4.
~/~ SOHO HELP DESK ~\~
http://www.demc.com
"Habeas, Inc. Reader Feedback"
Today's SOHO Help Desk wraps up our recent discussion on
Habeas, Inc.. First you'll find another quick clarification
from Anne P. Mitchell, CEO of Habeas, Inc on their licensing
fees. Then a number of our DEMC readers have written in to
share their opinions about Habeas, Inc.
If you missed the discussion on Habeas, Inc. our last E-Magazine,
you can access the back issue from our email marketing newsletter archive.
But before we get back to Habeas we have a DEMC subscriber
who needs your input on finding a email sign-up script. You
can send your answer to - mailto:helpdesk@demc2.com
And if you have any questions or feedback for our next issue
again just send your email to - mailto:helpdesk@demc2.com
Thanks for your input!
=== HELP REQUEST ===
From: Vijay Kumar
Hi,
I need a permission newsletter sign-up script for my site.
Can someone let me know where to find a script like this
and the costs involved?
Thanks very much in advance,
Vijay Kumar ...
(The Man who Realized God in 1993)
http://www.godrealized.com/
=== CLARIFICATION ON HABEAS, Inc. ===
From: Anne P. Mitchell
In Laurie Roger's last article there were a few misleading
statements which caused there to be inaccuracies in the
Habeas, Inc. fees. I have highlighted the confusing
statements below and provided clarification.
> "Individual and ISP licenses are free." Although they
> may be free, your messages must be completely non-
> commercial. That means you can not email your friends
> and family regarding any business matters."
This is an inaccurate interpretation. If you want to send
email to your sister saying "Hey, I have a great lead on a
wonderful business opportunity", or email to your mother
telling her the price of your stock, of *course* that's ok!!
> "Bulk Commercial Mail licenses are based on email volume."
> You'll pay from 1/2¢ to 1¢ a message, with a minimum fee of
> $200 up to a maximum of $3,000 a month."
This statement is not clear and while it may have meant this
the correct way (the minimum is $200 *per year*), it certainly
can be read to mean "$200 per month to $3000 per month"
which is not correct.
> "Upon double checking the Habeas site I learned that only
> non-commercial ezines with under $100,000 annual business
> revenue get special treatment.
Using the term "commercial" makes the comment above wrong.
By definition if a newsletter is of a "business", it is commercial.
We were very careful in choosing our words: we said "primarily
marketing or promotional material", not "commercial".
Most newsletters actually qualify for the newsletter exception
and can acquire the $200 business license. In nearly ever
newsletter I've seen, while the content was promotional in nature,
the primary purpose of the newsletter was to distribute *editorial*
content. Otherwise it wouldn't *be* a newsletter - it would be a
sales flyer.
If you have any questions or need additional information on
Habeas, Inc. please contact me.
Sincerely,
/s/
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
CEO
Habeas, Inc.
http://www.habeas.com
=== RESPONSES ABOUT HABEAS, INC. ===
From: Deirdre Jones
Something stinks about this whole thing. It is censorship in
its purest form.
It all started with the spam filters that most ISPs have
opted to start using without consulting me, the consumer.
There is something VERY WRONG with the idea of my ISP
deciding whose email I get. Who is paying whom here?
If this were the US Postal Service, these people would
all be prosecuted as felons for interfering with the
delivery of all.
Did I miss something here? Or do I feel like I am twelve
all over again, when my parents told me what, where,
when and how?
I am both insulted and outraged that someone has decided
that I lack the intelligence to decide what email I want
and do not want to receive. We are all adults here. Most
email programs come with filtering tools. I suggest we
behave like the adults that we are and learn to use them.
I don't enjoy getting all the UCE either, but I am NOT
behaving like a baby about it. I filter, filter, filter of
my own accord. My ISP provides an automatic filter, but I
am given a choice whether or not I want to use it.
I choose to have this mail delivered to another folder on my
server where I can review it at my own leisure. I have
often found something that I requested to receive in that
folder. How much email are YOU missing?
You see, Habeas is trying to soften the impact of all this
with their carefully worded rhetoric. But I ain't buying it!
Sure it starts small, just like the filters. Next thing you
know, it is a requirement. Just like taxes. Remember,
originally, only the rich were supposed to pay taxes. How
long will it be before we are ALL required to pay for this
censorship?
Not too long, because you can best believe, the days of
free information are coming to an end if we all just sit
down and take this one.
Deirdre Jones
http://www.jmoepost.com
===> A Better Solution
From: Joe Halbrook
Thank you for your clarification regarding Habeas licensing.
Personally, I don't care what it costs, I think it's a bad
idea for the industry. I recently considered partnering
with Habeas. But, after pondering over the concept for
some time, I decided it wasn't the right thing for me to do.
Here's why:
I ask the DEMC, and all email publishing communities, to
step back and take a couple of minutes to really think
about what Habeas is working in concert with ISPs and
spam filtering companies to do:
Remove the decision-making process of the individual
mailbox owner as to whether incoming email IS or IS NOT
wanted, and whether it is to be delivered to their
mailboxes or not.
And the basis for that decision? Whether the Senders of
email shelled out the $$$$ for a Habeas license fee. ???
Sounds more than a little questionable, to me.
Someone please explain to me how Habeas can guarantee
that a licensee does indeed have bonafide permission to
email each recipient. Until every subscription request from
every Habeas licensee originates from a Habeas interface,
I don't see how that can be done.
No thank you; no ISP or their partner has the right to
mandate what it will and will not deliver to my mailbox,
just like nobody sits between my telephone and my
incoming callers and screens who I will and will not
receive phone calls from.
Since when is this an acceptable practice? I and ONLY I
can decide for myself what IS and IS NOT unwanted email
in my mailbox. Period.
To make matters worse, sometimes filtering is done so
without the knowledge of the mailbox owner. And the
absolute worse case scenario, is that filtered email is
simply not delivered at all, nor is it placed in a temporary
holding area so that recipients can make that final decision
as to whether it truly is unwanted, or not.
>From that viewpoint, all those folks who buy into the
Habeas concept are really missing the point: Filtering
should be based solely on the judgment of the individual
mailbox owner - not some intermediary party or parties.
I proposed a solution that puts the mailbox owner in charge
of defining what he or she considers to be unwanted or
legitimate email. After all, that's all that really matters -
what the mailbox owner thinks. Right?
Thus, I developed a solution that, in effect, filters
EVERYTHING - the first time it hits my mailbox. I can
then blacklist or whitelist each item the first time (with
just one mouseclick).
But, I also offer each Sender the opportunity to whitelist
himself, if he can prove he's not a spammer. My solution
sends each Sender whose email I filter, an authentication
email that lets him prove there's a human on the sending
end. If he authenticates his email, viola, he adds himself
to my whitelist (which is nice, because the Senders
automate the whitelisting function). If not, I can assume
either 1) he's a spammer, or 2) he's not concerned that I get
his email. Either way, I never see future email from him
again.
Of course, since I always control the final decision, I can
override any whitelisted email address, at will - again
with just one mouseclick.
And by the way, when a Sender does authenticate his email,
the email item that was originally filtered is automatically
removed from the temporary holding area, and placed back
in my mailbox. So whitelisting is mostly an automated
function. Plus, it brings the chance of false-positives or
false-negatives down to zero.
Will the first issue of DEMC E-Magazine get filtered after
installing my solution? You bet. But only that first time!
>From that point forward, after I make the conscious
decision that I ALWAYS want to receive the DEMC
E-Magazine (with one mouseclick), it will NEVER be
filtered again. And it only took 2 seconds for me to train
my software solution to respect my decision - forever, or
until I change my mind, which I tend to do once in a while.
I really think we need to step back, from time to time, and
think about what kind of "solutions" we're being offered.
If we don't see anything that suits our needs, propose our
own solutions.
Joe Halbrook, CTO
Permission Technologies
http://www.CleanMyMailbox.com
===
Please keep sending in your feedback. The help and
resources we've been able to share has been terrific.
Send in your questions, answers and thoughts by
emailing: helpdesk@demc2.com
Be sure to include your SIG and contact URL with your
post as we'll be sharing any viable ideas/information in
an upcoming issue of DEMC E-Magazine.
=============
5.
ADVERTISE IN DEMC - * PRICES *
For information on advertising to the DEMC E-Magazine's
175,000 subscribers for as little as $36, plus details on
How To Get a FREE Ad in DEMC E-Magazine Visit Our Web Site:
http://www.demc.com/Advertise/advertise.html
DEMC
PMB 227, 24-G West Main St.
Clinton, CT 06413
(860) 669-4365
(c) 2003 DEMC All rights reserved
View other back issues of DEMC.
Just click to access our email marketing newsletter archive.