dwtamkin@chinet.chi.il.us (David W. Tamkin) (10/01/89)
Mark A. Holtz wrote in volume 9, issue 419: | Quite recently, a bill was passed through both houses of the | California legislature which prohibits unsolicited "junk fax" from | being sent. The basis: Regular junk mail costs nothing more than | the time to toss it into file 13, while you pay for the ink and | paper for junk fax. | | However, the governor of California has stated that he would not | sign said bill. | | He is bound to change his mind. | | Several radio stations have gotten a hold of the Governor's fax | number. And, they have given it out, telling people to keep the fax | machine busy with junk fax. And, sure enough, it has been busy. | | If you were the governor of California, would you sign the "Junk | Fax" bill now? There is a story, or perhaps an urban legend, that when a bill to outlaw junk faxing reached the desk of the governor of Connecticut, a junk-faxing advertiser found out the number of the governor's fax machine and spread it around the industry, telling fellow advertisers to bombard the state house with letters against signing the bill. The governor was so infuriated at their tying up the fax machine and preventing its use for official state business that the bill was signed immediately. David Tamkin P.O Box 813 Rosemont, Illinois 60018-0813 | BIX: dattier dwtamkin@chinet.chi.il.us (312)693-0591 (708)518-6769 | GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN Everyone on Chinet has his or her own opinion about this.| CIS: 73720,1570
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (10/03/89)
The story about junk fax and the Connecticut governor is true, and was
widely reported in the press when it happened. Keep those junk faxes
going to your elected representatives, folks.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|lotus}!esegue!johnljohn@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/04/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0422m04@vector.dallas.tx.us>, dwtamkin@chinet.chi.il. us (David W. Tamkin) writes: > Mark A. Holtz wrote in volume 9, issue 419: > | However, the governor of California has stated that he would not > | sign said bill. > | > | He is bound to change his mind. > | > | Several radio stations have gotten a hold of the Governor's fax > | number. And, they have given it out, telling people to keep the fax > | machine busy with junk fax. And, sure enough, it has been busy. If this isn't stacking the deck, I don't know what is. For about a month there was a thread running in alt.fax with people invited to share their junk fax stories. In all that time, nothing more serious than a couple of solicitations a month came to light. Indeed, no one could relate to anything near the "problem" that has been reported in the press and has obviouly paniced some state legislators into passing silly and needless legislation. I wrote to KGO in San Francisco, one of the stations passing out the governor's fax number, and told them that inviting the public to jam his fax machine was an inappropriate use of the public airwaves. If the governor vetoed the bill, then obviously up to this point he has not had any trouble with junk fax. This appears to be one of those comp.horror.stories without any real basis. I know of many fax machines in the area and a survey of all their owners reveals *NO* problem with junk fax. Sorry, this is a cause that won't fly. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
GREEN@wharton.upenn.edu (Scott D. Green) (10/05/89)
Conn. Governor O'Neill did, in fact, sign the junk fax bill, and it went into effect October 1.
tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) (10/05/89)
I have been wondering about junk fax....I see a lot of articles written about it, but I am wondering if it is this year's "computer virus" scare story in the media? After talking to a number of fax users, I am convinced that this may be an "urban legend". The articles all tell how the junk faxer can control your machine, and make it so you can't send important information. One article quoted a guy who claimed that he stood there helpless while the machine churned out junk fax, when he needed to send an important document. Somehow it never occured to him or the writed xxxx writer of the article to just unplug the RJ11 for a few seconds or hit the STOP button so that he could send his fax. The only junk fax we have received in the past few years was from that Mr. Fax outfit selling fax paper. They send one ad once in a great while, and one time after getting maybe two a year from them, we took advantage of their offer to have us taken off their list. We receive lots of transmissions from our customers, but no more junk fax. I asked about this on the alt.fax group, and still could find no one who really had a first person horror stories. All I could get was a lot of complaining about "they are using MY paper". Anyone here have any FIRST PERSON verifiable accounts (not friend of a friend urban legend stuff) of junk fax horror stories? Tad Cook tad@ssc.UUCP MCI Mail: 3288544
john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/06/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0429m06@vector.dallas.tx.us>, johnl@esegue.segue. boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > The story about junk fax and the Connecticut governor is true, and was > widely reported in the press when it happened. Keep those junk faxes > going to your elected representatives, folks. I don't understand. Are you a supporter of junk fax? That would seem to be the inferrence from your encouragement towards that activity. But if you support junk fax, it would seem counterproductive to harass legislators who might become irritated enough to strike back. If you support legislation against junk fax, then I would assume that our elected representatives are already aware of the problem, their fax machines being overrun with unsolicited advertisements. What I'm trying to say is that either there is a problem or there isn't. If there is, you don't need to create a situation with faxing campaigns. If there isn't, then those who are so concerned with junk fax need to get a life and move on. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) (10/09/89)
Regarding Junk Fax, I have been searching for verifiable first-person accounts of actual junk fax, both on alt.fax, here, various telephone BBS', at work and elsewhere, and have not been able to find ONE account, other than the apochryphal stories in the media. The only junk fax I have been able to find are the occasional ads for fax paper from MR FAX that we used to get at work. Tad Cook tad@ssc.UUCP
ellisond@asuvax.EAS.ASU.EDU (Dell Ellison) (10/25/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0433m04@vector.dallas.tx.us>, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > If you support legislation against junk fax, then I would assume that > our elected representatives are already aware of the problem, their > fax machines being overrun with unsolicited advertisements. > What I'm trying to say is that either there is a problem or there > isn't. If there is, you don't need to create a situation with faxing > campaigns. If there isn't, then those who are so concerned with junk > fax need to get a life and move on. What if the problem of junk fax is wide-spread, BUT the 'elected representatives' just happen to not have the problem???
john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/27/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0472m09@vector.dallas.tx.us>, gtephx!phobos!ellisond@ asuvax.EAS.ASU.EDU (Dell Ellison) writes: > What if the problem of junk fax is wide-spread, BUT the 'elected > representatives' just happen to not have the problem??? From all evidence presented so far, nobody seems to be having a problem. Ergo, no problem. At least it's not widespread. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
r4@mvuxd.att.com (Richard R Grady, Jr) (10/28/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0475m06@vector.dallas.tx.us> john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: >In article <telecom-v09i0472m09@vector.dallas.tx.us>, gtephx!phobos!ellisond@ >asuvax.EAS.ASU.EDU (Dell Ellison) writes: >> What if the problem of junk fax is wide-spread, BUT the 'elected >> representatives' just happen to not have the problem??? >From all evidence presented so far, nobody seems to be having a >problem. Ergo, no problem. At least it's not widespread. Whenever a law is proposed to ban junk fax, everyone who opposes the ban informs the elected representatives about his/her opposition, via an unsolicited fax (How dumb can you get?). So *only* elected representatives have a junk fax problem!!! Dick Grady r_r_grady@att.com ...!att!mvuxd!r4 The above opinions are mine, and not necessarily those of my employer.
tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) (10/28/89)
Dell Ellison says "what if the problem of JUNK FAX is widespread"... Don't forget....I am still looking for a single verifiable first person account from someone actually victimized by abusive junk fax. So far all of the stories I have tried to track down have been "friend of a friend" (FOAF) urban legend type stuff. All I have found is evidence of the ocassional ad from a fax paper seller in California. With all of the legislation concerning this "problem", can't just ONE victim step forward? (OOPS....I said "don't forget" above, and realized I may not have posted this stuff here before...just on alt.fax and various BBS echoes. I am trying to determine if the type of abusive junk fax publicized by the media is for real, or just urban legend).