This is a very fine line that we are asking the courts to walk for us. We are asking the same courts that think hot coffee is a dangerous substance worthy of millions in litigation to make the same kind of judgements on software. It is easy to say that certain advertising is 'SPAM' and not protected by the first amendment, but what about a notice to other shareholders of a particular shareholder's viewpoint? This is still information that may use space on an email system, so falls within the scope of the law. Ultimately it will become an argument over whose opinion is unpopular. Imagine being sued for trying to protect shareholder interests. I could list a thousand such examples where an unpopular opinion is not allowed to be voiced on this particular media. Your TV is something you pay for, the power to run it you pay for, do you ask for everything that comes across it? Should you be allowed to sue for people wasting your time with advertising? What about the tax impact of mass-mailing being thrown away or recycled?
Most email systems can be configured to filter a great deal of 'SPAM' out. We need smarter administrators, and more careful users. The web is a dangerous place, with dangerous ideas and the freedom of speech is the freedom to lie. It is just faster, now. More readily available. Take some personal initiative and stop asking Uncle Sam to drop in and fix things for which are laws could never be adequate. The writers of the laws are ill-trained and ill-advised, and the constitution was written when owning a press was expensive. Nonetheless, our forefathers knew that it would be abused and often said that you must allow a liar or cheat to speak, for it is the only way his treachery can be found.

My 2 cents.

Grim

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/51/10024#10024