Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you should have the right to stop them immediately. I don't see how that's controversial.
The CAN-SPAM Act only covers a specific type of marketing email with a specific set of rules. It doesn't cover emails that fall under the explanation that NYT provided. The author of the blog just didn't accept the explanation. This would be like if I just wrote a blog post and complained that every company sending me an email about updating the terms and conditions and I just called it "marketing" because I didn't k…
[flagged]