Richmond (VA) - The highest court in the state of Virginia is the first major judicial power in the country to rule on the debate of freedom of speech vs. spam, and the spammers lost.

Raleigh resident Jeremy Jaynes was convicted of violating Virginia's 2003 Anti-Spam Act for sending out more than 50,000 e-mails in under three days.  He was sentenced to nine years in prison, but appealed under the First Amendment.

The case was just settled in the Virginia Supreme Court, and with a close 4-3 vote among justices, the conviction was upheld.  The majority justices said bulk e-mail messages are not covered by citizens' right to "freedom of speech".

According to claims made in Jaynes's case, he received over $2 million during 2003 from his spamming scam.  This was the first felony case for spamming in the United States.  Jaynes was considered the eighth most prolific spammer when he was arrested.

Jaynes's attorney said the ruling could lead to problems in the future with cases not involving dangerous spam messages.  "As three justices pointed out in dissent, the majority's decision will have far reaching consequences. The statute criminalizes sending bulk anonymous e-mail, even for the purpose of petitioning the government or promoting religion," he said in an AP story.

What about my rights?

Mar 05, 2008 08:16     

I kinda feel like I have the right to not get spam of any kind, and therefore agree with the decision of the court. Nobody forsaw the ability to send out a million e-mails for almost nothing.
Ryan report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Thank God that common sense prevailed! The Constit...

Mar 05, 2008 09:29     

Thank God that common sense prevailed! The Constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech does not give anybody the right to come into your home and annoy you, which is what spamming does. Spamming misuses a service for which you pay for its on purpose. Stick the SOB's in jail.
Oldcrank report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Good Ridance

Mar 05, 2008 11:10     

I hope all other spammers find themselves in a similar perdiciment.... Jeremy I bet buba loves spam ;)...
SilverDraco report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

SPAM=trespassing

Mar 05, 2008 13:27     

We need to get to a point where your email accounts/pcs/servers etc are actually considered part of your domecile/place of business etc. As such, SPAM amounts to Trespassing and spyware/virii etc amount to Breaking and Entering (and depending on how agressive they get with getting past filters, SPAM could be considered B&E as well). While free speech is protected in the US, that doesn't give an advertiser the right to kick down your door to march into your living room. Further, the Do Not Call registry and nuisance fax law (I forget the proper name for that) have well established that invasive advertising is not free speech and both of those have stood up in US courts as well. I hate the fact that an entire law can be thrown out potentially because of concerns about protected rights. Why not just rule that there are restrictions on what the law can cover? Of course, why should common sense prevail in a court room?

Jim L report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Good, is xxx next?

Mar 06, 2008 12:57     

Proposal to put all naked bodies’ internet business beyond .xxx curtain was rejected using first amendment. I don't think showing privacies to children and even to anyone who don't like to see it can be considered as 1st.
wowe report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0