Click the comments link on any story to see comments or add your own.
Subscribe to this blog
17 Nov 2010
Last time, the court decided, among other things, that Melaleuca didn't have standing to sue because it contracts its mail service to an ISP called IP Applications, the ISP assigned its CAN SPAM clains to Melaleuca, but not until after filing suit, which the judge said was too late. This time, the claims are assigned before the suit started, so that particular defect is fixed, but all the other problems with the suit remain, most notably the absurd 9th Circuit rule that plaintiffs show specific harm from the specific messages they're suing about.
The only interesting bit of this case is the question whether the ISP can assign its CAN SPAM claims to someone else, which I believe has never come up before. I fear this may be another Gordon, a case with lousy facts that sets a precedent putting yet another needless hurdle in the way of subsequent reasonable CAN SPAM cases.
Venkat has a longer take on this suit, with comments about the procedural as well as substantive problems this suit has.
My other sites
© 2005-2020 John R. Levine.
CAN SPAM address harvesting notice: the operator of this website will not give, sell, or otherwise transfer addresses maintained by this website to any other party for the purposes of initiating, or enabling others to initiate, electronic mail messages.