CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc.
962 F. Supp. 1015 (1997)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Sending a substantial volume of unsolicited commercial electronic mail to a private online service provider's computer network, after the provider has explicitly revoked consent, constitutes an actionable trespass to chattels. A private company's computer equipment is not a public forum, and the First Amendment does not grant a right to send unwanted messages to such private property.
Facts:
- CompuServe Incorporated operates a proprietary nationwide computer network, providing online and e-mail services to its subscribers.
- Cyber Promotions, Inc. and its president Sanford Wallace engaged in the business of sending large volumes of unsolicited commercial e-mail advertisements ('spam') to internet users, including many CompuServe subscribers.
- CompuServe received numerous complaints from its subscribers, who were threatening to cancel their service due to the unwanted e-mails, which also placed a significant processing and storage burden on CompuServe's computer equipment.
- CompuServe formally notified Cyber Promotions that they were prohibited from using its computer equipment to process and store their unsolicited e-mails and demanded they cease the practice.
- Despite this notice, Cyber Promotions continued and increased the volume of e-mail sent to CompuServe's subscribers.
- To bypass CompuServe's software filters, Cyber Promotions intentionally falsified the point-of-origin information in the e-mail headers, which further burdened CompuServe's systems by causing them to process and store undeliverable messages.
- The influx of unwanted e-mails harmed CompuServe's business reputation and goodwill with its customers, leading some subscribers to terminate their accounts.
Procedural Posture:
- CompuServe Incorporated filed a lawsuit against Cyber Promotions, Inc. and its president Sanford Wallace in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
- The district court granted CompuServe's initial request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on October 24, 1996.
- CompuServe then filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to extend the duration of the TRO and to additionally enjoin the defendants from sending any unsolicited advertisements to its subscribers.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does sending a large volume of unsolicited commercial e-mail to an online service provider's private computer network, after the provider has expressly forbidden such messages, constitute an actionable trespass to chattels?
Opinions:
Majority - Graham, District Judge
Yes, sending a large volume of unsolicited commercial e-mail to an online service provider's private computer network after consent is revoked constitutes an actionable trespass to chattels. The court applied the common law tort of trespass to chattels, reasoning that electronic signals sent by computer are sufficiently tangible to constitute a physical contact with the chattel (CompuServe's servers). Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 218, liability for trespass to chattels arises if the chattel is impaired as to its condition, quality, or value. The defendants' mass mailings diminished the value of CompuServe's equipment by consuming finite disk space and processing power, making those resources unavailable to subscribers. Furthermore, the trespass caused harm to CompuServe's legally protected interest in its business reputation and goodwill. Although CompuServe initially granted tacit consent for internet users to send e-mail, it explicitly revoked that consent to Cyber Promotions. The defendants' First Amendment defense fails because CompuServe is a private entity, not a state actor, and its computer network is private property, not a public forum, meaning there is no constitutional right to trespass for speech purposes.
Analysis:
This case is a landmark decision in cyberlaw, as it was one of the first to successfully apply the traditional common law tort of trespass to chattels to the digital context of unsolicited electronic mail. It established the critical precedent that a private Internet Service Provider's network is private property and that the provider can legally block unwanted electronic intrusions. This ruling provided ISPs with a vital legal tool to combat spam before the passage of specific anti-spam legislation, affirming that private online spaces are not public forums subject to the same First Amendment rules as government property. The case's reasoning has influenced subsequent legal thinking about digital property rights and the application of traditional torts to new technologies.
Unlock the full brief for CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc.