Access member only content, take part in discussions with comments on blogs, news and reviews and receive all the latest security industry news directly to your inbox. Join now for free.
A confirmation email has been sent to your email address - SUPPLIED EMAIL HERE. Please click on the link in the email to verify your email address. You need to verify your email before you can start posting.
If you do not receive your confirmation email within the next few minutes, it may be because the email has been captured by a junk mail filter. Please ensure you add the domain @scmagazine.com.au to your white-listed senders.
Applying a 1991 federal law against autodialing, the Court of Appeals upheld a ruling in favor of Rodney Joffe, who sued the Acacia Mortgage company for sending unsolicited texts to his phone.
The ruling means that anyone who sends text spam could find themselves subject to Arizonan telemarketing laws.
Acacia maintained that the texts it sent did not constitute a phonecall and therefore did not apply to current state laws. But the three judges at the Arizona court of appeal argued that telemarketing laws can be applied to the relatively new technology of texting.
According to the Washington Post the 1991 law was written in a way that allowed for new interpretations and anticipated advances in mobile marketing technology.
It is understood that the case could result in a class action against Acacia.
In August SC reported a federal grand jury in Phoenix, Arizona indicted three people on charges of violating the federal Can-Spam Act for operating a pornographic spam business. The alleged face over five years in prison if convicted.
To begin commenting right away, you can log in below or register an account if you don't yet have one. Please read our guidelines on commenting. Offending posts will be removed and your access may be suspended. Abusive or obscene language will not be tolerated. The comments below do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of SC Magazine, Haymarket Media or its employees.