I got a clip today of an article at
http://www.internetnews.com/IAR/article/0,,12_1003541,00.html

In it, it describes AOL as claiming "victory" in a lawsuit against an adult entertainment
company for spam sent by its affiliates and by the company itself . 
In it, the article explains that the parties settled on undisclosed terms,
including damages and a prohibition against future unsolicited emails into AOL.

Ironically, their AOL and their lawyers claim:

"AOL Time Warner's (NYSE:AOL) America Online is claiming victory with a settlement in a lawsuit against accused spammer Netvision Audiotext.... [the company and] 40 of the company's affiliates similarly are enjoined from sending e-mail to AOL users through the settlement. ...

... In other words, while affiliates might send unsolicited bulk e-mail -- which include sign-up links for Netvision Audiotext's sites -- to America Online members, Netvision Audiotext itself might have little idea of how their subscriptions are being marketed.....

"Our complaint basically stated that Netvision conspired with these Webmasters to send junk e-mails to millions of America Online members," said AOL spokesman Nicholas Graham. "This settlement has now determined that an adult Website operator can be held responsible for negligence and the hiring and employment of Webmasters as a part of an affiliate program. This goes to the issue of holding those who incentivize the act of spamming accountable in court."  ....

"This is a landmark case, and we're very proud of our efforts in court. It's a valuable precedent for AOL and others in the industry, and spam is an industry-wide problem," Graham added.

Unfortunately, this is neither a landmark case, nor a valuable precedent.  It actually means nothing.

Unless an issue is tried in the courts, a judge or jury reaches a decision and a judgment is entered,
it means absolutely nothing.  A settlement is just a contract to drop your action against someone in
exchange for something.  It has no "value" beyond that single settlement and is a precedent for nothing.

Just thought it amusing that the lawyers for AOL forgot what they should have learned
what they taught in the first week of law school and blew the opportunity to actually set a precedent.

Ah... the good old days.  Expensive lawyers at the big firms were always the easiest to beat...

Chris Ulrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to