Don't "whoo hoo" too loudly, folks... this "win" is doubtless gonna be short-lived. In the first place the sending of UCE has not been outlawed completely, as many posters/readers may assume. Please notice that this law ONLY applies to UCE entirely within California. Technically, if the sender ain't in Cali, or if the recipient ain't a Cali resident, then no joy.
Anyhow, if this is appealed (and any spammer with a vested interest + bux could [ & maybe should ] appeal this ruling), I am fairly certain they will succeed at the Cali Supreme level (& if the spammers don't win there, they'll probably win at the Fed level).
Seriously, people.... read the ruling. Pay special attention to the legal findings regarding location and effects on inter-state commerce, especially regarding the concept / notion of "geographical location of an email address" and other parts regarding the affect on business "wholly outside of the state". Contrary to what the legal eagles decided, it is technically IMPOSSIBLE for every email address to be correlated to a person's physical residency. I use hotmail for all non-business email. I can access hotmail from any non-blocked, internet-attached computer on the planet, therefore, my email address can NOT be correlated with a geographic location in the physical world. Although in rl I live in Cali, & therefore this law would be applicable for me at home, I can travel outside of the state & access the very same email account... so will this Cali law apply when I'm in Ohio or Florida? If I'm in Miami for the winter, can these spammers now send me UCE because I'm outside of Cali, or will the Cali law be held as applicable in Florida? Will laws of other states also apply in Cali with respect to their residents accessing email from outside of their residency?
This ruling is grossly flawed, and is apparently based on pure fantasy and other nonsense that the judges (or whoever those people are that wrote that crap) pulled out of their fat butts.
Another gross error of logic is their argument that the law is safe from the "interstate commerce" conflict because they specify that it applies only to spam to Cali residents, and additionally only applies to spam that traverses hosts physically located in Cali. Are we missing something here? Isn't it generally known to everybody who's had even passing education on the nature of the internet / IP networks that the sender of a message across a standard IP network has no control over which physical connections any particular datagram may travel?
Seriously, am I off my rocker, or am I right? Look at it this way... if you are in Nevada, and you want to send an email to a person living in New Jersey, your message WILL cross / pass through the physical / geographical boundaries of other states. There is no 'direct connect' between NV & NJ. Even if you're network is LOGICALLY direct between point A & point B, that is not the same as being PHYSICALLY direct. Consider this: what if I -- as a spammer or even a valid business entity -- am physically resident in Washington state, have my ISP or domain on a server in Utah, and the particular email server where my target's account is stored is located in Missouri, and the target "person" is physically resident in North Carolina? Then what? Which laws apply? Technically, to beat this law, the only thing these spammers have to do is set up their "business" out of state, and then they won't be susceptible to that law any more (once again, the interstate commerce issue crops up, which, as has been seen, will always be the downfall of these stupid pissant states' myopic rules & legislation).
Anyhow, I'll end with this... I am not 'pro-spam'... I am 'ANTI-stupid-illogical-&-unenforcable-law'. I hate laws that are ignorant, unjust, illogical, or unreasonable -- even if the initial effect of such a law is to relieve me of some nuisance or other undesirable activity -- because in the long run any such crappy law will always come back to bite the citizens in the ass.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't "whoo hoo" too loudly, folks ... this "win" is doubtless gonna be short-lived. In the first place the sending of UCE has not been outlawed completely, as many posters/readers may assume. Please notice that this law ONLY applies to UCE entirely within California. Technically, if the sender ain't in Cali, or if the recipient ain't a Cali resident, then no joy.
.... read the ruling. Pay special attention to the legal findings regarding location and effects on inter-state commerce, especially regarding the concept / notion of "geographical location of an email address" and other parts regarding the affect on business "wholly outside of the state". Contrary to what the legal eagles decided, it is technically IMPOSSIBLE for every email address to be correlated to a person's physical residency. I use hotmail for all non-business email. I can access hotmail from any non-blocked, internet-attached computer on the planet, therefore, my email address can NOT be correlated with a geographic location in the physical world. Although in rl I live in Cali, & therefore this law would be applicable for me at home, I can travel outside of the state & access the very same email account ... so will this Cali law apply when I'm in Ohio or Florida? If I'm in Miami for the winter, can these spammers now send me UCE because I'm outside of Cali, or will the Cali law be held as applicable in Florida? Will laws of other states also apply in Cali with respect to their residents accessing email from outside of their residency?
... if you are in Nevada, and you want to send an email to a person living in New Jersey, your message WILL cross / pass through the physical / geographical boundaries of other states. There is no 'direct connect' between NV & NJ. Even if you're network is LOGICALLY direct between point A & point B, that is not the same as being PHYSICALLY direct. Consider this: what if I -- as a spammer or even a valid business entity -- am physically resident in Washington state, have my ISP or domain on a server in Utah, and the particular email server where my target's account is stored is located in Missouri, and the target "person" is physically resident in North Carolina? Then what? Which laws apply? Technically, to beat this law, the only thing these spammers have to do is set up their "business" out of state, and then they won't be susceptible to that law any more (once again, the interstate commerce issue crops up, which, as has been seen, will always be the downfall of these stupid pissant states' myopic rules & legislation).
... I am not 'pro-spam' ... I am 'ANTI-stupid-illogical-&-unenforcable-law'. I hate laws that are ignorant, unjust, illogical, or unreasonable -- even if the initial effect of such a law is to relieve me of some nuisance or other undesirable activity -- because in the long run any such crappy law will always come back to bite the citizens in the ass.
Anyhow, if this is appealed (and any spammer with a vested interest + bux could [ & maybe should ] appeal this ruling), I am fairly certain they will succeed at the Cali Supreme level (& if the spammers don't win there, they'll probably win at the Fed level).
Seriously, people
This ruling is grossly flawed, and is apparently based on pure fantasy and other nonsense that the judges (or whoever those people are that wrote that crap) pulled out of their fat butts.
Another gross error of logic is their argument that the law is safe from the "interstate commerce" conflict because they specify that it applies only to spam to Cali residents, and additionally only applies to spam that traverses hosts physically located in Cali. Are we missing something here? Isn't it generally known to everybody who's had even passing education on the nature of the internet / IP networks that the sender of a message across a standard IP network has no control over which physical connections any particular datagram may travel?
Seriously, am I off my rocker, or am I right? Look at it this way
Anyhow, I'll end with this
But that's just my opinion.