Spam-Fighters Legal Defense Fund

History of Lawsuits Against Spam Fighters

DateWhoComplaintResult
2000 Exactis v MAPS RBL Listing Settled out of court; Exactis agrees to take steps to prevent spamming, MAPS agrees to not list Exactis again.
2000 Yesmail v MAPS RBL Listing Yesmail agrees to switch to confirmed opt-in.
2000 Harris Interactive v MAPS, AOL, Microsoft, Qwest, et al RBL Listing Harris drops lawsuit, agrees to use confirmed opt-in. MAPS removes Harris from RBL
2001 Black Ice v MAPS RBL Listing  
2000 Media3 v MAPS RBL Listing Court denies Media3 request for TRO. Settled out of court; MAPS continues to list spamware sites in RBL.
2000 Gartman v Ritz (1) interference with contract Tossed for lack of service
2000 Gartman v Ritz (2) interference with contract Tossed for lack of jurisdiction
2000 Gartman v Ritz (3) interference with contract Withdrawn after jurisdictional challenge
2000 Stemple v Ritz interference with contract Withdrawn after jurisdictional challenge
2001 Actrix v. ORBS
Open Relay listing ORBS lost. ORBS ceased operation, June 2001. [Salon]
2001 iMatcher v Lugo Retaliation for spam complaint Withdrawn by plaintiff after case moved to federal court. May be the first case of a lawsuit against a private individual for simply reporting apparent AUP violations.
2002 T3 Direct vs Joseph McNicol Retaliation for spam complaint Dismissed by court.
2003 Haberstroh v. Jay Stuler [silicon.com], [slashdot], [Surriel.com] Retaliation for spam complaint Settled out of court; details not disclosed.
2003 EMarketersAmerica.org v Spamhaus, et al ROKSO listing Dismissed with prejudice when plaintiffs withdrew.
2003 Moore vs Uy
[Spam Kings]
Invasion of privacy (Uy had maintained a web site which alleged Moore was the "Dr. Fatburn" spammer, and gave his address and other personal information. Won by Uy
2004 Pallorium v. Osirusoft Open Relay listing Osirusoft won, but at great expense. Open Relay list service discontinued by Osirusoft. Appeals court rules that the Communications Decency Act gives listing services immunity from liability as long as they're acting in good faith.
2004 Optinrealbig.com vs. Spamcop Trade libel, unfair trade practices Settled. Spamcop will continue listing Optinrealbig; Optinrealbig will continue emailing as before. Other terms of settlement confidential. U.S. District Court rules that SpamCop is subject to immunity under §230 of the Communications Decency Act.
2004 Buckeye Cablevision vs. Spamcop    
2004 AAW Marketing vs Julian Haight   Dismissed
2005 Reynolds v Falk Defamation Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
2005 Sierra v Falk Publishing whois and dns data without permission Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
2005 Sierra v Ritz
[Chilling Effects]
Publishing whois and dns data without permission Still in court
2005 FreeSpeechStore v AHBL    
2006 Tift v Ferguson malicious usenet postings  
2006 E360insight vs Spamhaus ROKSO Listing Still in court
2006 E360insight vs various spam-fighters Defamation, tortious interference Case not yet begun

See SpamLinks.net for more.

See also Ben Edelman's Threats Against Spyware Detectors, Removers, and Critics.

See also SLAPP SUIT, Adventures of an Anti-Spammer movie trailer.

----
 
 . legal and privacy notice  . questions? comments@sfldf.org.  . all contents copyright 2006, all rights reserved.  . The SFLDF web site is bobby v3.2 approved for improved access for the disabled.  .