Feeds

Bulk fax outfit sued for $2.2 trillion in junk fax claim

Silly money fine sought for stupid, unwanted messages

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

A California businessman has launched a class action lawsuit against fax outfit Fax.com claiming truly gobs smacking damages of $2.2 trillion.

In suits filed yesterday, Steve Kirsch is seeking $500 damages for each unsolicited fax Fax.com has sent out over the last four years. He's relying on US federal laws passed in 1991, which banned sending out unsolicited commercial faxes. This law was upheld in 1995 by the US Court of Appeals in San Francisco which ruled that the law protected consumers and did not restrict rights to free expression.

If judges decide that the suit merits national class action status, then Fax.com faces paying for each of the 3 million faxes it sends each day. That comes to a cool £2.2 trillion, even without invoking a section of the law that allows penalties to be tripled for flagrant breaches of the law. Of course, the chances of such colossal fines been imposed are zero, but Kirsch's action does highlight consumer dissatisfaction over junk faxes and might (possibly) act as a determent.

Kirsch began his legal action after receiving more than 100 unwanted faxes at his San Jose home over the last few months, and many more at his business, which originated from Fax.com computers, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.

Fax.com is yet to respond to the lawsuit but in the past it has argued that junk faxes are legal, at least in California, providing recipients are given a chance to take their number off lists (through toll free numbers included on unsolicited faxes). Attempts to overturn this California law failed in June when members of the State assembly committee abstained from voting, after lobbying led by Fax.com. Opponents of junk faxing have vowed to try again to get California laws changed later this month.

Kirsch's suit comes two weeks after the Fax.com was fined nearly $5.4 million by federal regulators, for violation of the 1991 federal law after ignoring repeated warnings about its behaviour, the Chronicle reports. ®

Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Yes, yes, Steve Jobs. Look what I'VE done for you lately – Tim Cook
New iPhone biz baron points to Apple's (his) greatest successes
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.