MAYBE ENOUGH STATE LAWS CAN KICK CONGRESSIONAL BUTT AND GET MEANINGFUL FEDERAL LEGISLATION
If enough states pass laws governing the protection of our sensitive data, maybe the junk mail lobby will swoop down on Congress to standardize federal legislation for this issue. The feds are toying with several bills from Diane Feinstein in California to Patrick Leahy of Vermont. They all stink for one reason: They do not give control of your name and personal data to you, the individual. Do they think we are idiots, unable to handle this responsibility? Or are they—and by “they” I mean Congress—afraid that with control, most consumers will begin to demand the civil liberties that go with this important right? Mondaq.com had a good article on the state approach in March, focusing on California. Two bills have come out of that state; one, SB 1386, the California Data Protection Act, enacted in September of 2000, which exposed the ChoicePoint data breach. The second, SB 27, which keeps most data brokers honest by allowing state residents to demand to see the data in their personal records. Unfortunately, neither address the main issue which is where should the control over sensitive data reside. A bevy of states have passed data protection bills recently, and quite a few others have legislation pending. However, nothing even comparable to California’s, must less giving consumers the control. I will guarantee you though that when congress gets enough lobbyist calls, they will pass a bill. It is up to each of you to see that is the right law. Contact your Senator; Representative.
1 comment:
US Postal Service won’t let you refuse mail.
If the US Postal Service would abide by its own rule, each homeowner could easily stop junk mail from getting into their mailbox by putting a written notice on their mailbox expressing their preference.
The US Postal Services practices are supposed to be according to the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM). The DMM contains provision 508.1.1.2 that says, “Refusal at Delivery: The addressee may refuse to accept a mailpiece when it is offered for delivery.” I interpret this rule to mean that if a homeowner wants to refuse an unwanted mailpiece (i.e. junk mail), the homeowner can do so when the mailpiece is offered for delivery. More to the point – refuse it before it is put into the mailbox!
In practical application, since the postal carrier comes to homes at different times each day, the homeowner cannot be waiting at the mailbox to dialogue with the mail carrier about each mailpiece. The only realistic way to interpret 508.1.1.2 therefore is that the homeowner should post a notice on the mailbox telling the postal carrier about the homeowner’s preference. The notice to the postal service must be specific and unambiguous. For instance, a homeowner should certainly be able to write, “No mail that is not addressed to the Jones” because that does not require the postal carrier to make a subjective judgment. On the other hand, it would not be acceptable to write “no junk mail” because the definition of “junk mail” is subjective and the mail carrier cannot decide.
Unfortunately, the US Postal Service has written to me that they will NOT honor a notice refusing mail, not matter how specifically it is worded, because the postal carrier does not have time to sort through the mail at my mailbox to pick out the pieces that are not addressed to me. Therefore, the US Postal Service is passing their sorting and disposing task onto me by putting all the mail they want into my mailbox, even though this seemingly violates 508.1.1.2.
Since the U.S. Postal Service will not abide by 508.1.1.2, homeowners need to stop unwanted mail at the source (i.e. by blocking the sender from sending it). We need a nationwide “Do Not Mail” law to create a one-stop, convenient place for homeowners to give senders notice that we do not want certain kinds of mail sent to our homes.
http://www.newdream.org/emails/ta19.html
Signed,
Ramsey A Fahel
Post a Comment