1st Spam Conviction Reversed

[TiffanyDow]

Nation's 1st Spam Conviction Reversed - AOL Money & Finance

Wonder if this means spam will be turned up a notch?

[rmholla]

I was afraid that the courts would basically toss aside the conviction. I would rather see SPAMMERS fined instead of jailed. Our prisons are overcrowded with violent offenders so I prefer they are the ones behind bars.


Rhonda

[George Wright]

Hi,

Thanks for the article. "Spam being turned up a notch," OUCH! I already get thousands a day.

George Wright

[mmurtha]

Yeah GW,

I was thinking the same thing!

Jenn,

Thanks for the update. Ihope it doesn't put spam in overdrive.

If they fine people convicted of spamming, it will hurt where it counts.


Mary

[Chris Lockwood]

It's just a state law that was thrown out. It doesn't affect federal or other states' laws.

If VA loses the appeal, expect them to rewrite the law to satisfy the court.

I don't see this ruling affecting the volume of spam one bit. CAN-SPAM didn't, and neither did the various spam convictions, so why would this?

[Paul Myers]

Chris,

I don't see this ruling affecting the volume of spam one bit. CAN-SPAM didn't, and neither did the various spam convictions, so why would this?

You're almost certainly right on the impact this will (not) have on spam volumes.

I doubt that VA will rewrite their law, though. But, it's possible.

The VA Court of Appeals found the entire law unconstitutional, rather than making any determination on the facts of Jaynes' case. The basis appears to have been a First Amendment issue, but that's just an impression I get from a number of informed commenters. I haven't made time to read the entire decision yet.

For those who want to read it, you can get the PDF of the decision, with relevant references, at http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinio...wp/1062388.pdf

This decision illustrates why the majority of anti-spam law is very specific to discuss unsolicited commercial email, rather than simply bulk.


Paul

[mmurtha]

Hye Paul,

Thanks for posting that.


Mary

[Paul Myers]

Just read the decision.

The mistake was on the part of the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The statute left out two parts that are present in almost every other state level anti-spam law. First, it didn't limit enforcement t0o commercial speech. Second, it left out the word "unauthorized" in reference to the sending of unsolicited email.

The VA Court of Appeals found the law unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, and thus unenforceable.

I hate the result, but I love the thoroughness of the reasoning. And seeing a court in the US that has the stones to take a firm and proper stand on free speech issues these days is nice.

No, spam is not a free speech issue. This was about the law's potential for hitting people who didn't properly fall under the intended sway. The Legislature simply screwed up the wording.


Paul