Spammers CAN-SUE under CAN-SPAM

A federal court in Washington state has found that people who sue spammers and lose may have to pay their legal fees.

Washington resident James Gordon attempted to sue Virtumundo under both Washington state anti-spam law and the federal CAN-SPAM act.

The court found that Gordon's lawsuit was without merit. The question didn't seem to be whether Virtumundo had sent spam or not, but rather if that spam actually harmed Mr. Gordon. The law requires the recipient be "adversely affected" by the email in order to claim damages. Some users cough up substantial money for spam solutions. Others tolerate digging through hundreds of junk messages each day.

While I would argue that any spam message has a negative impact on the recipient, it would seem this isn't how the law was written, or at least how this court sees it.

Not only has Gordon lost his spam lawsuit, he has been ordered to compensate Virtumundo to the tune of $111,440.

On one hand I'm instantly sympathetic towards any anti-spam crusader. On the other, I understand the need to keep frivolous lawsuits to a minimum. It's easy to become overzealous and self-righteous when fighting such battles.

Sometimes when people think they are clearly in the right, they do stupid, illegal stuff and then act confused when they end up in trouble.

Back