Inc. v. America Online Cyber Promotions Inc.

The court's decision recognized that private on-line service providers have nearly absolute power to control the information which is sent over their on-line systems, without regard to the First Amendment. Thus, on-line service providers are free to impose whatever type of restrictions they please on the dissemination of information over their systems following the court's decision.

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the proliferation of computers and computer technologies lead to the development of the Internet. The Internet, a vast, complex network of interconnected computers, allows millions of computer users to communicate with each other and to access information from around the world on virtually any topic. There are a number of ways to access the Internet. For example, many universities provide Internet access to students and faculty, and some employers provide such access to their employees. However, a large number of people access the Internet through the use of private on-line companies. A person can subscribe to the on-line company and pay a monthly fee for the service. When the user connects to the on-line company, the user is given access to whatever amenities the on-line company may have. For example, the on-line company may provide electronic mail services, its own newsgroups , information services, and "chat rooms." These companies also generally provide access to the Internet.

America Online, Inc. (AOL) is one such private on-line company. Cyber Promotions, Inc., an Internet advertiser, sent unsolicited electronic mail advertisements to AOL subscribers via the Internet. On 26 January 1996, AOL sent a letter to Cyber Promotions advising it that AOL was unhappy with Cyber Promotions' dissemination of these unsolicited e-mails to AOL subscribers. When Cyber Promotions refused to stop the practice, AOL sent a number of "e-mail bombs" to Cyber Promotions' Internet service providers. AOL accomplished this by sending all unsolicited e-mail messages, which were addressed to AOL subscribers but not delivered, back to Cyber Promotions' service providers. These "bombs" disabled Cyber Promotions' service providers because their sheer bulk overwhelmed the capabilities of the service providers.

In response, Cyber Promotions filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging that as a result of AOL's "e-mail bombs" two Internet service providers canceled their relationship with Cyber Promotions, and thus AOL interfered with its business relationships. Thereafter, AOL filed its own lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging various counts of computer fraud and trademark infringement. The Virginia court transferred the second case to the Pennsylvania court, which consolidated the two lawsuits. The Pennsylvania court then directed the parties to file legal briefs addressing whether Cyber Promotions has a right to send unsolicited e-mail messages to AOL subscribers, or conversely whether AOL has a right to block such e-mail.