3 ms·

Link the case please.

• okdjnfweonfe 5y ago
  I... already did? but here it is again https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama
  • stillbourne 5y ago
    The closest thing I could find is: Cyber Promotions v. America Online https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/9 https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/9... The argument was based on the Marsh v Alabama ruling but the justices did not agree. That's why we're allowed to have spam filters. Are you pro or anti spam filter, because by your definition of the law, spam filters are illegal.
    • okdjnfweonfe 5y ago
      edit: actually nevermind, I'm not going to take a full degree in drafting legislature just to argue that citizen rights be respected in more places, you are silly and you know you are silly Marsh would sooner apply to social media than to email, it does not magically have to apply to both or neither.
      • stillbourne 5y ago
        I'm the one being silly? There is not a single affirmative ruling in your favor that's related to technology, all you have is something about sidewalks in a company town.