Slashdot Mirror
Spammers Lose Court Battle Against Univ. of Texas
voma writes "The University of Texas didn't violate the constitutional rights of an online dating service when it blocked thousands of unsolicited e-mails, a federal appeals court panel ruled Tuesday. White Buffalo Ventures, which operates LonghornSingles.com, had appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, saying it had complied with all anti-spam laws."
The school can't do much, it is public information (Freedom of Information Act, etc) unless you explicitly tell them not to release it.
Of course, institutions are really bad about this.. My high school, despite my multiple requests not to, released my information to all sorts of local corporations for them to spam me with prom/senior pictures/etc. related junk mail.
Lord High Crapflooder The Right Honourable Vlad Craig Esther McDavenpherson III
Destroyer of Mercatur.Net
Ok, this is just a question, and in no way intended to be a troll.
I am sure this story will be praised by the slashdot crowd, and as I work for a mid sized ISP, I can't say I am upset to see it happen. I am, however, curious about implications of the free speech side of this.
Let us assume that instead of commercial spam, this was a single individual that was sending out an email about some governmental injustice. For instance, if he had a friend that was being held under patriot act provisions without trial. Sure, a lot of people would junk the message, but judging from the messages I get that start with RE:FWD:RE:FWD:(ad infinitum), a goodly number of people would likely read it.
My question to slashdot is; Should there be occasions where it is ok to spam, and if so, how do we legislate it? If it can be justified, is bulk commercial spam just the price we have to pay for another venue by which our citizens can freely express themselves?
I would be very much interested to see if anyone had any legal precedents in the world of snail mail that might apply.