Anti-spamming Statute And Restrictions On Evidence

A class-action suit, Terry Gillman v. Sprint Communications, has been filed that argues that the phone company violated a Utah statute that places restrictions on senders of unsolicited e-mail. The lawsuit charges that Sprint breached Utah law, which requires commercial e-mail to include legitimate contact information, valid means to avoid future messages and a subject line containing the prefix "ADV." This lawsuit has become the pioneer case of for how much evidence a company can recover when defending against allegations of wrongful spamming.

The following questions have been addressed in this article:

Is Spam considered to be ordinary speech?


Facebook Twitter RSS