Slashdot Mirror


Judge Halts Utah's Spyware Law

TheFarmerInTheDell writes "According to CNet News, a judge in Utah has granted an injunction to WhenU.com to temporarily halt the state's new anti-spyware law from going into effect. WhenU filed suit in April asking for an injunction, and this judge has decided that their claim of abridging their First Amendment Rights has enough merit to issue the injunction. What about our rights not to have to deal with this scumware?" (This previous post mentions Ben Edelman's research on WhenU and other spyware makers' activities.)

2 of 390 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Umm... by nightsweat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually the courts have ruled in the past the 9th and 10th Amendment contain a right to privacy

    Amendment IX:
    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Amendment X:
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  2. Re:Umm... by Durandal64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, ignorance is a dangerous thing. In this case, it's dangerous because you didn't know that the Supreme Court interpreted the 4th amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure as implying a right to privacy, so the idea is perfectly valid.