Spamming: Legalized in Virginia... Super Spammer walks free
"The right to engage in anonymous speech, particularly anonymous political or religious speech, is an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment," Agee wrote, citing a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case.
"By prohibiting false routing information in the dissemination of e-mails," the court ruled, Virginia's anti-spam law infringes on that protected right ."
ISPs were outraged.
"Horrendous," said Jon Praed of the Internet Law Group, which has represented America Online, Verizon and other Internet providers. "The idea that someone can intrude on someone else's mail server, because they might be reciting the Gettysburg Address? I guess a burglar can break into your home as long as they are reciting the Gettysburg Address."
Link to the article....
Discussions
11 years ago
One warm cookie goes to whoever kills that man............. GO !!
Reply 11 years ago
He needn't be killed....just make it so that, if he is going to spam, he must type out each address........using his nose only. *smirk*
Reply 11 years ago
:D that would eventually kill him lol
Reply 11 years ago
Cut off his hands!
11 years ago
Surely what he is doing falls under another law... Something like harassment of the masses, can mail companies not sue for wasted resources? If all the people spammed came forward or a large enough list made then could they not cause him grief somehow? Or just give him a good kicking? Maybe fire could be reigned upon him or rained on him, one of them two. Something about unsolicited solicitation maybe?
Reply 11 years ago
Yeah, well they still use the baby blanket of "you are denying him freedom of speech!" Try walking into the White house at Washington DC and talking to the president (free speech)....it won't happen.....we have fools making foolish laws to make the world a ~~more hellish~~ better place :-)
11 years ago
I may be wrong, but I believe that UK law requires all adverts to bear a valid contact address or number, thus rendering faked routing details illegal on advertising emails.
Reply 11 years ago
I understand the reasoning behind their (USA) conclusions, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with them nor think they are moral in any way *sigh*
11 years ago
. From what I can tell (although I doubt if I have all the facts), overturning the ruling was the proper thing to do. I hate spammers as much as anyone, but the original ruling was way out of line. Surely they can nail him on some other charge.
Reply 11 years ago
I have always felt that spam, and allowing it was very similar to allowing another to dump garbage into my front lawn, and claiming it as a "statement" of free speech. I don't know...