Home > JITPL > Vol. 22 > Iss. 1 (2003)
UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law
Abstract
This casenote analyzes and critiques the decision reached by the California Supreme Court in Intel v. Hamidi. Intel v. Hamidi runs contrary to other cases that have found a cause of action for trespass to chattels where harm was caused by unwanted electronic communications: Thrifty-Tel, Inc. v. Benezek, eBay v. Bidder’s Edge, and CompuServe v. Cyber Promotions. The California Supreme Court in Intel v. Hamidi suggested other causes of action Intel could have brought instead of trespass to chattels. The casenote looks at each proffered alternative and concludes that none of the alternatives were feasible and that Intel should have succeeded with its original trespass to chattels action. This casenote concludes that the California Supreme Court should have recognized that Intel had a valid cause of action and that Intel established a sufficient showing of harm.
Recommended Citation
J. Brian Beckham, Intel v. Hamidi: Spam as a Trespass to Chattels - Deconstruction of a Private Right of Action in California, 22 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 205 (2003)
Included in
Computer Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, Privacy Law Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons