SPAM - the non-cannedvariety.
Unsolicted commercial email (UCE) affects everyone on the internet from users to service providers. We represent direct marketers and spam victims. While the majority of marketers attemtpt to use lawful means to responsibly deliver advertisements, a few individuals deliver millions of (often offensive) emails every day. The anti-spammers with some legitimate concerns often go too far by violating marketers rights to privacy or unlawfully interferring with their busines relations. State common laws, the Fourth Amendment and the First Amendment provide legitimate rights to both marketers and anti-spam advocates who proceed reasonably and responsibly.
Some suggest that many spam laws will ultimately prove to be unconstitutional due to commerce clause, first amendment and jurisdictional problems inherent in the the worldwide scope of the internet. While Congress has aggressively pursued domain name disputes with legislation, there has been less federal interest in spam until recently. As a result, there are some federal statutes which could implicate spam, but none as yet which directly address it. Individual states have been more active in enacting spam laws but the effectiveness of such laws remains at least partially in question.
TelphoneConsumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227(b)(1)(C).
Approximately 29 states have now enacted lawswhich seek to directly control spam. While these statutes all attemptto control spam, there is no consistency among the different states approachesto this common problem.
California - Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17538.4
Anthony J. DeGidio Esq., 419-382-9590