Jeremy Jaynes
Convicted spammer Jeremy Jaynes was charged under Virginia state law

Spammer claims law violates freedom of speech

A novel defence

Ian Williams

A US lawyer for Jeremy Jaynes, once considered one of the world's top 10 spammers, has told the Virginia Supreme Court that the state's anti-spam laws are a violation of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.

Jaynes was charged in 2003 in the nation's first felony case against illegal spamming for using aliases and false internet addresses to inundate email users with spam. He was found guilty and sentenced to nine years in prison.

Advertisement

Despite being from North Carolina, Jaynes was charged and convicted under Virginia state law as he had used servers located in that state.

"There is absolutely no question that spam can be regulated," said Jaynes's lawyer Thomas Wolf.

"The problem with Virginia's statute is that it attaches severe criminal penalties to unsolicited bulk email of a non-commercial nature."

Wolf explained that under these laws anyone around the world could unwittingly break the law by sending anonymous political or religious emails in bulk because some of the messages would probably pass through servers in Virginia.

However, state solicitor General William Thro argued that the law does not bar free or anonymous speech, but prohibits falsifying internet routing and transmission information to electronically trespass on a privately owned computer network.

Thro said that there is "no constitutional right to use the property of others to engage in speech" and that "using unsolicited bulk email to commandeer a privately owned computer network is akin to stealing a car to drive to a political rally".

Despite the controversy surrounding the law, the Virginia Court of Appeals upheld Jaynes's conviction last September in a unanimous ruling.

The court maintained that the statute "does not prevent anonymous speech but prohibits trespassing on private computer networks through intentional misrepresentation, an activity that merits no First Amendment protection".

The Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling in November when Jaynes, who has remained free during his appeal under a $1m bond, may have to begin his sentence.

  • Have your say
  • Send to a friend
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Share

Tags:

Do you agree?

Related whitepapers

Related jobs

Most watched

iPhone

Video Review: iPhone 3GS

We put Apple's latest iPhone through its paces

Xperia X1

Video Review: Sony Ericsson Xperia X1

First Looks Editor Ian Williams gets hands on with the Sony Ericsson Xperia X1

IT white papers

Search white papers

Top categories

Poll

Poll: Summer smartphones

Poll: Summer smartphones

Which smartphone will you be taking to the beach this summer?

View poll results

Advertisement

Advertisement

Newsletter signup

Sign up for our range of FREE newsletters:

Existing User

Newsletter user login:

Enter email address to edit your newsletter preferences

Job of the week

Search thousands of IT jobs :

Search thousands of IT jobs:

Advanced search

Hiring now on ComputingCareers:

Related IT jobs

Search thousands of IT jobs :

Search thousands of IT jobs:

Advanced search

Spotlight

iPhone

Video Review: iPhone 3GS

We put Apple's latest iPhone through its paces

old computer

Government honours veterans of Bletchley Park at last

Surviving veterans of the code-breaking facility to receive badge of...

Motorola MC55 Enterprise Digital Assistant

Review: Motorola MC55 Enterprise Digital Assistant

A rugged Windows Mobile device for mobile workers

BT

BT promises 1.5m fibre connections by summer 2010

Telco begins major rollout in 69 locations across the UK

Primary Navigation