Our Disclaimer

Nothing contained in this blog or on www.keytlaw.com is legal advice. This is just a website that provides information about the law designed to help people deal with their legal needs. Legal information provided on this website is not the same as legal advice, i.e., the application of the law to a person’s specific circumstances.

We try to make our legal information accurate and useful, but we recommend that you consult a lawyer if you want professional assurance that our information and your interpretation of it is appropriate to your particular situation and legal needs.

Our blog and website is also an indirect advertisement for legal services by our attorneys who are licensed to practice law in Arizona. Neither KEYTLaw, LLC, nor any of its attorneys are your attorney and you are not our client unless you enter into a written agreement with us to provide legal services.

Court Finds that SMS Spam Messages are Subject to the TCPA and Rejects First Amendment Defense

Eric Goldman:  “I didn’t think there was much dispute as to whether SMS spam falls under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, but Judge Gottschall’s order in Abbas v. Selling Source, LLC, tackles this issue and concludes that SMS spam messages are ‘calls,’ under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.  Along the way, the court addresses a few other interesting arguments, including defendant Selling Source’s First Amendment defenses.   Abbas allegedly received SMS spam from Selling Source.  Abbas sued Selling Source in state court under the TCPA.  Selling Source removed and filed a motion to dismiss.  The court rejected the crux of Selling Source’s arguments.”

Related posts:

  1. California Plaintiff Wins Lawsuit Against Spammer & Gets $7,000
  2. The Tagged.com Spam Cases: New York & Texas Attorney General Actions Show the Effectiveness of States’ Retained Powers to Regulate Spam
  3. Federal Court Dismisses Internet Defamation Lawsuit for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Where Defamation Was Not “Expressly Aimed” at the Forum State
  4. Internet Obscenity Conviction Requires Assessment of National Community Standards
  5. Eleventh Circuit Decision Largely Eliminates Fourth Amendment Protection in E-Mail
  6. Website Lauding Defendant’s “Worldwide Expertise” and Facilitating One-Way Contact to the Defendant Too Passive to Confer Jurisdiction
  7. Law Firm & Ex-Associate Litigate Badmouth Blog Battle in State & Federal Court
  8. Judge Didn’t Say E-Mail Not Protected by 4th Amendment
  9. How to Lose a Cybersqatting Case against a Serial Cybersquatter
  10. May a Court Enter an Injunction Requiring an ISP to Take Down an Allegedly Defamatory Third Party Post?

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree