On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:32:19 GMT Richard J. wrote:
} Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
}
} If it is really officially from TfL, then either:
} - you agreed at some past time to receive it, in which case it is good
} practice for them to include an unsubscribe feature, or
} - you haven't so agreed, in which case they're breaking the law.
}
} What law is that? I didn't realise that the UK's anti-spam laws were that
} strict.

Obliquely. To send you mail they must keep you e-mail address and in so
doing fall under the data protection act.

Since a tightening up that came into force January such data may only
be used for the purpose for which it was gathered.

Top satisfy this you must have been presented with some text (paper or
web) explaining that they'd spam you if you did (opt in) or didn't (opt
out) this or that check box.

Further they may now only do so for a year before again ascertaining
your willingness to be spammed. Without your extended permission they
have to expunge "the data" ie your e-mail address.

Now I'm looking forward to a time when opt-outs are made illegal and all
such schemes require a positive opt-in action on the part of the
putative recipient. This is the way we do it at work and I had cause to
notice that the Telegraph site is the same.

Personally I wish that I'd kept more stringent records of various
transactions online. I am usually scrupulous about opting-out or not
opting-in as the case may be and am firmly convinced that I have never
given permission for the Really Useful Company to spam me. They persist
in doing so and I lack the means of demonstrating that I didn't say they
could.

Matthew
--
Záhid sharáb píné dé, masjid mein baith kar
ya woh jagah batá dé jahán Khudá na ho.
http://www.calmeilles.co.uk/