anti-spam law successfully challenged - WickedFire - Affiliate Marketing Forum

lazerwager · 09-12-2008, 09:07 PM

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH,

Finally a court roiling that doesn't encroach on civil rights!

"Anti-spam legislation around the country could face significant challenges on First Amendment grounds following a ruling issued Friday by the Virginia Supreme Court to strike down the state's anti-spam law. "

Court Doesn't Like Spam, But Will Defend Right To E-Mail It - Government - IT Channel News by CRN and VARBusiness

About time. Spammers and rapists getting similar sentences is a tad out of hand IMO.

imagenesis · 09-12-2008, 11:50 PM

ehh, spam is evil

goalsetter · 09-14-2008, 12:44 PM

How does spam violate the First Amendment? I defend anyone's right to freely speak their mind but I don't believe they have the right to send crap that I didn't ask for to my email (at least not more than once). Of course, long prison terms are a bit ridiculous. The jails are full enough without sending spammers to jail. They should get big fines, instead - it's losing the money that hurts them the most.

Bofu2U · 09-14-2008, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goalsetter

How does spam violate the First Amendment? I defend anyone's right to freely speak their mind but I don't believe they have the right to send crap that I didn't ask for to my email (at least not more than once). Of course, long prison terms are a bit ridiculous. The jails are full enough without sending spammers to jail. They should get big fines, instead - it's losing the money that hurts them the most.

It's kind of like arguing that someone yelling something across the street to you in a town is also illegal. You didn't ask for it but you still heard it.

Andrew · 09-14-2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

"That statute is unconstitutionally overbroad on its face because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mails including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution," the ruling stated.

Re-read that.

xmcp123 · 09-14-2008, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Re-read that.

I smell a "John McCain" edition of viagra

Jon · 09-14-2008, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xmcp123

I smell a "John McCain" edition of viagra

Hahahaha!!

HarveyJ · 09-14-2008, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xmcp123

I smell a "John McCain" edition of viagra

Edition? What with Palin now, I bet he's the biggest user of the stuff, just in case she decides to give him a sly ol' wink! Getting his aides to open every single email that has that in the subject line... just to be sure (cause, y'know, the dude doesn't actually know how to open his own email *rolls eyes*)

But back to what this thread's about:

Quote:

While that practice violated the anti-spam law's prohibition against using false transmission information, the court ruled that sending anonymous e-mails was protected under the First Amendment and further, deemed it functionally impossible to do so without using a false IP address or domain name.

Ummm, wouldn't that be considered mail fraud with regular mail?
And isn't mail fraud a felony crime in the US?

elime · 09-14-2008, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarveyJ

Edition? What with Palin now, I bet he's the biggest user of the stuff, just in case she decides to give him a sly ol' wink! Getting his aides to open every single email that has that in the subject line... just to be sure (cause, y'know, the dude doesn't actually know how to open his own email *rolls eyes*)

Muahah, I love that. "Sly ol' wink!"

Actually though, it's not that he doesn't know how to open email, it's that he's physically incapable due to the torture he experienced in Hanoi. Apparently the reason he always looks a bit hunched/awkward is from having his arms repeatedly broken. He can't tie his own shoes either, from loss of dexterity.

Not a political argument, just sayin'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarveyJ

But back to what this thread's about:
Ummm, wouldn't that be considered mail fraud with regular mail?
And isn't mail fraud a felony crime in the US?

Here's some info on mail fraud:

Quote:

Mail fraud is a criminal scheme where the postal system is used to obtain money or anything of value from a victim by offering a product, service, or investment opportunity that does not live up to its claims. To obtain a mail fraud conviction, a prosecutor must prove (1) the facts surrounding the offer were intentionally misrepresented and (2) the U.S. Mail was relied on to carry out the scheme.

The False Representation Statute (Title 39, United States Code, Section 3005) is a civil law used to protect the public from aggravated monetary loss where proving fraudulent intent is difficult. Three remedies are available to the Postal Inspection Service under this law in pursuing con artists who use the mail to defraud people. If the Postal Service sues the promoter based on evidence obtained by postal inspectors, it need only prove a particular representation was made, that it is false, and that money or property was sought through the mail.

Source: The Mail Fraud and False Representation Statutes

So I suppose using false information could be considered "intentional misrepresentation". I'd like to hear more though from someone here who knows the details (and I have no doubt there is, heh).

On a final note, this is the First Amendment for those who need a refresher:

Quote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

09-12-2008, 09:07 PM	#1 (permalink)
lazerwager Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 8 iTrader: 0 / 0%	anti-spam law successfully challenged AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, Finally a court roiling that doesn't encroach on civil rights! "Anti-spam legislation around the country could face significant challenges on First Amendment grounds following a ruling issued Friday by the Virginia Supreme Court to strike down the state's anti-spam law. " Court Doesn't Like Spam, But Will Defend Right To E-Mail It - Government - IT Channel News by CRN and VARBusiness About time. Spammers and rapists getting similar sentences is a tad out of hand IMO. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter Last edited by xmcp123; 09-12-2008 at 09:09 PM.. Reason: god damn it don't use black text

09-12-2008, 11:50 PM	#2 (permalink)
imagenesis sup Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 312 iTrader: 0 / 0%	ehh, spam is evil Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

09-14-2008, 12:44 PM	#3 (permalink)
goalsetter Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 20 iTrader: 0 / 0%	Huh? How does spam violate the First Amendment? I defend anyone's right to freely speak their mind but I don't believe they have the right to send crap that I didn't ask for to my email (at least not more than once). Of course, long prison terms are a bit ridiculous. The jails are full enough without sending spammers to jail. They should get big fines, instead - it's losing the money that hurts them the most. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Spam King	AdExhibitJason	Shooting The Shit	4	07-26-2008 12:21 AM
Spam Filters Keyword List	Jon	Affiliate Marketing	2	08-10-2007 11:44 PM
US Internet 'Spam King' Robert Soloway arrested	Michel Z.	Industry News	17	06-17-2007 07:46 AM
How I Stopped Blog Spam	Elvie	Design, Development & Programming	2	02-21-2007 06:13 PM
MSN Search Spam Research	xcentrix	Traffic & Content	0	07-17-2006 02:09 PM