Since we all hate spam.

Is this good news?

>    High Court Won't Hear ESpam Case
>    
>    By KATHERINE PFLEGER
>    Associated Press Writer
>    
>    WASHINGTON (AP) The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case Monday
>    involving Washington state's tough law against deceptive junk e-mail,
>    or spam.
>    
>    The decision clears the way for trial to begin in King County Superior
>    Court in Seattle on a lawsuit against Jason Heckel over millions of
>    pieces of unsolicited e-mail sent by Heckel and his company, Natural
>    Instincts.
>    
>    The high court turned away the case without comment. But by not
>    accepting the case, the justices effectively agreed with a Washington
>    state Supreme Court's decision to overturn lower court's dismissal of
>    the lawsuit.
>    
>    A Washington state law prohibits commercial e-mail with misleading
>    information in the subject line, an invalid reply address or a
>    disguised path of transmission across the Internet.
>    
>    In October 1998, state Attorney General Christine Gregoire filed suit
>    against Heckel of Salem, Ore., after her office's Consumer Protection
>    Division received complaints about Natural Instincts' messages,
>    advertising a $39.95 package called ``How to Profit From the
>    Internet.''
>    
>    Among the allegations, Heckel was accused of using a misleading
>    subject line ``Did I get the right e-mail address?'' which state
>    lawyers considered a trick to deceive recipients into thinking the
>    message came from an acquaintance.
>    
>    Heckel's attorney, Dale Crandall, said if he doesn't prevail after the
>    King County trial, the case may work its way back again to the
>    nation's highest court.
>    
>    Crandall argues the Internet is a commercial infrastructure that needs
>    to be protected from inconsistent state regulations, like Washington's
>    law, to protect national and international commerce.
>    
>    ``We view the Internet to be similar to what the founding fathers saw
>    in the oceans, coastlines and navigable waters,'' which are protected
>    by uniform federal regulations, Crandall said.
>    
>    But Regina Cullen, Washington state assistant attorney general, said
>    Crandall wrongly argues Heckel's actions are legitimate and somehow
>    protected under the Constitution.
>    
>    ``You have to take a look at what the man is doing he is defrauding
>    people,'' she said. ``You can't use the Constitution as a shield to
>    hide bad behavior.''
>    
>    Cullen said Heckel was selling a 45-page brochure on how to send out
>    spam. She said the only customer she's aware of, a Washington state
>    woman, sent Cullen a check but never received the brochure.
>    
>    The case is Heckel v. Washington, 01-469.

-- 
Bob Tanner <tanner at real-time.com>         | Phone : (952)943-8700
http://www.mn-linux.org, Minnesota, Linux | Fax   : (952)943-8500
Key fingerprint =  6C E9 51 4F D5 3E 4C 66 62 A9 10 E5 35 85 39 D9