[Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] Medial Mail

[Sheldon Daitch]

The USPS Domestic Mail Manual is supposed to be the bible for mailing 
regulations.

Media Mail section of the DMM is here:

http://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/173.htm#1060484

3.2.a:  "Books, including books issued to supplement other books, of at 
least eight printed
pages, consisting wholly of reading material or scholarly bibliography, 
or reading material
with incidental blank spaces for notations and containing no advertising 
material other than
incidental announcements of books.  Advertising includes paid 
advertising and the publishers'
own advertising in display, classified or editorial style."

If we make the case that magazines are considered books, for the 
purposes of the use of
media mail, then if the only advertising in the magazine is incidental 
announcements of
magazines or books, then it would appear the magazines should be 
acceptable for media
mailing.

If the magazines contain any paid advertising, it would then appear the 
magazines do not
qualify for media mail rates.

With that said, I would like to see the USPS add a section allowing 
magazines with a cover
date of, say, 50 years prior to mailing would also be acceptable as 
media mail.  50 year old
magazines really are far more research documents than advertising media, 
even though it is
certainly true many/some of the advertisers are still in business.  I 
don't think there are many
ads in a 50 year old ham magazine which apply to a currently marketed 
product.

73
Sheldon
WA4MZZ






On 7/16/2011 9:36 PM, W4AWM at aol.com wrote:
> I simply don't have time to research it, but somewhere there has to be a
> printed set of Postal Regulations. When found, we can each get a copy and
> take  it with us to the post office when we ship something questionable.
>
> I move got the top hand on a NY State Police Officer because I carried a
> copy of the Federal Regulation regarding the use of modulated headlights on
> motorcycles. This superceded any state regulations. Had I not had that piece
> of  paper, I would have been cited and had to take my argument before a
> judge. This  was easier and most satisfying.
>
> 73,
>
> John,  W4AWM
>
>
> In a message dated 7/16/2011 2:26:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> dfischer at usol.com writes:
>
>
> The  people at the post office do not even know the differences between
> most
> of  these ambiguous packaging regulations, classifications of contents  etc.
>
>
>