In a four to three decision, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled last week that the first amendment does not protect spam (mass commercial messaging) e-mails. The defendant in the case was convicted, but not for a violation of the right to free speech or the interstate commerce clause.
The defendant, Jeremy Jaynes, was the eighth-largest spammer in the world before his arrest in 2004, according to the Spamhuas Project, which tracks spam on a global level. Jaynes conviction landed him nine years behind bars for sending more than 53,000 e-mails in a three-day period using AOL's servers.
"Spam not only clogs e-mail inboxes and destroys productivity, it also defrauds citizens and threatens the online revolution" said Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell in a press release regarding the case.
In its decision, the court said that misleading speech for commercial means is not protected.
"It sounds right," said Rachel Stover, a junior marketing major. "Spam is an invasion. The fact that you get so much of it without agreeing to it is a problem."
Virginia's anti-spam law makes it a class-one misdemeanor or class-six felony to send out e-mails in mass quantities.
In the dissenting opinion, Judge Elizabeth Lacy writes that the anti-spam law is unconstitutional "because it prohibits the anonymous transmission of all unsolicited bulk e-mail including those containing political, religious or other speech protected by the First Amendment."
Teresa Miklitsch, a professor in the Graduate School of Education, said that just as professors rely on the freedom of speech to talk about issues that may be in contrast to current thinking, spammers' e-mails are a speech that ought to be protected.
"In the same way, spam falls under freedom of speech, to contact me or any person about a particular product or service...to provide me with information," Miklitsch said. "How is spam any different than telemarketers, or the junk-mail, like credit-card offers that I receive at my house? I never ask for either, so why are they permissible, but now spam isn't?"
This is the first time that a spammer has been convicted of a felony, according to the press release by the Virginia attorney general's office. Experts don't foresee any immediate effects on the amount of spam that winds up in the inbox, however.
"Spam has changed the nature of e-mail for the worse, there is no question about that," said William J. Rapaport, an associate professor in the department of computer science and engineering. "I'm optimistic about the decision but still skeptical because nothing has worked so far to stem the tide of spam."
Photo: Courtesy of Laron Fomby
