Kleffman

Kleffman v. Vonage Holdings Corp.

Good Law
110 Cal. Rptr. 3d 628·2010 Cal. LEXIS 5765·49 Cal. 4th 334·232 P.3d 625
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 21, 2010S169195California6,014 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

Business and Professions Code section 17529.5, subdivision (a)(2) (section 17529.5(a)(2)) provides that it is unlawful to advertise in a commercial electronic mail (e-mail) advertisement—commonly known as “spam”—if the advertisement “contains or is accompanied by falsified, misrepresented, or forged header information.” The issue this case presents is whether, under this section, it is unlawful to send commercial e-mail advertisements from multiple domain names for the purpose of bypassing spam filters. We hold that, on the undisputed facts of this case, the answer is “no.”

Factual Background

“The Internet is an international network of interconnected computers” that enables millions of people “to communicate with one another and to access vast amounts of information from around the world.” (Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997) 521 U.S. 844, 849-850 [ 138 L.Ed.2d 874 , 117 S.Ct. 2329 ].) “In order for the Internet to function, each entity connected to it (e.g., computer, router, network, etc.) must have a unique numeric ‘address.’ A unique identifier is required to enable one connected computer or network to identify and send information to another connected…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.