Re: namedroppers, continued
2002-12-10 07:50:46
I checked 39USC and 39CFR955 I guess the postal service maintains a list if
you want to not receive mailing for sexually oriented materials,
sweepstakes, and pandering solicitations. But that's about it. As far as the
USPS goes.
I have not yet tried filing a form 1500, but, if you believe the folks
at junkbusters.com [1] [2], and page 13 of Postal Bulletin 21977 [3],
it's clear that the courts have ruled that porn is in the eye of the
beholder.
"Postmasters may not refuse to accept a Form 1500 because the
advertisement in question does not appear to be sexually
oriented. Only the addressee may make that determination."
- Bill
[1] http://www.junkbusters.com/self.html#prohibit
[2] http://www.junkbusters.com/dmlaws.html
[3] http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/bulletin/1998/pb21977.pdf
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- RE: namedroppers, continued, (continued)
- RE: namedroppers, continued, Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student)
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Vernon Schryver
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Vernon Schryver
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Bill Cunningham
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Valdis . Kletnieks
- Message not available
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Bill Cunningham
- Re: namedroppers, continued, John C Klensin
- Re: namedroppers, continued, Bill Cunningham
- Re: namedroppers, continued,
Bill Sommerfeld <=
RE: namedroppers, continued, Dean Anderson
RE: namedroppers, continued, Ketil Froyn
RE: namedroppers, continued, Randy Presuhn
Re: namedroppers, continued, Steven M. Bellovin
Re: namedroppers, continued, Vernon Schryver
Re: namedroppers, continued, Bill Cunningham
Fw: namedroppers, continued, Bill Cunningham
|
|
|