In an action against an online marketer for sending unsolicited e-mail (i.e. spam), summary judgment for defendants-spammers is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff was not an "Internet access service" provider within the meaning of the CAN-SPAM Act; and 2) plaintiff was not "adversely affected by" spam e-mail solely by virtue of receiving a large amount of commercial e-mail.
Argued and Submitted December 9, 2008
Filed August 6, 2009
Opinion by Judge Tallman