Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Beattie preferred to Mansfield

Just got this email in. Lucky really as I was just about to book my flights, send an email to our Sydney database to announce my trip and a series of seminars and workshops for next Monday and Tuesday, to be run around an in house training session with the McCarthy Group.

I am informing you of our final decision to retract the offer for your company to provide in-house training on Tuesday 27th March.

We will not be proceeding with the payment of your invoice.

Mark Harry / Senior Associate & Business Development Manager
M c C A R T H Y G R O U P
P : +61 2 9687 3601F : +61 2 9687 3610
Building 2, Suite 2.01, 35 Waterloo Road MACQUARIE PARK NSW 2113

No explanation... no warning...

However, when pressed to why the change of heart... I was informed that after a Google search of Wayne Mansfield which shows thousand of listings for my fight with authorities and anti-spam activists about email marketing, The McCarthy Group couldn't be seen to be associated with the first person fined under Australia's Spam Act, even though the session was to be how to use the telephone better.

Strange that the many scandals of Queensland politics, as recorded by many news stories in the last few years, doesn't seem to have the same effect with McCarthy Groups website happily showing the founder with Peter Beattie. Then again, maybe some funds coming from the Queensland Government might influence that... no, that couldn't be true.

Or perhaps they have heard that telephone selling is going to be legislated against and what they are now doing will become illegal, and maybe, as in our case, it will be made retrospectively illegal.


  1. Anonymous5:30 am

    Mr Mansfield. It would appear that you do not condone free choice. Further it would appear you may have commited sedition with the remarks you have made regarding the elected parliament. It is free choice to do business within the market place. If you have, which is the case found to have flaunted the law of the parliament of Australia, then yours is not a test case, as you attempt to mitigagte your disgraceful behaviour. You have been found guilty by a court under the regime that abides by the seperation of powers, you clearly do not have the intellect to understand this concept. I shall report this blog to the Attorney General and leave it to that department to deal with. You will not be hard to locate.

    It would appear the management of the McCarthy Group may well take their business and to whom thay allow to assist them on their day to training quiet seriously, and to that end if you wish to attempt to defame this group you shall find yourself yet again before the Federal Court of Australia, which may or may not concern you. Let be finsih by saying that The people elect the representatives to form the governments so that they can put forward satidfactory laws so that the community (business as well) can co-exist in unisen. The Judges interepret those laws. You are a citizen that flaunts those laws. I would find that astute business people may well take a wide berth around you, in light of your remarks on this website.

    I have attached information that may assist other readers of this blog as to what the Federal Court were dealing with in your matter before them.
    Wayne Mansfield, of Perth in Western Australia, was the head of direct marketing business T3 Direct Marketing, operating under a series of two-dollar companies, and in 2005 became the first Australian to be prosecuted for email spamming.

    Mansfield was a junk faxer in the mid-1990s before turning to spamming, in which he promoted seminar-hosting companies he ran, including The Maverick Partnership and Business Seminars Australia. These messages admitted he had harvested emails from "various publicly available sources and other marketing promotions", but included instructions for recipients to unsubscribe from the list.

    T3 Direct was blacklisted along with the company in June 2002 by the Spam Prevention Early Warning System (SPEWS), along with its ISP, Swiftel (now People Telecom). Swiftel suspended T3 Direct's online access for this, and also violation of its terms of service. T3 Direct was left with AU$4,578 in charges outstanding to Swiftel. However, Mansfield insisted that it was the other arm of his business, concerned with web design and the management of opt-in databases, which suffered as a result.

    In July of the same year, Mansfield began legal action against Perth technician and anti-spam campaigner Joey McNicol. After receiving spam from Mansfield and discovering that the unsubscribe option did not work, and that contact details in the messages were fake, McNicol had set up a website publishing the details of T3 Direct and other Mansfield companies, as well as publishing these details in newsgroups. Mansfield accused McNicol of sending his company's IP address to SPEWS, prompting the blacklisting, but lost the case as he was unable to prove McNicol had actually contacted SPEWS, and in any case the action was not ruled to be illegal. Although Mansfield's company was ordered to pay McNicol's costs in the action, Mansfield shut down that company without paying those costs and continued business using a new company. McNicol's legal fees were in part paid by donations. [1] [2]

    [edit] Proceedings under the Spam Act of 2003
    In June 2005 the then Australian Communications Authority (ACA) (Now known as the Australian Communications & Media Authority - ACMA) brought proceedings against Mansfield and his new company, Clarity1, under the recently-passed Spam Act 2003 where ACMA alleged that they were involved in the sending of 56 million spam emails during 2004. He however insisted that sending commercial emails was his "right", but claimed he had not harvested any new email addresses since the Spam Act came into force, arguing that because he had started spamming the recipients before the Spam Act and the recipients had not unsubscribed, he could infer consent (an argument that did not find favor with the Court). He also stated that telephone operators at his company had been subjected to abuse by irate callers, but promised that unsubcribe requests were handled "within minutes". He defended his campaign, citing 20,000 attendees at his business seminars. [3] [4] [5].

    ACMA's complaint in this matter was upheld in the Australia Federal Court on 13 April 2006. The Court imposed a penalty of AU$4.5million on Clarity1, and AU$1million on Wayne Mansfield, on 27 October 2006.

  2. Thanks for the comment. I welcome feedback on this issue.

    The issue was not freedom of choice, but the decision, after much discussion with the McCarthy Group about providing training services for Telephone Techniques to assist in soliciting new business, that the cancellation of the contract was by way of an email without listing the reason.

    The reason subsequently given was the matter referred to in the comment left by "Anonymous" namely the adverse publicity that MAY result if it "got out" that I had presented a session for the McCarthy Group.

    With politicians of the nose at the moment - Burke, Grill, Santoro... I amde the point that maybe we can't be seen with anyone??

    Wayne Mansfield