Whilst I certainly believe that that arguement may be used by spammers (and
probably will), the concept of freedom of speech was that you could talk
un-obstructed by any persons or organisations. The audience had the option
wheather they wanted to listen or not, if they did not, they would simply walk
away.
With the advent of email however, we have lost the right to walk away and not
listen, so now we have to open the mail, read the mail and decide if we are
intrested in the contents of the mail, before deleting it. The loss of time and
man hours could be significant enough to warrant charges maybe being drawn up
against the spammer for theft of that employees time. and whilst the spammers
will invoke the freedom of speech excuse, will it make any difference when in
effect you have a captive audience who cannot even exercise the right to walk
away.
Wow, this is getting very legal (and I am a Network Engineer, not an attorney,
Damn it ;-> (apologies to Dr. McCoy))
What is the legal perspective on this ? (clip notes please ;-> )
Jim
**************************************************************************************
* Legal Disclaimer
*
* *
*The opinions expressed within this mail are specifically my own and in no way
refer to or relate to any *
*ongoing business and/or the technical direction of 3Com Corporation, or any
subsidiary companies or *
*business units within 3Com Corporation and it's subsidiaries.
*
* *
**************************************************************************************
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> on 06/15/2000 06:35:23 PM
Sent by: Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
To: Doug Isenberg <disenberg(_at_)GigaLaw(_dot_)com>
cc: "'ietf @ietf.org'" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> (Jim
Stephenson-Dunn/C/HQ/3Com)
Subject: Re: fyi.. House Committee Passes Bill Limiting Spam E-Mail
I've yet to read the whole bill (H.R. 3113), but I suspect (or, at
least, hope) that the politicians behind this legislation are intending to
draft a federal law that, unlike at least two state attempts, will survive
a constitutional challenge.
And I hope that the courts will finally realize that freedom of speech
includes the freedom not to have your communications disrupted by people
who want to sell you things.
Keith