Letters:
RE: What Datran Case Means to You:
As a list broker, I am always most concerned about the validity of the information that I provide to my clients. If I tell a client that a file is DTP or most recent 3-month buyers, or opt in, it’s my reputation on the line. So if I were a broker renting data from someone who is not telling the whole story (or the story isn’t true), I’ve got a problem – and a big one. I’ve told my client that this data conforms to CAN-SPAM regulations, plus I’ve given them my professional assurances (by dint of recommending and renting the file) that it is what I said it is.
And if it’s not? I know brokers who’ve been fired for that, regardless of whether they were misled or not. And in the current political climate, everyone involved has liability – mailer, broker and data provider. If the list owner is altering the privacy policy to suit their needs – then there is absolutely something to be concerned about.
I was going to send you a note after Part 1 appeared – I disagreed with your premise that this was a witch-hunt for political gain. I think [Eliot] Spitzer’s office is politically astute enough not to go after someone without backup – and lots of it. It’s certainly curious that Spitzer’s office isn’t going for the big fine, but that may be because the line is unclear or this is the first offense (that’s been caught, anyway).
Stefanie Pont
Managing Partner
PONT MEDIA DIRECT
