First felony spam conviction affirmed by Virginia Supreme Court |
Those reading who despise spam might be interested to learn that the nation’s first felony conviction for spam was held up in Virginia today.
Jeremy Jaynes of Raleigh, N.C., considered among the world’s top 10 spammers in 2003, was convicted of massive distribution of junk e-mail and sentenced to nine years in prison.
Almost all 50 states have anti-spamming laws. In the 4-3 ruling, the court rejected Jaynes’ claim that the state law violates both the First Amendment and the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Jaynes’ lawyer claimed this was a blow to first amendment rights but it’s hard not agreeing with the courts. Should sending bulk unsolicited email be protected speech? It clogs our inboxes and wastes our time. It’s one thing to be an aggressive marketer, but this guy seems to have gone way too far.
Do you agree that mass unsolicited spamming should be a felony?
Did this post make you go hmm?
(Hmm, no ratings yet)
Loading ...
IANAL, but I am taking Constitutional Law and Civil Rights this semester. We’ve looked at several freedom of speech issues and while I haven’t read the ruling that was recently passed down, but I think there is clear precedent for this ruling. On several occasions, the Supreme Court has restricted free speech as with very narrowly tailored; we _are_ dealing with restrictions to a constitutional right. When free speech is restricted, it’s usually a time, place, manner (TPM) regulation. In this case, I’m guessing that the courts objected to the manner of the speech.
You may be interested in reading the abstracts on Hill v. Colorado (530 US 703) and/or Frisby v. Schultz (487 US 474). They’re mostly related to picketing, but I think there is still applicable precedent in the rulings.
So yes, I do agree that mass unsolicited spamming should be at least illegal. I’m not sold on the felony part yet though (mostly because I haven’t don’t a lot of research).
Comment by Andrew Ferguson — February 29, 2008 @ 5:35 pm PST
I think its ridiculous. Fine the guy a lot of money, thats fine, but giving him 9 years in prison? Rapists don’t even get locked up for that long. Society is screwed up, on the one hand you got violent crimes that get almost no punishment, but when you touch a large corporation’s wallet, you get life.
Comment by thaman — March 3, 2008 @ 12:31 pm PST
At first, the Libertarian in me is always cautious of any limitations placed on free speech. But his freedom of speech was not abridged. He could have posted his “content” on the web instead of invading people’s inboxes. We all have a right to say what we want, but we don’t have a right to post it on other people’s property. That principle should apply to email and blog comments.
Comment by Sterling Camden — March 3, 2008 @ 1:57 pm PST