Legal Precedents Relating to Unsolicited Electronic Mail

Taken from a post <34477ec3.6186347@news.erols.com> by JOWazzoo@WhiteICE.com (Roswell Coverup) on news.admin.net-abuse.email around October 16, 1997

I. CP vs Agis

As quoted in 
CYBER PROMOTIONS, INC.          :
                                :
v.                              :
                                :
APEX GLOBAL INFORMATION         :
SERVICES, INC.                  :       NO. 97-5931

                                  MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
5. Recent cases have held that there is no First Amendment right to send bulk e-mail and that Internet service providers are permitted to block such mail if they choose. See Cyber Promotions, Inc. v. America Online, Inc., 948 F.Supp 436 (E.D. Pa 1996).

II. CP vs AOL & AOL vs CP

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                     FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

                                     Cyber Promotions Inc.
                                               v.

                                      America Online Inc.
                                       C.A. NO. 96-2486

                                   __________________________

                                      America Online Inc.

                                               v.

                                     Cyber Promotions Inc.
                                       C.A. NO. 96-5213

                                         November 4, 1996

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

In sum, we find that since AOL is not a state actor and there has been no state action by AOL's activities under any of the three tests for state action enunciated by our Court of Appeals in Mark, Cyber has no right under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to send unsolicited e-mail to AOL's members. It follows that AOL, as a private company, may block any attempts by Cyber to do so.

III. Compuserve vs CP

IN THE UNITES STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
                                     EASTERN DIVISION

                                   CompuServe Incorporated,
                                            Plaintiff,

                                               v.

                          Cyber Promotions, Inc. and Sanford Wallace,
                                          Defendants.

                                       Case No. C2-96-1070
                                         February 3, 1997

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Defendants' intentional use of plaintiff's proprietary computer equipment exceeds plaintiff's consent and, indeed, continued after repeated demands that defendants cease. Such use is an actionable trespass to plaintiff's chattel. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides no defense for such conduct.

ROWAN v. USPO

"Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit....The ancient concept that 'a man's home is his castle' into which 'not even the king may enter' has lost none of its vitality....We therefore categorically reject the argument that a vendor has a right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another. If this prohibition operates to impede the flow of even valid ideas, the answer is that no one has a right to press even 'good' ideas on an unwilling recipient. That we are often 'captives' outside the sanctuary of the home and subject to objectionable speech and other sound does not mean we must be captives everywhere....The asserted right of a mailer, we repeat, stops at the outer boundary of every person's domain."

U.S. Supreme Court: ROWAN v. U.S. POST OFFICE DEPT. , 397 U.S. 728

(as told by "Mr. Sam" sam-001@dpinc.ml.org in <6245p2$bp2@examiner.concentric.net> on news.admin.net-abuse.email around October 16, 1997).

Forging Mail Headers

According to the Lanham (Federal) Act, 15 USC 1125(a), false designation of the origin, affiliation, or sponsorship in advertising is illegal. This most likely applies to any unsolicited commercial email with bogus mail headers (From, Received, etc).

Spammers do not have a "free speech" (or "speach" [sic]) first amendment basis to send unwanted mail for storage on our servers.

Pat Murphy
home / work / feedback