entire country of plaintiffs that can sue hard working companies so that they can get rich. If they really wanted to stop the spam crap, they should pass a law that NO one's information can be sold, solicited, or traded. Why wont they? Because these same information sellers pay top dollars to their lobbyists.

I actually wouldnt mind being the person to challenge the legality of the laws in MI & UT.

Coursedesign wrote on 7/1/2005, 2:14 PM

The downside is my lack of prescence would probably give the plaintiff an automatic judgement but its not like they would ever get their money to begin with.

No, but you might not be able to refinance your mortgage or buy a house.

"Mr. Masters, according to your credit report you have $1,250,000 in judgments against you in UT & MI, so the best we can offer you is 30% down plus a 5-year mortgage at 13.75%."

Most spam originates from overseas, that's tougher to eliminate.

I think it's time for a mandatory computer education for our lawmakers, with a comprehensive written exam afterwards.

If they pass, they get to keep their seats. If they fail, their bodies are sold for medical research.

johnmeyer wrote on 7/1/2005, 2:49 PM

My advice: Go enjoy the 4th of July fireworks celebration and quit wasting time thinking up reasons to feel miserable (and make everyone else feel miserable).

These laws sound like something similar to the Patriot Act. That law definitely went too far, but despite that fact, and despite all sorts of dire predictions, it has certainly not caught us all in some sort of Orwellian dragnet.

Quick, name one instance of a famous case of someone unjustly accused, tried, and convicted under provisions of the Patriot Act.

If any of these laws resulted in even a few such actual, real travesties, there is no way they would stand up to publich scrutiny.

It gets a little old listening to all the "sky is falling" scenarios. Like I said, just relax, go have some fun over the holiday, and chill out a little. People have got to regain some perspective on these things.

TheHappyFriar wrote on 7/1/2005, 3:07 PM

exactly. Let the supream cout really mess things up. They're on a roll! :D

p@mast3rs wrote on 7/1/2005, 3:13 PM

>My advice: Go enjoy the 4th of July fireworks celebration and quit wasting time thinking up reasons to feel miserable (and make everyone else feel miserable).>

John, I dont think we are here sitting here dreaming up scenarios. These things are actually happening. While these things have not yet had a great impact on someone, they will and theres the reason for the fear.

Its funny you mention the 4thof July. Independence Day. Yet on this Independence Day, we continue to lose more rights and liberties with modern day politicians. Is that what we should celebrate? Or how about we celebrate the original reason for Independence in the fact that our forefathers were a bunch of rich, egotistical, drunks who refused to pay their taxes. This is the very foundation our country was founded on. Yet, here we are many years later, we have an IRS that FORCES people to pay taxes. We have the right to free speech and not be subject to unreasonable search and seizure yet those very things are under attack currently. We have a right to purchase, invest in, and own property yet the government now sees fit to seize any home/property that it feels can bring in more taxes for them. We have our men and women fighting a senseless war who are dyign every day for a President's scramble for more oil. We have a country being run on a religious belief instead of one on a moral or political agenda and lastly a President who created the "No Child Left Behind Act" when he himself was a very poor student and most likely could not pass xCATS test himself.

We are constantly lied to by our nation's leaders, (pubs and dems both) and even those in our faiths whatever they may be. Add to it a bad economy and the obscene national debt, and boy oh boy, isn't it great to be an American?

Forgive me, but I dont think I can raise a beer and drink to that. The longer everyone burries their heads in the sand and ignores the "sky is falling" people, we will continue to lose more liberties. While we may be fortunate enough to not have these lost liberties affect us today, the potential is there for more liberties losses that will at some point impact some of us to a degree.

>Quick, name one instance of a famous case of someone unjustly accused, tried, and convicted under provisions of the Patriot Act.>

The name of the guy escapes me, but their was a strip joint owner in Nevada that used the PATRIOT Act right after it had passed to gather information for prosecution for prostitution, drugs, tax evasion, etc... Now, if I remember correctly, the PA only gives authority that level of access to information of someone suspected in terrorist activity. Maybe its me, I just cant see how some chick in her pasties threatened national security.

The sky may not be falling, but the sun is no where as bright as it once was for those that cherish each and every liberty we have been afforded.

Coursedesign wrote on 7/1/2005, 3:23 PM

These laws sound like something similar to the Patriot Act. That law definitely went too far, but despite that fact, and despite all sorts of dire predictions, it has certainly not caught us all in some sort of Orwellian dragnet.

The Justice Department recently officially denied that law enforcement ever asked for library and bookstore records. Too bad that the American Library Association quoted large numbers of member librarians who had received requests.

How can there be public scrutiny if the librarians can go to jail under the Pathetic Act for even disclosing that they received these requests?

Next step: mandatory video camera and microphone on everybody's cable box, with a second channel hookup in the bedroom for state officials to ensure that all plumbing hookups there are done according to state law (several states explicitly prohibit anything not performed by missionaries, it's for your own good), and automated RFID scanning of individuals within six inches of each other to make sure they are married in an evangelical church (Reformation of 1879, not the Reformation of 1915 infidels that were outlawed last year).

Seriously, laws like these have been used by dictators throughout history to suppress the people.

Let's hope that next year's elections will spur some of our congress critters to get rid of this idiotic garbage.

And let's hope that CPB's Inspector General gets Tomlinson fired for hiring an outside consultant to classify PBS guests as liberals or conservatives. Lifelong Republican guests who wanted better pay for military personnel were classified as liberals, because they didn't agree with Bush.

Freedom requires continuous vigilance and hard work.

So, let's relax this weekend and reflect on the free country that this once was.

Then, starting Tuesday, vow to make your contribution towards restoring the freedom that was.

It's not a party choice, they both seem to be equally daft right now, it must come down to those individuals in Congress and the Senate who care enough vs. those who are happy being slaves, and among the latter especially those who are happy to see their constituents enslaved.

Chanimal wrote on 7/1/2005, 4:28 PM

Frankly, as a father of FIVE beautiful and innocent children (4 months to 13 years--both boys and girls), I am pleased to see some states at least trying to do something about all the filthy, putrid pornographic, value destroying trash that is being pushed into our homes (I didn't subscribe to it) through our personal e-mail accounts.

I'm sure the intent of the law is not to nail any of us for including an inadvertant link to "child harmful" content. The "intent" is to nail the blantent porno pushers that fill our e-mail boxes with unsolicited garbage. These filthy dogs are getting bolder every day. At first it was suggestive e-mail or invitations to come see more. Now we get uninvited pornographic pictures embedded in our e-mails, terrible text that describes detailed attrocities, or e-mails with titles so brash that I have to have my kids look the other way when I'm ready to get my e-mail.

Having launched some of the earliest smut buster software, and having used several packages and filters since then--paying my money to keep these animals out--it still does not work. These folks are not making innocent mistakes, they are intentionally trying to deceive us by misspelling words, and ducking and dodging every wall we create--just to spill their filth into our homes. These folks are not concerned about our constitutional rights (certianly not as worried as we seem to be abour theirs)--just about exploiting what will hopefully be a short lived way of making their filthy lucre until we get smart and plug the holes.

We already have laws preventing unsolited filth in our mail boxes. We already have laws regulating the location of "adult" (porno) houses. It is about time we get creative and legally figure out how to keep this unsolicited e-mail garbage out. You opt in, you have a right to it--but it should be illegal for someone to use my bandwidth, my computer, my connection, my screen to pawn their filth into my family and private account without my express permission.

There are loopholes that are being used to poor the trash in, it is about time that we try to find loopholes to keep it out. The other person's rights stop where mine begins--at my door.

winrockpost wrote on 7/1/2005, 4:33 PM

Enjoy the holiday weekend, enjoy family, be thankful what you have,
at the very least evryone here has a computer and the internet. thats pretty immpressive to many parts of the planet.
quit bitchin and vote next time it comes around.

enjoy the weekend

vitalforce2 wrote on 7/1/2005, 4:51 PM

Problem with the Patriot Act is not that the Feds can snoop around your affairs. They've always been able to do that once they got a judicial warrant. Many, many judges take the officer's word and rubber-stamp the warrant. Now, not only do they not need a warrant, they can poke around your house/bank account/personal friends and leave, and they're not even required to tell you they were there. The difference is that law enforcement doesn't have to take the responsibility of going on record as to why you are a suspect. So now they're no longer accountable to you--you're accountable to them. The presumption of innocence is what is damaged by the Patriot Act, and nothing less.

This week I heard on talk radio that President Bush signed into law, the Real ID Act. This permits the state motor vehicle bureaus to encode your driver's license with your personal information. Is anyone asking "why--what does my credit history or my arrest in college, or my race, have to do with my driver's license?" A license accessible to a Federal database.

A nation doesn't lose its freedoms overnight. It always happens by degrees. We are seeing it happen in small bits now, and the only way to reverse the tide--the only way--is to drive the moneychangers from the temple.

The practical reality of the situation, given the current state of American politics, is that in order to purge the neo-con men hiding in the Republican Party, the Party unavoidably is going to suffer some temporary collateral damage. We all need to take a breath and pull the Democrat lever in every election for the next six years or so. Not Libertarian, not Greenpeace, only Democratic Party power can rival that of the party in power now.

So sit quietly a half-hour or so this July 4 weekend, whatever our politics, and ask yourselves (with the TV and the radio OFF), what does 'patriot' mean? What did it mean in 1776 when the British were raiding our Treasury and striping our driver's licenses?

Reread the Declaration of Independence. I keep a copy on the wall of my law office here on Wall Street. It declares freedom from an oppressive government and the construction of a new government based on "the consent of the governed."

.

TheHappyFriar wrote on 7/1/2005, 4:52 PM

I agree that the intentions are good & something should be done, but there's a lot of rediclious things also being done to stop kids from gettings things they shouldn't. Go to www.activision.com & click on the doom 3 link. You are required to enter your CC number to view any M rated content. Remember, this is info that you can get w/o any age verification from the back of the box. Plus, if you copy/pate the link into a browser window it works anyway.

Now, under this law, if your kid posted a question about Doom 3 on a website, or you e-mailed me asking about it & I sent eigther of you a link, *I* can get arrested. Technically, if I post the link here & your click on it & your kid goes to it in the history, *I* can get arrested. I can get arrested for just saying www.activision.com has info about stuff for underage kids.

Maybe the govt should put more effort into making sure media/online creators/outlets provide us with approperiate children material instead of wasting tax dollers atempting to take down what e-mail companies already spend millions on anyway.

In the now immortal words of "The Cat in the Hat" I'll leave you with the phrase "You dirty hoe" (rated PG of course)

johnmeyer wrote on 7/1/2005, 5:02 PM

So, let's relax this weekend and reflect on the free country that this once was.

Oh please, "the free country that this once was?" That is hyperbole of the highest order. Is your life really that different than it was a few years ago? Are you really that miserable? Is there even one thing you can't do now that you couldn't do twenty years ago? If so, I am sorry for you. Truly sorry.

Life is pretty darn good here, and I bet it is for most other people in this country as well. I have a great life, and everyone I have ever met in my life (I just turned 53) seems to be doing pretty well. What in the heck do you want? What sort of horrible things are happening to you? Exactly what Utopian ideal have we left behind?

Cars are safer, the air is cleaner, the water safer, and virtually every facet of life is easier and more pleasant than it was when I was a kid in the 1950's or when my parents grew up in during the Depression. I listened very closely to stories of what it was like in the 1930s, and then during the War in the 1940s. We've got things so good, that there isn't even a remote comparison to what they went through then.

All sorts of people like to try to make you think differently, and unfortunately a lot of people seem to enjoy making themselves miserable believing all this nonsense. They'll tell you the air is more polluted (it isn't -- I remember what it looked like in LA before 1970's smog controls, and I briefly worked for a steel company in East Chicago before they cleaned things up), the water far worse (despite measurements to the contrary, and despite the fact that Lake Erie, which was supposed to be dead forever according to experts in the 1970s, has come back to life), and the food supply contaminated with pesticides and genetically modified plants.

I guess this must explain why we are all living shorter lifespans, why we are sick all the time, and why I got arrested ten times in the past two weeks.

So my advice to everyone reading this is simple: Quit kvetching and enjoy your life!

TheHappyFriar wrote on 7/1/2005, 5:18 PM

except for the recent fish-herpes oubreak, lake erie has been great. Haven't been to but woodlawn, down the road from the bethlem steel is open (did you know they did work with nuclear material there? I didn't until recently) again.

I got a valid complaint though: thanks to money gubby banks my nice quite dirt road with 4 houses on it has turned into a not so quite non-dirt road with 9 houses on it (4 in the past 3 years). no, it's not a city, but i didn't move out here for the ability to mingle with others. :)

we can look at it this way though: if we start creating the same laws that we fought against in almost every war then soon we'll be be the ones ducking under bridges to avoid air raids & england will be comming to save our hides next time. :)

p@mast3rs wrote on 7/1/2005, 6:18 PM

John,

Again, just because you dont feel affected by the dwindling liberties doesnt mean others dont. While I may not have the years on this earth as you and many others, I still care about the freedom I have become accustomed to. A great man once said (name escapes me),"Those that refuse to fight for their freedoms, do not deserve their freedoms in the first place."

Like I said, you may not feel the affects of your freedoms now but what happens in 5 years when something does happen to you? Then do you start caring? Just what will it take for you to make a stand? While the liberties have not impacted me as of yet, I still have to stand together with others are. To stand up only when its in your best interest is exactly what is wrong with our country today.

Today, its ok for the government to read your emails without every telling you. You are ok with that I am sure because you never send in email something you dont want read. But what happens in a year if the government passes the law that they can open your postal mail and read it without ever telling you? Whats that? It wont happen? This is how it starts.

People everyday have the Patriot Act used against them. The only problem is they never know about it because the government is NOT required to disclose it. Stick your head in the sand and tell yourself everything is ok, that the Constitution will protect you and that we are all just worrying. Oh wait a sec...what was that thing about the right to property? They could never overturn that. Wait...thats right...they did.

mattockenfels wrote on 7/1/2005, 7:55 PM

What's the problem?

"Let's say you send out a thank-you letter to your customers including those in Michigan and Utah, with a recommendation for your favorite books, say, "Lighting for Videographers" and "How to Read the Bible", with links to the Amazon pages for these titles. "

Say thank you and be done with it.

apit34356 wrote on 7/1/2005, 8:38 PM

pmasters, maybe some good news, congress is about to pass a law, probiding state and local governments from taking private property and using it for private or any form of business enterprise, reversing the surpreme court ruling. Also they trying to pass a law to permit people who owned copyright material to copy it for personal use,(limited in use), again reversing some current law rstrictions.

p@mast3rs wrote on 7/1/2005, 8:49 PM

That would definitely be good news. My position on government is I am all for adding to the rights of the people, I just get concerned when rights we once had are taken away. Hopefully our country can recover from this rut we are in. I dont have much faith that we will but if and when it does happen, Ill be the first one to eat my plate of crow. I guess I just want my children to grow up with the same rights and liberties I was able to enjoy without fear of conspiracy or hidden agendas.

What will be interesting is with O'Connor retiring, will GWB nominate and get an extreme right wing Justice to give the Conservatives the major majority (6-3) on the Supreme Court. If that happens, its very possible that the Republican agenda could be carried out for the next 20 years regardless of which party holds the presidency.

apit34356 wrote on 7/1/2005, 9:11 PM

pmasters, an interesting note is that it was the conservative Surpreme judges that voted against the property sieze by government for private use. It was interesting that the media gave the impression that the ruling was from the right. O'conner was appointed by a Republican pres. and she was the first woman Surpreme Court judge. If her replacement goes left, then that will have more impact than her replacement being to the right.

Coursedesign wrote on 7/2/2005, 10:12 AM

What's the problem?

The easiest would perhaps be to revoke the First Amendment and replace it with a prohibition against desecrating the flag (excluding desecration of it through actions that shame the country that the flag represents).

Without the right to free speech, you can just say "thank you" and be done with it.

That is, you're done with it if you aren't believed to have said it in an ironic way that could be construed as criticism of the current government at the time, as interpreted by the court without hindrance from the quaint First Amendment.

You don't need to say anything. Do you?

Do you really think you should have a right to speak out for what you think is right? Just say "thank you" no matter what happens, and you won't get arrested.

I thought we went through this more than 200 years ago, in response to repeated similar problems where people got arrested for disagreeing with the king, disagreeing with the church, etc.

This is not about making yourself feel bad that the world isn't perfect.

There is a time for everything under the sun though, as stated so beautifully in Ecclesiastes:

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
a time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
a time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
a time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
a time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

Of the choices above, it seems to me that the time to speak is when we see something that's a lie and needs to be corrected for the future of our country, and certainly when we want to give thanks for what is good and right according to our own beliefs.

Somebody here mentioned that he had put up the "Design Specification" (that's what this really is!) for this country on his office wall.

I think I'll start doing the same, it is worth reflecting on every day of the year, not just the 4th of July.

If we don't remember our values, we slowly lose our rights, as eager politicians of all stripes create legislative shortcuts for their convenience (or personal profit).

Have a great 4th and remember the wise people who created the framework for this country!

Edit: closed html bracket properly.

vitalforce2 wrote on 7/2/2005, 1:51 PM

I'm reluctant to enter a debate with johnmeyer because of my respect for his tremendous contribution to this forum and his excellent advice when I've had tech questions. Just suffice it to say that political issues are issues involving groups of people, official surveys, statistics and trends, not individual anecdotes or newspaper accounts about how fine things subjectively appear to be. I heard that all the time as a teenager in the South--even though the last lynching and bumper-dragging of a black man in my home town was only 15 years earlier.

I know it sounds a sour note on July 4 to be critical of certain things, but I say it with full confidence in my own patriotism. I felt it vividly on September 11--my office is 2 blocks from the south tower of the WTC (all our windows suddenly went black when the dust cloud hit Wall Street--we thought the Stock Exchange had been bombed). I would have picked up a gun and started firing alongside any policeman who asked me to (it really scares my wife when I say that).

As to GWB and the O'Connor replacement, rest assured that the Pres will do the same thing he's done to fill every single other significant Federal office since O'Connor handed him the election in 2000: He will nominate someone from deep inside his political machine. This is one Administration that has distinguished itself in history as being based on politics to the exclusion of policy. I would not be a bit surprised if he nominates one of his closer acquaintances in Congress, judicial background or not.
.

johnmeyer wrote on 7/2/2005, 7:43 PM

This is one Administration that has distinguished itself in history as being based on politics to the exclusion of policy

And Clinton wasn't??

p@mast3rs wrote on 7/2/2005, 8:05 PM

While I am no big fan of Clinton, he left office and our country with a massive surplus and without a war only to have the incoming MORON piss it away and endanger innocent men and women all in the name of OIL...err I mean WMD.

Clinton may have been unfaithful to his wife and lied about it but the one thing I respect Clinton for was that he did not lead based on his faith and religon. Wish we could say the same about the current President.

filmy wrote on 7/2/2005, 9:41 PM

You know this is akin to what goes on "behind our back" every day...and I mean here in the U.S anyway. For example I get a letter today from the U.S Department of Education - chances are that every single person here who lives in the U.S and went to college and had a stundent loan also got one. The letter simply states that I am getting the letter as a form of disclosure that the US Department of Education, thanks to a 1999 bill, sells it's "Non-Public" information to third parties. It says I am getting this letter, and it is a generic letter, because I "currently have, or had at one time, a student loan." The really disturbing part to me is that this means that years ago whatever I did is now being sold to any "third party" that wants it - and I went to college many years ago, long before 1999 so it really is not important anymore in reguards to current goings on - unless someone wants to know what college I went to and that part is feely given by me. THing such as how much money I got, who co-signed th epaperwork, payments that were made and so on...I mean sorry but that is nobody's business. But imgine this - you apply for something - a loan or a job - and they come back with whatever "real" reason they feel fits, like "We see you were too poor to pay for college so you had to get a loan..." or "We see that you were late for 3 payments 30 years ago..." or somehting along these lines. Aside form this - ho wmany people here srtill live th elife they lved when they were 18 - 21? Aside from those here who are 15 - 24.

Think it doesn't happen? Well ok, maybe they don't tell you "they" purchased this info but a few years ago I decided to get a credit report and what do I see? I see that my auto insurence company had requested a credit history on me. I almost went through the roof. I called them to ask what they were doing and I was told that they run checks on every customer because people with bad credit will have to pay higher premiums - even if they had a perfect driving record and all the other auto safety things. What does credit havd to do with safe driving? Seems that the insurence industry did some sort of study and found that people who had bad credit were more of a liablity than those with good credit. Knowledge of driving be damned.

Welcome to the "hidden" world we live in anymore. You think the entertainment industry had hard times during the McCarthy era because of all the stupid BS well now with stuff like this, to re-quote a phrase - "You ain't seen nothing yet".

Besides - tracking people via email lists, private or otherwise, is an emerging "art form" and it has been done and I can only see it being done more and more. The recent rulings to allow lawsuits against any software that "could be/might be" used to "share" copyrighted material just opens up any form of extension of that - such as this threads topic. Oh yes...sure it can - get an email hyping something: software, a film, a TV show, a band or a song and the email has a link to a website where you can download it, legal or otherwise. gee - does this mean that your email program is now software that is being, or could be, used to download something you shouldn't? And oh my - forget if the email is talking about something like "The Tin Drum", "Thjrteen" or "Lolita". And what about songs like "Hit me baby one more time" or "When he hit me (it felt like a wet kiss)"? Maybe the athesist's will lobby to remove anything religious from all emails and email lists.

Excuse me now - I feel like going to see a film and yelling "fire". Maybe no one will care because everyone is too busy tracking down the file sharers and spammers.