Hydra Media Group, an email advertising service provider, was sued for violating the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act (CSPA) and the Electronic Mail Advertising Act (EMAA) by a plaintiff who received numerous unsolicited advertisement e-mails. Hydra’s motion for summary judgment was based on the following grounds: (1) it is exempt from Plaintiff’s CSPA claim under Ohio Statute (2) since Hydra never directly sent any emails to him, plaintiff’s EMAA claims fail, (3) EMAA is preempted by the CAN-SPAM Act. The court granted defendant Hydra’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Hydra qualified for the exemption and the Plaintiff’s EMAA claims over CAN-SPAM Act is insufficient, but declined to grant summary judgment on the claim that there was an issue of fact as to whether Hydra "caused" the transmission of the email since Hydra could have reasonably foreseen the transmission.
Published in Tuesday, November 11, 2008, Volume 6, No. 2Stanford Center for Internet and Society
In the heart of the Silicon Valley, legal doctrine is emerging that will determine the course of civil rights and technological innovation for decades to come. The Center for Internet and Society (CIS), housed at Stanford Law School and a part of the Law, Science and Technology Program, is at the apex of this evolving area of law.
Our Issues
cybercrime
Fair Use Project
free speech
infrastructure
intellectual property
privacy
anti-circumvention copyright copyright copyright law Creative Commons defamation DMCA drm economics Fair Use first amendment Fourth Amendment Future of Ideas Google Hearsay Culture internet libel IP reform journalism libel podcasting Privacy surveillance tcblog Testimony trademarks
anti-circumvention copyright copyright copyright law Creative Commons defamation DMCA drm economics Fair Use first amendment Fourth Amendment Future of Ideas Google Hearsay Culture internet libel IP reform journalism libel podcasting Privacy surveillance tcblog Testimony trademarks