In a prosecution arising from defendants' conduct relating to their business of sending unsolicited email, or spam, advertising adult websites, defendants' electronic mail fraud convictions and sentences are affirmed where: 1) no authority supported defendants' notion that a district court must provide a clear geographic definition of the relevant community in an obscenity prosecution; 2) a national community standard must be applied in regulating obscene speech on the Internet, but the district court's failure to instruct on this standard was not plain error; 3) defendants' as-applied vagueness challenge to the CAN-SPAM Act failed even applying a heightened requirement of clarity; and 4) the district court properly concluded that one defendant's related lawsuit was meritless and amounted to obstruction of justice.
Argued and Submitted June 8, 2009
Filed October 28, 2009
Opinion by Judge B. Fletcher
Gary Jay Kaufman, Dana Milmeister, and Colin Hardacre, The Kaufman Law Group
Jill Trumbull-Harris and Bonnie L. Kane, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC