republican-creole
site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
114
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Vonage
·DIRECTV

ANY network has the right . . .

to refuse traffic from ANYONE.

quote:
"Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit. The ancient concept that 'a man's home is his castle' into which 'not even the king may enter' has lost none of its vitality. We therefore categorically reject the argument that a vendor has a right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another. If this prohibition operates to impede the flow of even valid ideas, the answer is that no one has a right to press even 'good' ideas on an unwilling recipient. That we are often 'captives' outside the sanctuary of the home and subject to objectionable speech and other sound does not mean we must be captives everywhere. The asserted right of a mailer, we repeat, stops at the outer boundary of every person's domain."

Chief Justice Burger, U.S. Supreme Court
ROWAN v. U. S. POST OFFICE DEPT.,
397 U.S. 728 May 4, 1970.

--

Ö¿Ö
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's Newest Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket?

TheWickerMan

join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA

said by newview:

to refuse traffic from ANYONE.
Right, and I believe there was another precedent set, besides the one you mentioned. Going back about 10 years, I seem to remember hearing about notorious spammer Sanford Wallace, back in the Cyberpromo days, trying to sue ISPs who were blocking his spam. I believe he lost.

Sunday, 27-May 12:22:29 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics