Comments on: CAN-SPAM in court http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/ "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:15:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: White Buffalo Loses Again | Intellectual Intercourse http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-67626 White Buffalo Loses Again | Intellectual Intercourse Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:01:11 +0000 http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/#comment-67626 [...] readers, of course, are already familiar with this story. For related entries here see here, here, and [...] [...] readers, of course, are already familiar with this story. For related entries here see here, here, and [...]

]]> By: Intellectual Intercourse » White Buffalo Loses Again http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-9979 Intellectual Intercourse » White Buffalo Loses Again Mon, 09 Jan 2006 17:56:30 +0000 http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/#comment-9979 [...] Regular readers, of course, are already familiar with this story. For related entries here see here, here, and here. [...] [...] Regular readers, of course, are already familiar with this story. For related entries here see here, here, and here. [...]

]]> By: TK http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-1221 TK Sun, 21 Aug 2005 02:21:02 +0000 http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/#comment-1221 It never ceases to amaze me how those that wish to vomit their abuse on others misread the First Amendment into expanding "congress shall make no law" etc into the gross generalisation that all instututions funded by the public purse is not allowed to restrict my right to vomit my abuse on you or your employee's or students. Even perverting the First Amendment with some fictitious seperation of church and state by demanding all practice or recognition of Christian faith be excluded from governmental, judicial and educational life. ALL of those deny members of government, judiciary and the education system, including students their First Amendment rights to their unfettered right to freely practice their religious beliefs. In my understanding of the First Amendments Freedom of speech, it is Personal free speech NOT comercial free speech. Congress is entirely at liberty to make laws prohibiting aspects of comercial "speech" ie adverts are regulated, performance claims are regulated etc and so they should be. It never ceases to amaze me how those that wish to vomit their abuse on others misread the First Amendment into expanding “congress shall make no law” etc into the gross generalisation that all instututions funded by the public purse is not allowed to restrict my right to vomit my abuse on you or your employee’s or students. Even perverting the First Amendment with some fictitious seperation of church and state by demanding all practice or recognition of Christian faith be excluded from governmental, judicial and educational life. ALL of those deny members of government, judiciary and the education system, including students their First Amendment rights to their unfettered right to freely practice their religious beliefs.
In my understanding of the First Amendments Freedom of speech, it is Personal free speech NOT comercial free speech. Congress is entirely at liberty to make laws prohibiting aspects of comercial “speech” ie adverts are regulated, performance claims are regulated etc and so they should be.

]]> By: Intellectual Intercourse Efficiency? What Efficiency? http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-1108 Intellectual Intercourse Efficiency? What Efficiency? Tue, 09 Aug 2005 04:30:33 +0000 http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/#comment-1108 [...] cuit makes an interesting observation in its Central Hudson analysis in footnote 24 of its recent White Buffalo Ventures decision: courts’ tendency to favor the [...] [...] cuit makes an interesting observation in its Central Hudson analysis in footnote 24 of its recent White Buffalo Ventures decision: courts’ tendency to favor the [...]

]]> By: Intellectual Intercourse 5th Circuit and Server Efficiency http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-1106 Intellectual Intercourse 5th Circuit and Server Efficiency Mon, 08 Aug 2005 22:10:01 +0000 http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/#comment-1106 [...] l to accept the "server efficiency" argument put forward by the University of Texas in the recent White Buffalo Ventures decision. The answer to why the "server e [...] [...] l to accept the “server efficiency” argument put forward by the University of Texas in the recent White Buffalo Ventures decision. The answer to why the “server e [...]

]]> By: Lockergnome's Political Geeks http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-1058 Lockergnome's Political Geeks Thu, 04 Aug 2005 03:34:13 +0000 http://mickc.whizardries.com/archives/2005/08/03/can-spam-in-court/#comment-1058 <strong>CAN-SPAM in court</strong> Tech News on ZDNet reports that "[a]n online dating service does not have the right to blast unsolicited e-mail at thousands of University of Texas e-mail addresses, a federal appeals court ruled."... CAN-SPAM in court

Tech News on ZDNet reports that “[a]n online dating service does not have the right to blast unsolicited e-mail at thousands of University of Texas e-mail addresses, a federal appeals court ruled.”…

]]>