Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

UPS Hunts Unknown Culprits in Spam Scam

By R. Robin McDonald
September 07, 2003

United Parcel Service of America (UPS) is tackling computer spam with a federal suit that seeks more than $1 million in damages from unnamed spammers.

Accusing spammers of using UPS's domain name and its employee and customer lists to market sexual products, lawyers for UPS have secured from U.S. District Judge Jack T. Camp an emergency order that has allowed them to subpoena computer data from Internet servers to track down and identify the offenders. UPS v. John Does One-Ten, No. 103CV1639 (N.D. Ga. June 13, 2003).

In June, the Atlanta-based parcel delivery service sued individuals identified only as John Does 1-10, seeking an injunction that would bar them from transmitting e-mail messages that either purport to originate from UPS or use its trademark.

According to the suit, the spammers began sending thousands of unsolicited advertisements to UPS customers in March. The e-mails contained headers that made them appear to have originated from UPS or its employees, the suit claims.

The e-mails prompted hundreds of customer complaints 'under the mistaken belief that the employees were responsible for sending spam e-mails,' according to the suit.

UPS spokesman Norman Black says the company decided to sue because the problem of spam 'is threatening to get out of control' and because spammers are 'illegally and improperly using our computers.'

In addition, by masquerading as UPS employees in a process known as 'spoofing,' Black says, '[t]hey are using our good name and the good name of our employees to promote products that are repugnant to our customers.' Black said that UPS has issued 20-25 subpoenas to Internet list servers.

Camp issued an emergency order in mid-June allowing UPS limited, expedited discovery to identify and locate computer logs to track down the spammers. In seeking the order, UPS attorneys noted that 'time is of the essence' because information needed to identify and locate the spammers typically is maintained by Internet service providers for only a few days. Internet web pages advertised by the spammers 'are typically only active for a few hours or days.'

The suit accuses the spammers of violating federal and state racketeering laws, federal trademark infringement laws and Georgia's Computer Systems Act. The suit seeks actual, punitive and treble damages as well as disgorgement of any profits the spammers may have earned through the UPS e-mails.


R. Robin McDonald is a reporter for the Fulton County Daily Report.

United Parcel Service of America (UPS) is tackling computer spam with a federal suit that seeks more than $1 million in damages from unnamed spammers.

Accusing spammers of using UPS's domain name and its employee and customer lists to market sexual products, lawyers for UPS have secured from U.S. District Judge Jack T. Camp an emergency order that has allowed them to subpoena computer data from Internet servers to track down and identify the offenders. UPS v. John Does One-Ten, No. 103CV1639 (N.D. Ga. June 13, 2003).

In June, the Atlanta-based parcel delivery service sued individuals identified only as John Does 1-10, seeking an injunction that would bar them from transmitting e-mail messages that either purport to originate from UPS or use its trademark.

According to the suit, the spammers began sending thousands of unsolicited advertisements to UPS customers in March. The e-mails contained headers that made them appear to have originated from UPS or its employees, the suit claims.

The e-mails prompted hundreds of customer complaints 'under the mistaken belief that the employees were responsible for sending spam e-mails,' according to the suit.

UPS spokesman Norman Black says the company decided to sue because the problem of spam 'is threatening to get out of control' and because spammers are 'illegally and improperly using our computers.'

In addition, by masquerading as UPS employees in a process known as 'spoofing,' Black says, '[t]hey are using our good name and the good name of our employees to promote products that are repugnant to our customers.' Black said that UPS has issued 20-25 subpoenas to Internet list servers.

Camp issued an emergency order in mid-June allowing UPS limited, expedited discovery to identify and locate computer logs to track down the spammers. In seeking the order, UPS attorneys noted that 'time is of the essence' because information needed to identify and locate the spammers typically is maintained by Internet service providers for only a few days. Internet web pages advertised by the spammers 'are typically only active for a few hours or days.'

The suit accuses the spammers of violating federal and state racketeering laws, federal trademark infringement laws and Georgia's Computer Systems Act. The suit seeks actual, punitive and treble damages as well as disgorgement of any profits the spammers may have earned through the UPS e-mails.


R. Robin McDonald is a reporter for the Fulton County Daily Report.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit Image

Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.