Their customers are not paying them to harm legitimate senders from whom they wish to receive emails. It's unfathomable that you appear to see no dinstinction t

Their customers are not paying them to harm legitimate senders from whom they wish to receive emails. It's unfathomable that you appear to see no dinstinction there. Neither is it "exactly" nor even remotely the same as ad blockers. >That probably means that "tortious interference" is more complex than you are making it out to be. No, it means that your analogies are invalid. Further, perhaps you should look up the term before musing about what it "probably means".