Xref: utzoo misc.consumers:26303 comp.org.eff.talk:1231
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!stan!csn!news
From: schwartz@latour.colorado.edu (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: More on " Here's how to CONTROL YOUR JUNK MAIL"
Message-ID: <1991Jan24.172734.10450@csn.org>
Date: 24 Jan 91 17:27:34 GMT
References: <856@argosy.UUCP> <1991Jan24.003028.18320@oswego.Oswego.EDU>
Sender: news@csn.org (news)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 41
Nntp-Posting-Host: latour.colorado.edu

In article <1991Jan24.003028.18320@oswego.Oswego.EDU> dayger@oswego.Oswego.EDU (Tim Dayger) writes:
>(...)
>If anyone out there has information about "Private Citizen", please share it
>with the rest of us.

The address and phone are:
	Private Citizen, Inc.
	Box 233
	Naperville, IL 60566
	(312) 393-1555

I have no affiliation with them.  However, I once sent for some
information from them, and found out the following.  If you contribute
$15 and sign their authorization form, they will list you in a directory
that they send to firms that do telemarketing.  The directory contains a
notice that the people listed do not want junk calls, and that if the
calls continue, that will constitute acceptance on the part of the
business of an "offer" to allow use of the callee's time and property
(phone) for the business.  The notice goes on to say that this service
costs $100 per call.  They then say they will take legal action against
firms that continue junk calls without paying the fee.

While I appreciate their intent, I doubt they will have an effect on
junk mail.  For one thing, their organization focuses telephone
marketing, not postal mail.  But even concerning junk calls, I question
the legal footing of this "agreement".  Moreover, a legal agreement is
only as good as the amount of money you have to spend on defending it.
I doubt Private Citizen can afford to take on Hart Hanks or a similarly
large company.  Besides, junk mail is big business, and therefore has
the implicit blessing of our legal system.  I believe that is why, for
instance, the post office corrects mailing lists at stamp buyers'
expense.  I once wrote to the Post Master General, pointing out that
this use of postal information is a violation of the Privacy Act of 1974
(since it is using information for purposes other than those for which
it was originally gathered), and received back a copy of a section of
some legal document, stating that the post office has an explicit right
to do this.

 - Mike Schwartz
   Dept. of Computer Science
   Univ. of Colorado - Boulder