4th Circuit Court Sides With a Spammer
bulled writes to tell us about coverage on CNet regarding a ruling a couple of weeks back that allows a spamming company to procede with their suit against a spamfighter. The 4th Circuit court ruled that the U.S. CAN-SPAM Act, much derided here, trumps the Oklahoma law under which anti-spam activist Mark Mumma sued Omega World Travel for spamming him. The ruling allows Omega World Travel's countersuit, for defamation, to go forward. From the article: "'There's been a lot of activity in the states to pass laws purportedly to protect their citizens' from spam, said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. 'The 4th Circuit may have laid waste to all of those efforts.'"
and rot in hell...
What's unfortunate in this case is that the activist has said that he's not going to appeal the decision due to lack of funds.
Currently there is a conflict between various state and Circuit courts as to whether the CAN-SPAM act overrides stricter State laws regulating unsolicited email. The only thing that's going to resolve the issue is a ruling from the USSC, barring further legislation to clarify the issue. If this guy were to push on, he could conceivably bring it before the Supreme Court and get a real decision; more importantly, he'd probably concentrate enough media attention on it so that even if the decision were to go in favor of the spammers, it might make a tougher anti-spam law a campaign issue in the national arena. Right now, the spammers win if people don't make noise.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
In that case, I guess the judges shouldn't object if we forward our spam to them.
Well, of course. If you think the law is wrong, then obviously there's a problem- but that doesn't make the ruling bad.
"It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
I know a few of you will probably say "What's the judges email address, let's get him some spam"
It will not work. The judge probably has the best spam filter money can buy- an assistant that prints off legitimate emails for him to read, or deletes spam every morning for him.
That's true for just about anyone who is involved in legislation that can stop spam. Except for their home email account, they are probably ignorant of what the real world is like.
I am not saying we shouldn't try to keep US companies from spamming but to think that spam will be greatly reduced because a mojority of the US has strict laws against it I think is just wishful thinking.
You know what? I'd have better luck and less stress if I was ONLY trying to filter the stock pumping spam. If the people selling fake V1@gra, fake Rolexes, and fake everything else - all of the stuff that requires you to visit a web site and present payment - were taken down, it would hugely reduce the noise level. But more importantly, it's a matter of principle. Some fights are worth it, just because it sets a more civilized tone to overtly care about it and act with justice in mind that to just put up with it and decide that it will always be part of your life.
I agree that there needs to be a protocol change or two. But there is a LOT of inertia behind good old SMTP. And I'd rather null-route every packet from Romania, and lose the occasional piece of legit mail, than give in and say that some spamming asshat who happens to live there can litter me and all of my users with his trash. *blood pressure up*
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.