[176586] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Anybody at Amazon AWS?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Teleric Team)
Thu Dec 4 15:49:45 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Teleric Team <teleric-lists@outlook.com>
To: "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." <amitchell@isipp.com>, "nanog@nanog.org"
<nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 15:49:36 -0500
In-Reply-To: <C57E8050-8DA6-4408-9F32-6A7A1031714B@isipp.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> From: amitchell@isipp.com
> Subject: Anybody at Amazon AWS?
> Date: Thu=2C 4 Dec 2014 09:15:36 -0700
> To: nanog@nanog.org
>=20
> Anybody have a contact at Amazon AWS?
>=20
> I sent in a spam complaint=2C and got back the below response - while I g=
ive them kudos for actually=2C you know=2C responding=2C I'm pretty sure th=
at we can all agree that "sending the same canned message to email addresse=
s scraped off websites" is the very definition of spam=2C yet somehow the E=
C2 abuse team seems to consider it a perfectly acceptable explanation - I'=
d sure love to discuss this with someone with a clue at Amazon AWS
Did you try their abuse telephone? +1 (206) 266-2187?
Once I needed I had proper services on that number.
Anyway I am not sure if your contact will make a difference. As I see the c=
ase=2C honestly=2C it's you complaining against their customer=2C and Amazo=
n is profiting from that customer. If you and only you are complaining I do=
n't believe you will be heard.
Anyway the customer assumed they sent UCE. But won't assume it was a SPAM. =
As I see the customer states that a e-mail was sent to an e-mail address yo=
u have published as contact e-mail address and therefore=2C they have conta=
cted you. In a canned way=2C but if it was a personal e-mail offering you s=
omething you don't care about=2C would you fill an abuse report? Or just ig=
noring/declining the offer?
If I right you a polite message right from my MUA and don't mention your na=
me=2C treating you pretty much like a generic person I don't know=2C and of=
fering my services=2C my curricula=2C or trying to show you a product I hav=
e created myself and believe it might be off your interest=2C it's certainl=
y UCE but will you complain to my provider stating I was spamming you?
Well if it's true tha the sender used gmail (you can check your e-mail head=
ers)=2C pasted your address on their MUA or webmail as a Bcc or something l=
ike that=2C and Gmail didn't block the outgoing message=2C and you (and may=
be 2 or 3 other individuals) didn't like that=2C I don't think Amazon or Go=
ogle will find it as abuse of services.
Certainly it's not a good practice. Not something nice to do=2C or to recei=
ve. But is that an abuse? I don't think so. Specially of a minimum good pra=
ctice is in place=2C just like a an opt-out mechanism or similar.
Good luck with that phone call. You will find someone to talk to. But I'm n=
ot sure you will find someone to agree with you it's an abuse.
> ---
>=20
> Our customer has responded to your abuse report and provided the followin=
g information
>=20
> "The below emails were sent individually to the recipient using a canned =
message. There is no automation or mass emailing at all. Our publisher repr=
esentative personally visited each of the below websites=2C decided they we=
re right for our service and emailed them individually. The emails are sent=
through gmail using a web interface to their API.
>=20
> Let me know if you require any additional information.
>=20
> Dwayne"
>=20
> If you are satisfied with the above information=2C there is no need to re=
spond to this notice. If you are not satisfied=2C please respond with a cle=
ar=2C succinct reason for dissatisfaction and what results you desire from =
our customer. We will make every reasonable attempt to work with you and ou=
r customer to resolve this matter. =20
>=20
> Thank you=2C
> The EC2 Abuse team
>=20
> ---
>=20
> Anne
>=20
> Anne P. Mitchell=2C Esq.
> CEO/President
> ISIPP SuretyMail Email Accreditation & Certification
> Your mail system + SuretyMail accreditation =3D delivered to their inbox!
> http://www.SuretyMail.com/
> http://www.SuretyMail.eu/
>=20
> Author: Section 6 of the Federal CAN-SPAM Act of 2003
> Member=2C California Bar Cyberspace Law Committee
> Ret. Professor of Law=2C Lincoln Law School of San Jose
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/annemitchell
> 303-731-2121 | amitchell@isipp.com | @AnnePMitchell | Facebook/AnnePMitch=
ell=20
>=20
>=20
=
