Spam-Free-or-Die Video

By Eric Goldman I recommend joke videos pretty rarely, but this one made me laugh out loud! (and the music wasn’t too bad either). With its vigilante sentiments, it captures the prevailing anti-spam attitudes perfectly. Check out the “Spam-Free-or-Die” video,…

Cellphone Spam Violates TCPA–Joffe v. Acacia Mortgage

Joffe v. Acacia Mortgage Corp., No. 1 CA-CV 02-0701 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 20, 2005). When is an email a telephone call? The Arizona Court of Appeals says that an email is a telephone call when the receiver gets a…

U.T. v. Longhornsingles.com Part 2 – state email filtering

This second post of a two-part posting continues looking at the 5th Circuit’s opinion in this unique case. The first post focused on the CAN-SPAM Act and how the court applied it in this case. This scond post will talk about 1st Amendment complications when a government agency or entity (in this case the University of Texas) adopts a filtering policy or blocks email.

White Buffalo – the 5th Circuit hits on LonghornSingles.com

This two-part post it going to take a rather detailed look at the 5th Circuit’s opinion in this unique case, talking in Part One about the CAN-SPAM Act and how the court applies it in this case.

2004 Case on Advertiser Liability for Spam

Fenn v. Redmond Venture, Inc., 2004 UT App 355 (Utah Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2004). I was digging through my stack and stumbled across this case from last year. It seems apropos to a running theme on this blog about…

FTC Cracks Down on Porn Spam

The FTC has brought enforcement actions against seven companies for violating failing to include the “SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT” label on emails where such labels are required under CAN-SPAM and the implementing FTC regulations (as well as other violations of CAN-SPAM). Four of…

Mistaken Judgments for Content Labeled Advertising

Last week I applauded the FTC for arguing against the mandatory labeling of commerical emails. In that post, I argued that the labels would increase the rate of erroneous judgments by recipients, because the recipients would mistakenly believe that the…

FTC Votes Against Mandatory Spam Labeling

The FTC has recommended against adopting a mandatory label for spam like “ADV.” The FTC concluded that recipients have better filtering mechanisms for law-abiding emailers and the law will have no effect against law-breaker emailers. I think this quote sums…

Hypertouch Inc. v. Kraft Foods Inc.–New CAN-SPAM Lawsuit

An Internet access provider has sued Kraft Foods under CAN-SPAM and the California anti-spam law. This case is a little unusual because, to date, most CAN-SPAM lawsuits have been against marginal marketers, in many cases who were expected to default….

2005 Pew Report on Spam

Pew has released its annual survey on recipient attitudes towards spam. The 2005 version shows that recipients are becoming adjusted to the spam influx. As the report says, recipients are “minding it less” and that the “worst case scenario—that spam…