Spamming Gets Expensive in Utah and Ohio

bradipo writes "A large number of lawsuits have been filed against companies that have not complied with the anti-spam statute in Utah. I'm not sure how this will turn out, but it should be interesting nonetheless." And reader spoton writes "The governor of Ohio has signed into law a bill that allows internet subscribers to sue for up to $50,000 and ISP's for up to $500,000. It allows you to sue for $100 per email + court and lawyer fees incurred. Looks like the cost of spamming is going up."

Re:what about jurisdiction

[siskbc]

Jurisdiction on internet is typically the user - recall mid 90's when a NY porn site was busted in TN for things that were legal in NY but illegal in TN. They should be able to extradict.

Curious as to what the laws are in YOUR state?

[johnthorensen]

http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ [spamlaws.com]

libility and finding the bastards

[_ph1ux_]

only problem with this is that finding the source of the spam and actually holding them accountable will likely be a big problem.

also - who is truely responsible for the *sending* of the email e.g: the guy who was on /. a while ago about making such a great living at being a spammer etc - he provides a service to people who want to send out shitloads of spam. Under this law - who is liable for the spam - the _sender_ or the _client_ of the service?

so - if you go after spammers and you find that the email you are getting comes from someone like this said spammer guy, do you have the legal right to demand client info from him - and can you sue both him (sender) and his client for 100/email each (totalling 200/email)

the other isue is the time it will take to try to track down these people when you have false headers etc.. and when they are in china or some such country where it would be hopeless to track them....

Re:what about jurisdiction

[langed]

Many of the policies tend to be quite clear on this issue. For example, my state [spamlaws.com]:

5. JURISDICTION. Transmitting or causing the transmission of unsolicited bulk electronic mail to or through an interactive computer service's computer network located in this state shall constitute an act in this state.

That legalese, I think, is sufficiently clear to stand by itself. That said, of course, IANAL.

On another note, Utah and Ohio are somewhat known for tighter legal control.
After all, they are among the states that get special mention on those satellite channels that give titillating promos for the porn channels.
And they're the states that were the reason for the "you may have other rights, which vary from state to state" you find in most license agreements; these states are the ones that have laws that specify that even a license that completely disclaims all liability can't be held up in court.
In short, if I agreed a little more with some of their more unconventional laws, I'd move to Utah in a heartbeat.

But FWIW, I have begun documenting my spams. Occasionally I do unsubscribe, but most I just send to the Federal Trade Commission [mailto]. I figure that someday there might be a precedent, and I wouldn't mind making $500 per unsolicited email. :)
Anyway, I got the idea for spamming the FTC from here [ftc.gov].

HTH. HAND.