Here's another schmuck who's giving a bad name to freedom of speech:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/07/01/email.speech.ap/index.html

Of particular interest...

"The majority's reasoning does not give a legal nod to those sending spam, or unsolicited e-mail, en masse, she noted.

But how can that be? The ruling seems inconsistent with current anti-spam laws that are gaining momentum. Why is this guy allowed to pollute the mailboxes of Intel employees, while a spammer isn't allowed to? Or to turn it around, why can't the spammers claim their free speech is being infringed upon?

I'm all about free speech, but this idiot needs to stop spamming and either shut up, or challenge his dismissal in court.

You're right. But it has nothing to do with free speech, per se. It's a potential denial of service.

You're right. But it has nothing to do with free speech, per se. It's a potential denial of service.

Yeah but the judge used the free speech argument, and apparently weighed it heavier than any strain these mails may cause on Intel's poor mail servers. So if it's not a free speech issue at its core, it is now, thanks to this shortsighted judge.

Until it gets appealed and remanded.

I know this is gonna start a fight -

The guy himself is making a protest: to a limited group of people contained on a mailing list: he is not wantonly harvesting addresses and spamming indescriminately without the recipient's permission: he mails to employees within a single organisation, many of which have requested the mails: he removes people from his list on request.

This sounds to me pretty much like a closed membership reflector. Am I totally wrong? He has a seperate website which is also available to public access from the rest of the world, so he's only "using" (debatable concept here) Intel's "resources", and his own.

The Register has been tracking this story on and off for several years, and I have been reading his protest site occasionaly, some of which (from the viewpoint of an engineer who has experienced similar) makes for pretty appalling reading.

If you think carefully and re-read the judgement, I would say that this ruling is actually progress against SPAM, since certain exclusions for legitimate mass-mailing have now been legally established, thereby preserving the rights of mailing lists to exist. It is also the first time that the courts have shown that they have finally taken advice on the technical issues of the use of a new communications medium - similar to the "TV Wars" in the 60's where a number of obscure rulings were also seen this way - but in the end defined the limits for broadcasters and distributors. Similar happened with the film industry and the establishment of distribution networks in the 20's and 30's. Read David Puttnam's book "The Undeclared War" and then try and relate it to what's happening on the web now. Even the RIAA's behaviour at the moment is almost a copy of the way the US film studios (and the French, and the British) behaved in the 30's - only in those days, they didn't sue - Thompson sub-machine guns were cheap and easily available in those days (still are).

Think about this in the long term, as if you were building a house. Build the foundations first, install the pipe work next, and after that, you can start putting in the stuff that finally shows *above ground*, the walls and the roof - ie. the "Application" bit

The next step is to define what a Spammer is - and then the hammer will come down.

I wasn't happy with the link on the first page that said something like 'It's OK to slam your boss in email according to the court.' Then it went on to talk about slamming the employer, not the boss. I was already to send that page to my boss saying 'You are now free game dude.' Imagine my disappointment...

In addition to all that, what Intel had him charged with was tresspassing. Spammers are going to be prosecuted under anti-spam laws, not trespassing laws, so this case is not setting a precedent that would be useful for any spammer, unless they were also charged with trespassing.

I agree. For some good info, and a good chuckle at a Writ issued by the spammers against Anti-spam activists, have a look at Spamhaus's website.

Here