In September, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that the State law that prosecuted those involved in sending spam emails was unconstitutional and in violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution that guaranteed free speech. The judgment used a rationale that doesn’t make much sense to me ;
“As Justice (G. Steven) Agee said in the court’s opinion, if the Federalist Papers were written today and disseminated by e-mail, the sender would be guilty of a felony under Virginia’s anti-spam statuteâ€
With more than 1 billion spam emails sent out in a year, it is estimated a spam network rakes in somewhere to the amount of $3.5 million each product. While the statute has been declared unconstitutional, the Attorney General for the State has now decided to take the matter upto the Supreme Court of the United States and ask the decision to be reversed.
Earlier, the ACLU president commenting on the judgment stated;
“â€The internet is a uniquely democratizing public forum that provides ordinary people with an outlet to express a wide variety of opinions. Some of those views may be controversial, making anonymity or the use of pseudonyms essential for giving those ideas fair consideration in public debates. Speech on the Internet deserves no less First Amendment protection than in any other medium.â€
Cross – posted from The Social Blog .
I would agree, sending 1 billion unsolicited spam e-mails a year selling Viagara is pretty controversial, and I would want to remain anonymous too.
How that relates to free speech rights though is beyond me.
Although freedom of expression in Canada does include advertising, infringement of corporate free speech has been justified under s. 1 in Irwin Toy.
The spammers might have a tougher case north of the border.