guy typing on macbook with an orange next to him email marketing

Email Marketing Compliance

Our readers may recall a prior piece in which we discussed email marketing compliance, and a California statute which prohibits the sending of false or misleading unsolicited commercial email. With the marketing industry’s renewed reliance on email marketing, there is a corresponding increase in lawsuits alleging violations of California’s email marketing statute. Below, we discuss the facts and claims asserted in one such recent California State court lawsuit.  

California Unsolicited Email Marketing Claims  

In Rogers, et al. v. Rely Home, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants violated Section 17529.5 of the California Business and Professions Code (“CBPC”) by “spamming” consumers with unsolicited commercial email. Specifically, the Complaint alleged that Plaintiffs received, without their consent, 199 purportedly violative marketing emails which: (1) used third party domain names without the third-party’s permission for the prohibited purpose of sending unsolicited commercial email; (2) contained false and/or forged information in the email headers; and (3) contained subject lines which were misleading as to the content or subject matter of the emails. Plaintiffs further alleged that Defendants used non-readily traceable domain names to conceal their identities in violation of the CBPC, and that Defendants failed to establish and implement reasonable practices and procedures to prevent “unlawful spamming.” These actions, according to the allegations contained in the Complaint, demonstrate that Defendants acted willfully in sending Plaintiffs false and deceptive unsolicited email marketing.  

If You’re An Email Marketer, Contact KMT  

The CBPC allows for the recovery of actual damages or $1,000 per email, plus the recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs. Accordingly, CBPC lawsuits can be extremely lucrative for the plaintiffs’ bar, while they can result in significant cost for marketers. In addition to CBPC compliance, companies that send unsolicited commercial email also must comply with the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003, commonly referred to as CAN-SPAM. The rise in email marketing, coupled with heightened regulatory scrutiny in the telemarketing space, is likely to result in significantly more federal and state-related action. 

Email marketing companies are advised to hire experienced counsel to ensure that they comply with California State law, CAN-SPAM, and other applicable federal and state regulations. The attorneys at Klein Moynihan Turco (“KMT”) have a wealth of experience in guiding clients on how to comply with the rules and regulations governing email marketing. In addition, over the years, the KMT litigation team has defended countless businesses that have been named in email marketing lawsuits. If your company is engaged in email marketing, or has been served with a California email marketing lawsuit, please email us at info@kleinmoynihan.com or call us at (212) 246-0900.  

The material contained herein is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice nor is it a substitute for seeking legal advice from an attorney. Each situation is unique, and you should not act or rely on any information contained herein without seeking the advice of an experienced attorney. 

Attorney Advertising 

Photo by NordWood Themes on Unsplash

Similar Blog Posts: 

Email Marketing Is Back!  

Swigart Law Group CIPA Demands  

California Court Issues Major Decision for the Email Marketing Industry  

Share:

David Klein

David Klein is one of the most recognized attorneys in the technology, Internet marketing, sweepstakes, and telecommunications fields. Skilled at counseling clients on a broad range of technology-related matters, David Klein has substantial experience in negotiating and drafting complex licensing, marketing and Internet agreements.
person on shopify website wiretapping claim

Favorable CIPA Wiretapping Claim Decision

As our readers know, lawsuits alleging illegal wiretapping claims against companies that collect consumers’ data continue unabated. Below, we discuss a recent favorable ruling dismissing California Invasion of Privacy

Read More »
close up of the letter AI for artificial intelligence AI calls

AI Telemarketing Calls

Readers of this blog know that the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) declared that telemarketing calls utilizing artificial intelligence (“AI”) are subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (“TCPA”) restrictions on “artificial or prerecorded

Read More »

Trending Topics

Trending Topics

person on shopify website wiretapping claim
Blog

Favorable CIPA Wiretapping Claim Decision

As our readers know, lawsuits alleging illegal wiretapping claims against companies that collect consumers’ data continue unabated. Below, we discuss a recent favorable ruling dismissing California Invasion of Privacy

Read More »
close up of the letter AI for artificial intelligence AI calls
Blog

AI Telemarketing Calls

Readers of this blog know that the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) declared that telemarketing calls utilizing artificial intelligence (“AI”) are subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (“TCPA”) restrictions on “artificial or prerecorded

Read More »
phone on table with reflection opt out tcpa telemarketing
Blog

New Effective Date for TCPA Opt-Out Rule!

Although originally adopted on February 16, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission again has decided to delay the effective date of its opt-out regulation until January 31, 2027. We discuss the reasoning for the most recent delay below.   TCPA Opt-Out Regulation Delayed, Again 

Read More »