英语论文网

se of his contact details and that means is free of charge except for the costs of transmission of the refusal message. This system has been described as a ‘soft’ opt-in regime. 

There are a number of serious concerns with this exception. The primary problem relates to the fact that direct marketing e-mails can be sent where the recipient’s contact details have been obtained by the sender during the course of the sale or negotiations for the sale of a product or service. At first glance this appears to be a reasonable restriction that takes into account the needs of both the recipient and the sender. However, on closer inspection it becomes clear that the provision is potentially destructive of a recipient’s privacy.

If we consider the situation of door-stop selling and telesales, if this provision were applicable, it would enable double glazing salespeople  to phone or visit potential customers, harangue them with an aggressive sales spiel and then conduct a follow up visit.

The provision entitles the recipient to refuse further communications and this is the nub of the problem. The potential customer is exactly that: a potential customer. If a person completes the online transactional process and buys a product or service, then that person is a customer of the company. In the euphoria of the post-purchase timeframe, where the customer is expectantly awaiting delivery of the product or service, the customer may not remember to tick the box prohibiting further commercial e-mails. When a subsequent e-mail does arrive, the customer simply replies stating that they are not interested in receiving further e-mails. In the case of potential customers, depending on how far they have progressed through the transactional process, they may have provided personal data such as a name and address or even reached the stage of inputting credit card details. If the potential customer decides not to proceed, for whatever reason, they may reasonably assume that because they have not reached the status of bona fide customer, they do not need to tick any boxes or otherwise signify their wish not to receive further communications. The potential customer then exits the website under a serious misapprehension and will be rather shocked to receive new communications from the potential seller/provider. A further e-mail or internet visit is required on the part of the potential customer to prevent further communications.

The E-privacy Directive, is more forthright. Regulation 22 of the British enacting Regulations adopts the terminology ‘recipient’ of an e-mail, which, naturally, can encompass customers and potential customers. Article 13(2) of the Directive affords no such room for ambiguity. The word used throughout is ‘customer.’ The intention of the Directive is clear  in this regard: Unsolicited communications are only permissible where prior consent has been obtained. Companies can send unsolicited communications to their customers, where the customers have not objected. However, every new communication must give the customer the option to refuse further communications.

The United Kingdom Regulations obfuscate the position. The general rule of Article 13 of the Directive remains intact: Unsolicited communications are only permissible where prior consent has been obtained本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。