****Peacefire.org Wins Spam Suits 12/12/01 WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A., 2001 DEC 12 (NB) -- By Brian Krebs, Newsbytes.

Bennett Haselton, the Webmaster for anti-Internet censorship Web site Peacefire.org, is the latest in a string of Washington residents to emerge victorious in small claims court by invoking the state’s new law against unsolicited bulk e-mail.

While the $2,000 in damages he’s won would hardly seem worth the six-month fight, Haselton said he’ll soon be taking more spammers to court now that he’s learned how to work the system.

“Now that I've got the hang of it, I'll probably be at the courtroom just about every week, since I get more than enough spam to keep filing about one lawsuit per day,” Haselton said. “In the long run I hope that enough Washington State residents will become aware of their rights under the anti-spam law -- so much so that it becomes economically impossible for U.S. companies to spam, with all the Washington residents that file lawsuits against them.”

Twenty-eight-year-old Tacoma resident Joe Hylkema has done just that. Hylkema filed his complaint two months ago in a local district court against a Florida-based credit counseling agency he claims spammed him nine consecutive times, even after he sued the company.

If the company fails to reply today, the judge in the case could order the company to pay Hylkema $4,500. Or, under state consumer protection laws, the judge could decide to treble the damages.

Hylkema said he didn’t have any grand agenda. He just got sick of getting spammed so much by so many different people and companies.

“Everybody hates spam, everybody bitches, but nobody does anything about it - so I wanted to do something about it,” he said.

Washington prohibits the sending of commercial e-mail that contains misleading information in its subject line or uses a bogus return address or third-party domain name return address without permission.

Lawsuits brought by the state under its consumer protection act can seek up to $2,000 per violation, while consumers and Internet service providers (ISPs) may sue for $500 and $1,000 per violation, respectively.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected an appeal to review the law by attorneys for accused Oregonian spammer Jason Heckel.

Heckel challenged the law in 1998 after Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire sued him under the state's consumer protection act. The state claimed Heckel violated the law by spamming millions of users to spur sales of his book, which, among other things, gives readers tips on using unsolicited e-mail to turn a profit.

The King County Superior Court in Seattle now will hear the case against Heckel.

Haselton’s victory comes on the heels of a series of small claims court triumphs by Washington resident Martin Palmer, whose 18 consecutive court decisions have forced spammers to pay him more than $18,000 under the new law.

Lawmakers in Congress have been worked for years to enact anti-spam legislation, but that effort has recently encountered considerable resistance from several powerful lobbying groups, lead by e-commerce, retail, and financial services companies.

The groups have charged that federal spam legislation would outlaw legitimate communications between companies and their customers. The groups also claim the law would lead to mountains of frivolous lawsuits from spam-chasing lawyers.

While the small-claims and district court victories may not lend precedent to the fledgling state law or anti-spam movement, they do encourage spam victims to assert their rights - and most manage to do so without hiring a lawyer - said Tom Geller, executive director of SpamCon Foundation, an anti-spam Web site that tracks news and court filings related to unsolicited e-mail.

“Regardless of the legal precedent it sets, these suits show individuals that they can take advantage of the laws that have been crafted to fight spam,” Geller said. “And it shows they can win.”