Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Court Rejects Intel Electronic Trespass Charge

Posted by simoniker on from the get-orff-moi-server dept.

NearlyHeadless writes "The California Supreme Court reversed lower court rulings that ex-Intel employee Kourosh Kenneth Hamidi committed electronic trespass by sending e-mail to Intel employees, reports the San Jose Business Journal. E-mail has the same protection as other communication, according to the court's opinion, available here (PDF link)." We've covered Hamidi's case more than once in the past.

2 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Electronic Trespass by taybin · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, the ruling said that you can *not* sue emailers for electronic trespass.

  2. Re:Electronic Trespass by spiritraveller · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wrong! You didn't read the whole opinion. It said that such a claim may not be based on the _content_ of the messages. The court took pains to make it clear that you can still sue for spam that overloads machines. In other words, you can't sue because of what the sender says, only the amount of what he sends.