by Kirill Popov

CAN-SPAM

In early September the FTC ended the comment period of a proposed clarification of the definition of “primary purpose” of an email, as provisions in the act apply to email which have a primary commercial purpose.

The FTC is proposing the following criteria to determine the primary purpose of an email:

• First, if an e-mail message contains only content that advertises or promotes a product or service (“commercial content”), then the primary purpose of the message would be deemed to be commercial;
  
  
• Second, if an e-mail message contains both commercial content and content that falls within one of the categories listed in the Act’s definition of “transactional or relationship message,” then the primary purpose of the message would be deemed to be commercial if either 1) a recipient reasonably interpreting the subject line of the message would likely conclude that the message advertises or promotes a product or service; or 2) the message’s “transactional or relationship” content does not appear at or near the beginning of the message;
  
  
• Third, if an e-mail message contains both commercial content and content that is neither “commercial” nor “transactional or relationship,” then the primary purpose of the message would be deemed to be commercial if either: 1) a recipient reasonably interpreting the subject line of the message likely would conclude that the message advertises or promotes a product or service; or 2) a recipient reasonably interpreting the body of the message likely would conclude that the primary purpose of the message is to advertise or promote a product or service. Factors illustrative of those relevant to this interpretation would include the placement of commercial content at or near the beginning of the body of the message; the proportion of the message dedicated to commercial content; and how color, graphics, type size, and style are used to highlight commercial content.
  
  

The test for whether an email is commercial in nature is dependent on the reader’s interpretation. If you have commercial or promotional information in your transactional messages, I would still recommend that you add your address as well as provide links for the reader to manage their subscription options. You should also include a link to your privacy and/or email policies.

Sender ID, Microsoft’s proposed standard which combines Caller ID and Meng Wong’s SPF, has hit a stumbling block having been rejected by the Internet Engineering Task Force. Citing conflicts over Microsoft’s proposed license terms and patent applications, the IETF rejected Sender ID as a possible internet standard and disbanded MARID, the working group responsible for evaluating authentication methods for email.

Microsoft has not been deterred by this rejection, however, and plans to continue developing the Sender ID framework. Microsoft’s goal is to create a protocol that will be flexible as well as backwards compatible with the current version of SPF, allowing authentication at multiple levels. Microsoft plans to begin phasing Sender ID compatibility into their services (MSN, Hotmail) in the near future. Microsoft’s Sender ID page can be found here: http://www.microsoft.com/senderid