Editing Spamming (section)

==Court cases==
{{See also|E-mail spam legislation by country}}

===United States===
Earthlink won a $25 million judgment against one of the most notorious and active "spammers" Khan C. Smith in 2001 for his role in founding the modern spam industry which dealt billions in economic damage and established thousands of spammers into the industry.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Credeur|first1=Mary|title=Staff Writer|url=http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2002/07/22/story4.html|access-date=July 22, 2002|agency=BizJournals.com|publisher=BizJournals.com|archive-date=August 15, 2002|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020815075025/http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2002/07/22/story4.html|url-status=live}}</ref> His email efforts were said to make up more than a third of all Internet email being sent from 1999 until 2002.

[[Sanford Wallace]] and Cyber Promotions were the target of a string of lawsuits, many of which were settled out of court, up through a 1998 Earthlink settlement<ref>{{cite web|title=On the dark side of the planet temperatures average 110amp160K|url=http://www.brechtweigelhaus.de/css/box/js/icon/en/on-the-dark-side-of-the-planet-temperatures-average-110amp160k.htm|website=www.brechtweigelhaus.de|access-date=2018-04-12|archive-date=2018-04-13|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180413124518/http://www.brechtweigelhaus.de/css/box/js/icon/en/on-the-dark-side-of-the-planet-temperatures-average-110amp160k.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> that put Cyber Promotions out of business. Attorney [[Laurence Canter]] was disbarred by the [[Tennessee Supreme Court]] in 1997 for sending prodigious amounts of spam advertising his [[immigration law]] practice. In 2005, [[Jason Smathers]], a former [[America Online]] employee, pleaded guilty to charges of violating the [[CAN-SPAM Act of 2003|CAN-SPAM Act]]. In 2003, he sold a list of approximately 93 million AOL subscriber e-mail addresses to Sean Dunaway who sold the list to spammers.<ref>U.S. v Jason Smathers and Sean Dunaway, amended complaint, US District Court for the Southern District of New York (2003). Retrieved 7 March 2007, from {{cite web |url=http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0623042aol1.html |title=Pair Nabbed In AOL Spam Scheme |publisher=thesmokinggun.com |date=2010-07-14 |access-date=2007-03-07 |archive-date=2009-12-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091201093245/http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0623042aol1.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>Ex-AOL employee pleads guilty in spam case. (2005, February 4). CNN. Retrieved 7 March 2007, from {{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/02/04/aol.spam.plea/ |title=Ex-AOL employee pleads guilty in spam case |date=February 5, 2005 |publisher=CNN.com |access-date=27 August 2010 |archive-date=28 August 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100828112527/http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/02/04/aol.spam.plea/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

In 2007, [[Robert Soloway]] lost a case in a federal court against the operator of a small Oklahoma-based Internet service provider who accused him of spamming. U.S. Judge Ralph G. Thompson granted a motion by plaintiff Robert Braver for a [[default judgment]] and permanent [[injunction]] against him. The judgment includes a statutory damages award of about $10 million under Oklahoma law.<ref>[http://www.mortgagespam.com/soloway Braver v. Newport Internet Marketing Corporation et al.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070123044716/http://www.mortgagespam.com/soloway |date=2007-01-23 }} -''U.S. District Court - Western District of Oklahoma (Oklahoma City)'', 2005-02-22</ref>

In June 2007, two men were convicted of eight counts stemming from sending millions of e-mail spam messages that included hardcore pornographic images. Jeffrey A. Kilbride, 41, of [[Venice, California]] was sentenced to six years in prison, and James R. Schaffer, 41, of [[Paradise Valley, Arizona]], was sentenced to 63 months. In addition, the two were fined $100,000, ordered to pay $77,500 in restitution to [[AOL]], and ordered to forfeit more than $1.1 million, the amount of illegal proceeds from their spamming operation.<ref>{{cite web
 | title = Two Men Sentenced for Running International Pornographic Spamming Business
 | publisher = [[United States Department of Justice]]
 | date = October 12, 2007
 | url = http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/October/07_crm_813.html
 | access-date = 2007-10-25
 | archive-date = 2007-10-15
 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071015052249/http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/October/07_crm_813.html
 | url-status = live
 }}</ref> The charges included [[conspiracy (crime)|conspiracy]], [[fraud]], [[money laundering]], and transportation of [[Obscenity|obscene]] materials. The trial, which began on June 5, was the first to include charges under the [[CAN-SPAM Act of 2003]], according to a release from the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]]. The specific law that prosecutors used under the CAN-Spam Act was designed to crack down on the transmission of pornography in spam.<ref>Gaudin, Sharon, [http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=200000756 ''Two Men Convicted Of Spamming Pornography''] {{Webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20130103121026/http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=200000756 |date=2013-01-03 }} InformationWeek, June 26, 2007</ref>

In 2005, Scott J. Filary and Donald E. Townsend of [[Tampa, Florida]] were sued by [[Florida Attorney General]] [[Charlie Crist]] for violating the Florida Electronic Mail Communications Act.<ref>{{cite web
 |url=http://myfloridalegal.com/__852562220065EE67.nsf/0/F978639D46005F6585256FD90050AAC9?Open&Highlight=0,spam 
 |title=Crist Announces First Case Under Florida Anti-Spam Law 
 |access-date=21 December 2014 
 |publisher=Office of the Florida Attorney General 
 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090115231519/http://myfloridalegal.com/__852562220065EE67.nsf/0/F978639D46005F6585256FD90050AAC9?Open&Highlight=0%2Cspam 
 |archive-date=15 January 2009 
 |url-status=dead 
}}</ref> The two spammers were required to pay $50,000 [[USD]] to cover the costs of investigation by the state of [[Florida]], and a $1.1 million penalty if spamming were to continue, the $50,000 was not paid, or the financial statements provided were found to be inaccurate. The spamming operation was successfully shut down.<ref>{{cite web
 |url=http://myfloridalegal.com/__852562220065EE67.nsf/0/F08DE06CB354A7D7852570CF005912A2?Open&Highlight=0,spam 
 |title=Crist: Judgment Ends Duo's Illegal Spam, Internet Operations 
 |access-date=21 December 2014 
 |publisher=Office of the Florida Attorney General 
 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090115231222/http://myfloridalegal.com/__852562220065EE67.nsf/0/F08DE06CB354A7D7852570CF005912A2?Open&Highlight=0%2Cspam 
 |archive-date=15 January 2009 
 |url-status=dead 
}}</ref>

Edna Fiedler of [[Olympia, Washington]], on June 25, 2008, pleaded guilty in a [[Tacoma, Washington|Tacoma]] court and was sentenced to two years imprisonment and five years of supervised release or [[probation]] in an Internet $1 million "Nigerian check scam." She conspired to commit bank, wire and mail fraud, against US citizens, specifically using Internet by having had an [[accomplice]] who shipped counterfeit checks and money orders to her from [[Lagos]], Nigeria, the previous November. Fiedler shipped out $609,000 fake check and money orders when arrested and prepared to send additional $1.1 million counterfeit materials. Also, the U.S. Postal Service recently intercepted counterfeit checks, lottery tickets and eBay overpayment schemes with a value of $2.1 billion.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/26/Woman_gets_prison_for_Nigerian_scam/UPI-73791214521169/ |title=Woman gets prison for 'Nigerian' scam |publisher=upi.com |access-date=2008-06-27 |archive-date=2017-12-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171226184328/https://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/26/Woman_gets_prison_for_Nigerian_scam/UPI-73791214521169/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://www.pcworld.com/article/147575/article.html |title=Woman Gets Two Years for Aiding Nigerian Internet Check Scam (PC World) |magazine=PC World |access-date=2014-01-30 |date=2008-06-25 |archive-date=3 February 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140203031651/http://www.pcworld.com/article/147575/article.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In a 2009 opinion, ''[[Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc.]]'', 575 F.3d 1040, the Ninth Circuit assessed the standing requirements necessary for a private plaintiff to bring a civil cause of action against spam senders under the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, as well as the scope of the CAN-SPAM Act's federal preemption clause.<ref>{{Cite court |litigants=Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc. |vol=575 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=1040 |court=9th Cir. |date=2009 |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/08/06/07-35487.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110703161453/http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/08/06/07-35487.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>

===United Kingdom===
In the first successful case of its kind, [[Nigel Roberts]] from the [[Channel Islands]] won £270 against Media Logistics UK who sent junk e-mails to his personal account.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/jersey/4562726.stm |title=Businessman wins e-mail spam case |date=27 December 2005 |work=[[BBC News]] |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-date=29 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111029112035/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/jersey/4562726.stm |url-status=live }}</ref>

In January 2007, a Sheriff Court in Scotland awarded Mr. Gordon Dick £750 (the then maximum sum that could be awarded in a Small Claim action) plus expenses of £618.66, a total of £1368.66 against Transcom Internet Services Ltd.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.scotchspam.co.uk/transcom.html |title=Gordon Dick v Transcom Internet Service Ltd |publisher=Scotchspam.co.uk |access-date=2013-09-03 |archive-date=2014-06-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140605100547/http://scotchspam.co.uk/transcom.html |url-status=dead}}</ref> for breaching anti-spam laws.<ref>{{CELEX|id=32002L0058|text=Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications)}}</ref> Transcom had been legally represented at earlier hearings, but were not represented at the proof, so Gordon Dick got his decree by default. It is the largest amount awarded in compensation in the United Kingdom since Roberts v Media Logistics case in 2005.

Despite the statutory tort that is created by the Regulations implementing the EC Directive, few other people have followed their example. As the Courts engage in active case management, such cases would probably now be expected to be settled by mediation and payment of nominal damages.

===New Zealand===
In October 2008, an international internet spam operation run from New Zealand was cited by American authorities as one of the world's largest, and for a time responsible for up to a third of all unwanted e-mails. In a statement the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) named Christchurch's Lance Atkinson as one of the principals of the operation. New Zealand's Internal Affairs announced it had lodged a $200,000 claim in the High Court against Atkinson and his brother [[Shane Atkinson]] and courier Roland Smits, after raids in Christchurch. This marked the first prosecution since the Unsolicited Electronic Messages Act (UEMA) was passed in September 2007.
The FTC said it had received more than three million complaints about spam messages connected to this operation, and estimated that it may be responsible for sending billions of illegal spam messages. The US District Court froze the defendants' assets to preserve them for consumer redress pending trial.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/675386 |title=Kiwi spam network was 'World's biggest' |date=16 October 2008 |work=[[Stuff.co.nz]] |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-date=10 March 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140310200259/http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/675386 |url-status=live }}</ref>
U.S. co-defendant Jody Smith forfeited more than $800,000 and faces up to five years in prison for charges to which he pleaded guilty.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/11/herbalkings.shtm |title=Court Orders Australia-based Leader of International Spam Network to Pay $15.15 Million |publisher=Ftc.gov |date=2011-06-24 |access-date=2013-09-03 |archive-date=2013-06-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130626075839/http://ftc.gov/opa/2009/11/herbalkings.shtm |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Bulgaria===
{{copyedit|section|date=December 2024}}
[[Bulgaria]] allows spam messages as long as the message is clearly marked as spam according to the Bulgarian E-Commerce act. Spam messages can't be sent if the user opts out of them. When a user opts out of a message, their e-mail gets stored in a public registry. Companies sending spam messages to users registered in the registry have to pay a fine. Under the ECA, spam messages can't be sent if the address of the spam message is invalid or the user identity is unknown.<ref>{{Cite web |date=14 August 2011 |title=Закон За Електронната Търговия |url=https://lex.bg/bg/laws/ldoc/2135530547 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130724113235/http://lex.bg/bg/laws/ldoc/2135530547/ |archive-date=24 July 2013 |website=lex.bg |at=Chapter 2, article 5.}}</ref><ref>Dimitrov, George, and Zahariev, Martin. Cyber Law in Bulgaria. Part 4, Chapter 4, Section 3. Netherlands, Wolters Kluwer, 2022.</ref>

This made lawsuits against Bulgarian ISP's and public e-mail providers with antispam policy possible, as they are obstructing legal commerce activity and thus violate Bulgarian antitrust acts. While there are no such lawsuits until now, several cases of spam obstruction are currently awaiting decision in the Bulgarian Antitrust Commission (Комисия за защита на конкуренцията) and can end with serious fines for the ISPs in question.{{when|date=May 2014}}

The law contains other dubious provisions — for example, the creation of a nationwide public electronic register of e-mail addresses that do not want to receive spam.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.kzp.bg/register/ |title=Регистър на юридическите лица, които не желаят да получават непоискани търговски съобщения |publisher=Kzp.bg |access-date=2013-09-03 |archive-date=2010-09-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100927171539/http://www.kzp.bg/register/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> It is usually abused as the perfect source for [[e-mail address harvesting]], because publishing invalid or incorrect information in such a register is a criminal offense in Bulgaria.