AOL v. IMS, Gulf Coast Marketing, & TSF Complaint

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA,

ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

AMERICA ONLINE, INC.,
Plaintiff,

v.

IMS, BRIAN ROBBINS, GULF COAST MARKETING, RALPH C. GOODSON, JR., TSF MARKETING, TSF INDUSTRIES, and JOSEPH J. MELLE, JR.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 98-0011-A

NATURE OF PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS

Defendants have repeatedly bombarded America Online, Inc. ("AOL") and its members with tens of thousands of deceptive, unsolicited, and unwanted Internet electronic mail ("e-mail") messages. Despite demands by AOL that they cease sending their unwanted and unsolicited e-mail, Defendants have refused to stop these mass mailings and have persisted in using deceptive techniques designed to frustrate AOL's ability to detect and filter their e-mail messages. Among other things, Defendants forge "aol.com" within their e-mail messages so the messages falsely appear to originate from an AOL member. The use of "aol.com" creates the misperception among AOL members that AOL permits and condones the highly criticized practice of sending unsolicited bulk e-mail. Defendants' e-mail messages peddle products and services of dubious value and legality, such as "stealth" mass mailing software, a "Spammers Tool Box," and lists of millions of e-mail addresses that are intended to enable others to transmit their own bulk e-mail to AOL and its members. Defendants' junk e-mail has resulted in thousands of member complaints and clogs AOL's computers and computer system, co-opting valuable computer and staff resources needed to deliver legitimate Internet e-mails.

Defendants' indiscriminate mass mailings and deceptive practices cause serious and irreparable injury to AOL by impairing the functioning of AOL's e-mail system and harming AOL's business reputation and goodwill among its members. Defendants have violated the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.), the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030 et seq.), and the Virginia Computer Crimes Act (Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-152.2 et seq.), and have trespassed upon AOL's personal property in violation of Virginia common law. Defendants Gulf Coast Marketing, Ralph C. Goodson, Jr., TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr. have, in addition, conspired with others to engage in unlawful conduct in violation of Virginia common law. AOL has demanded that Defendants stop their mass mailings and it has tried to stop Defendants' misappropriation of its computers and computer system through technical means, but its attempts at self-help have proven unsuccessful. By this action, AOL seeks an injunction to prevent further unlawful conduct, and compensatory and punitive damages. 

THE PARTIES

AOL

AOL is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 22000 AOL Way, Dulles, Virginia 20166. AOL provides a proprietary, content-based online service. AOL maintains computers and other devices that enable its members to obtain various services, including access to the Internet. Its central computer system, which includes specialized computers (called "servers") that process e-mail messages, is located in Reston, Virginia. E-mail sent to and from AOL members is processed through and stored on these computers. AOL's computers in Virginia likewise provide the functionality for, and maintain the content of, the AOL service provided throughout the United States and abroad.

AOL has used as a trademark and as a service mark the initials "AOL," in various forms and styles, continuously in commerce to identify its products and services since October 1989. This mark has been registered as a trademark upon the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office as United States Registration No. 1,984,337, registered July 2, 1996. The mark has been registered as a service mark upon the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office as United States Registration No. 1,977,731, registered June 4, 1996. These registrations are attached at Exhibit A hereto.

AOL has invested substantial resources to promote and protect the AOL trademark and service mark in connection with the interstate and worldwide sale of its products and services.

AOL has registered the domain name "aol.com" with the InterNIC. This domain name is used extensively in interstate commerce and is recognized worldwide as a source identifier of AOL's online services.

IMS and Brian Robbins

On information and belief, Defendant IMS is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Tennessee or a d/b/a designation for Brian Robbins, with its principal place of business at 5201 Kingston Pike, Suite 6-216, Knoxville, Tennessee 37919. IMS maintains accounts with various Internet Service Providers ("ISPs") from which it sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, Defendant Brian Robbins is a citizen of Tennessee who resides at 1122 Mcarthur, Maryville, Tennessee 37804. He operates and transacts business, or has operated and transacted business, under the corporate name "IMS" and maintains accounts with various ISPs through which he sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, IMS and Brian Robbins jointly operate and transact business, acting in concert with one another and with third party contractors and/or agents unknown to AOL to send unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

Gulf Coast Marketing and Ralph C. Goodson, Jr.

On information and belief, Defendant Gulf Coast Marketing is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Louisiana or a d/b/a designation for Defendant Ralph C. Goodson, Jr., with its principal place of business at 8867 Highland Road, Suite 112, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808. Gulf Coast Marketing maintains accounts with various ISPs from which it sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, Defendant Ralph C. Goodson, Jr. is a citizen of Louisiana who resides at 17422 Breman Drive, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70817. He operates and transacts business, or has operated and transacted business, under the name "Gulf Coast Marketing" and maintains accounts with various ISPs from which he sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, Gulf Coast Marketing and Ralph C. Goodson, Jr. jointly operate and transact business, acting in concert with one another and with third party contractors and/or agents unknown to AOL to send unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr.

On information and belief, Defendant TSF Marketing is a California d/b/a designation for Joseph J. Melle, Jr., with its principal place of business at 1053 E. 6th Street #8, Ontario, California 91764. TSF Marketing maintains accounts with various ISPs from which it sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, Defendant TSF Industries is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business at 6275 Grant Street, Chino, California 91710. TSF Industries maintains accounts with various ISPs from which it sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, Defendant Joseph J. Melle, Jr. is a citizen of California. He operates and transacts business, or has operated and transacted business, under the names "TSF Marketing" and "TSF Industries" and maintains accounts at various ISPs from which he sends unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr. jointly operate and transact business, acting in concert with one another and with third party contractors and/or agents unknown to AOL to send unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL and its members.

On information and belief, Joseph J. Melle, Jr. is also the president of the "National Organization of Internet Commerce" ("NOIC"). According to its Web page (http://www.noic.org), NOIC is an organization dedicated to fostering the transmission of unsolicited bulk e-mail on the Internet. On or about December 31, 1997, NOIC, through Melle, threatened to publish on NOIC's Web page the e-mail addresses of five million AOL members that were collected by TSF Marketing. This list, if published, could be used by anyone with access to the Internet to further bombard AOL and its members with unsolicited and unwanted e-mails. NOIC's threat has since been retracted.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This action arises out of, among other things, Defendants' violations of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq., and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 et seq. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction of this action based on 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338, and has supplemental jurisdiction of AOL's state law claims based on 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), and this Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they have caused tortious injury in this Eastern District of Virginia, and because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to AOL's claims, together with a substantial part of the property that is the subject of AOL's claims, are situated in this judicial district.

On information and belief, Defendants, either individually or through their agents, have transmitted or caused to be transmitted junk e-mail to AOL's computers and computer system, which are physically present in this district. Further, on information and belief, Defendants, either individually or through their agents maintain or have maintained a membership with AOL, which membership has been used to facilitate the collection or "harvesting" of members' e-mail addresses.

THE INTERNET

Defendants committed the acts complained of herein through their use of the electronic messaging capabilities of the Internet. The Internet is a complex "network of networks" that interconnects innumerable smaller groups of linked computers. All of the networks comprising the Internet are connected in a manner that permits any computer on the Internet to communicate with any other computer on the Internet.

The Internet makes it possible for a user rapidly to exchange e-mail messages with other Internet users in the United States and abroad. E-mail can be sent virtually instantaneously from one individual to another, or from an individual user to a large group of addresses. The Internet's e-mail functionality makes it possible for a sender easily to transmit tens and even hundreds of thousands of copies of a single message.

The InterNIC, a consortium funded by the National Science Foundation, is responsible for assigning the unique addresses used by computers to communicate through the Internet. These unique addresses are referred to as Internet Protocol ("IP") addresses. Like the unique street addresses and telephone numbers used by individuals and businesses for their mail and telephone communications, IP addresses ensure orderly communications between computer networks on the Internet. An IP address consists of 4 sets of up to 3 numbers in the following format: 123.123.123.123.

The InterNIC also assigns "domain" names to individuals, businesses, and organizations using the Internet. Domain names function as convenient shorthand for users of the Internet, giving Internet users the option of using readily understandable proper names to identify themselves and their communications, rather than cumbersome twelve-digit IP addresses. Businesses, for example, are typically assigned domain names with the ".com" designation (e.g., "aol.com"), while educational and governmental organizations usually are assigned ".edu" and ".gov" domain names (e.g., "topuniversity.edu" and "federalagency.gov"). Because each domain name corresponds to a unique IP address, the InterNIC performs the important task of maintaining the directories that allow computers connected to the Internet to find the appropriate IP address for a particular domain requested by a user.

An e-mail address consists of a name corresponding to the individual user's account (the "user name") and the name of the domain within which the user's account is located, separated by the "@" symbol (e.g., "jdoe@company.com").

E-mail messages contain "headers," generated by the sender's ISP, which identify the sender's return e-mail address, the message's "subject," and other information related to the transmission of the e-mail message (such as the date, time, and routing information). AOL's system is configured such that these "headers" are excerpted at the beginning of each message and appear in full text at the conclusion of the message.

A sender who wishes to conceal his true identity and e-mail address can falsify the header information in his e-mail transmissions or manipulate the information used in the electronic header. Various "stealth" software programs, designed for and marketed to the senders of junk e-mail, facilitate the falsification of e-mail header information in mass mailings.

JUNK E-MAIL

It costs virtually nothing to transmit an e-mail message, regardless of the number of recipients. Considerable resources are expended by the ISP at the receiving end, however, storing, sorting, and delivering the e-mail.

Although the sender of junk mail sent through the postal system must pay the costs of delivery through the purchase of stamps, there are no stamps on the Internet. Instead, the costs of storing, sorting, and delivering junk e-mail are borne -- involuntarily -- by the recipient's ISP, and ultimately the recipients themselves. When computer and staff resources are consumed by massive batches of junk e-mail, the delivery of legitimate, authorized e-mail is often impaired.

Bulk e-mailers engage in the practice precisely because the medium permits them to shift their marketing costs onto the recipients' ISPs, such as AOL. The ability to send junk e-mail from "throw away" Internet accounts or with falsified headers, and thereby avoid accountability to the consumer, has made junk e-mailing an irresistibly tempting marketing method for disreputable would-be entrepreneurs peddling get-rich schemes and dubious products and services.

The practice of unsolicited bulk e-mailing is widely condemned in the Internet community. AOL's Terms of Service specifically prohibit AOL members from using their AOL accounts to send unsolicited bulk e-mail, and expressly reserve AOL's right to block unsolicited e-mail sent to its members from the Internet. In addition, AOL's Terms of Service prohibit members from harvesting or collecting the e-mail addresses of other AOL members.

On information and belief, Defendants, either individually or through their agents, maintain or have maintained an AOL membership to harvest or collect members' e-mail addresses.

JUNK E-MAIL CAUSES SUBSTANTIAL HARM TO AOL'S COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND BUSINESS REPUTATION

AOL's e-mail system was created solely for the benefit of AOL members, who pay prescribed fees and who agree to adhere to AOL's Terms of Service. The e-mail system is operated through dedicated servers that store and route e-mail messages between AOL's members. AOL permits its members to use the "aol.com" domain name, which when combined with a unique user name gives each member a distinctive e-mail address from which to exchange e-mail with Internet users (e.g., "member96@aol.com").

Any e-mail that is sent through the Internet to an AOL address is first received and sorted by AOL's mail servers. The AOL mail system has a finite capacity designed to accommodate the demands imposed by AOL's members. AOL's computers and computer system are not designed to accommodate, and are vulnerable to disruption by, Defendants' and others' indiscriminate mass mailings of unsolicited e-mail. AOL has been forced to devote thousands of hours of staff time to address member complaints about this unsolicited e-mail and millions of dollars for new equipment to process the mass mailings.

The repeated transmission of massive batches of unsolicited e-mail messages by Defendants and other junk e-mailers also degrades the performance of AOL's computers and computer system, forcing AOL to divert computer processing resources away from the handling of authorized e-mail for AOL members. The aggregation of time required to process these bulk e-mail transmissions slows the "delivery" of all e-mail to AOL members, and has at times resulted in significant delays in members' receipt of their e-mail from the Internet.

The transmission of unsolicited bulk e-mail by Defendants and other junk e-mailers also results in a substantial quantity of mail sent to invalid e-mail addresses, which causes additional harm to the performance of AOL's computers and computer system. For each message that contains undeliverable recipients, AOL's computers must attempt to transmit a message back to the originating site of the e-mail message to inform it of the delivery failure. Attempts to send such "bounce" messages back to the sender's computers consume considerable processing resources within AOL's computers and computer system.

AOL has undertaken various technical efforts to permit its members to opt out of receiving messages from domains and IP addresses that are or have been the subject of member complaints regarding unsolicited bulk e-mail. These methods, however, rely on truthful e-mailing practices to be successful. When senders, such as Defendants, mail from multiple and varying domains, employ random and varying user names, relay their messages through the servers of innocent third parties, or falsify the headers on their e-mails to indicate that their messages are from domains that AOL does not filter (e.g., "msn.com" or "aol.com"), AOL's computers and computer system cannot detect and filter the e-mail.

The practice of sending unsolicited commercial e-mail through AOL's computers and computer system has the effect of unfairly shifting to AOL and its members the costs of transmitting these promotional messages. It is AOL, rather than the junk e-mailer, that pays the costs of the additional computer and staff resources that must be devoted to the processing of the massive batches of e-mail that junk e-mailers transmit through AOL's computers and computer system. AOL members also pay for these unwanted bulk messages in time and effort wasted in opening, reading, and discarding the messages.

Junk e-mailers' activities have particularly adverse consequences for those AOL members who pay for their access to AOL's online services and e-mail capability in increments of time. Time spent by such a member accessing, reviewing, and discarding junk e-mail messages is paid for by the member according to the member's hourly billing rates. These AOL members thus end up paying twice for the activities of junk e-mailers, through the increased costs and delays in AOL's operations occasioned by the processing of mass quantities of e-mail, and through increased monthly billings for their connection time with AOL. The costs of member dissatisfaction ultimately are borne by AOL, in lost business and harm to its reputation and goodwill.

The receipt of unsolicited, unwanted e-mail is the number one complaint voiced by AOL members about the Internet e-mail system. AOL receives up to one hundred thousand such complaints per day.

IMS and Brian Robbins

In recent months, Defendants IMS and Brian Robbins have sent substantial quantities of unsolicited e-mail solicitations through AOL's computers and computer system to its members. Many of these messages promote "The Complete Credit Repair Kit," which IMS claims "will allow you to legally and permanently ERASE the negative information on your credit bureau file." Others promise their recipients that they can "get paid to shop" by ordering an IMS manual which purports to explain how to become a "Mystery Shopper."

After receiving thousands of member complaints, AOL demanded by letter dated October 9, 1997 that IMS, and its agents, cease and desist sending unsolicited e-mail to AOL and its members. These Defendants have ignored AOL's demand. In recent weeks, AOL has received several thousand additional complaints from members who have received IMS's junk e-mail. One such complaint, with the offending message attached, is appended at Exhibit B hereto.

Gulf Coast Marketing and Ralph C. Goodson, Jr.

In recent months, Defendants Gulf Coast Marketing and Ralph C. Goodson, Jr. have sent massive quantities of unauthorized e-mail messages through AOL's computers and computer system to its members. Their messages are particularly pernicious, because these Defendants are in the business of selling via unauthorized, unsolicited, bulk e-mail tools that allow virtually anyone to engage in the same unlawful conduct. These Defendants market "bulk email products and bulk email services," including a "Spammers Tool Box" that contains mailing lists of "40,000,000 Bulk E-mail addresses" and "Stealth Mass Mailer" software, which they claim enables a user to "mail up [to] ONE MILLION messages per hour."

On information and belief, third parties to whom these Defendants have sold the "Spammers Tool Box," e-mail addresses, or Stealth Mass Mailer software have, with training and/or support from Defendants, sent unauthorized, unsolicited, bulk e-mail to and through AOL's computers and computer system to AOL members by deceptive means.

After receiving thousands of member complaints, AOL demanded by letter dated October 9, 1997 that Gulf Coast Marketing, and its agents, cease and desist sending unsolicited e-mail to AOL and its members. These Defendants have ignored AOL's demand. In recent weeks, AOL has received thousands of complaints from members who received Gulf Coast Marketing's junk e-mail. One such complaint, with the offending message attached, is appended at Exhibit C hereto.

TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr.

In recent months, Defendants TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr. have sent massive quantities of unauthorized e-mail through AOL's computers and computer system to its members. These Defendants employ misleading subject lines that are completely unrelated to the actual content of the messages in order to trick AOL members into opening their unwanted solicitations. Falsely portraying themselves as friends or acquaintances, Defendants use subject lines such as "How are you?"; "Hello there"; "what a weekend"; and "Hope you had a good Thanksgiving." At other times, Defendants use hyperbole like "my God this is awesome!"; "check this out"; and "wow."

Like Gulf Coast Marketing and Goodson, these Defendants are in the business of selling via unauthorized, unsolicited, bulk e-mail tools that allow virtually anyone to engage in the same unlawful conduct. Their messages advertise several products that facilitate bulk e-mailing. The messages offer for sale compact discs containing as many as 25 million e-mail addresses. Recipients who purchase these addresses are promised a free demonstration copy of "'Stealth,' the most powerful bulk Email program on the market" and "an instruction guide on how to use the bulk Emailer, and tips on how to bulk email." The advertisements contain offers to send bulk e-mail on behalf of those recipients who want to engage in bulk mailing but "do not wish to send [their] own names." They claim that, for a fee, these Defendants will transmit the customer's advertisement to "1 million addresses."

On information and belief, third parties to whom these Defendants have sold e-mail addresses and Stealth software have, with training and/or support from Defendants, sent unauthorized, unsolicited, bulk e-mail to and through AOL's computers and computer system to AOL members by deceptive means.

After receiving thousands of member complaints, AOL demanded by letter dated October 15, 1997 that TSF Marketing and any of its agents cease and desist sending unsolicited e-mail to AOL and its members. These Defendants have ignored AOL's demand. In recent weeks, AOL has received several thousand additional complaints from members who received TSF's junk e-mail. One such complaint, with the offending message attached, is appended at Exhibit D hereto.

False and Deceptive E-mail Practices

Defendants employ false and deceptive practices to mask their identities, and the source and quantity of their transmissions, and thereby evade AOL's electronic filtering mechanisms and avoid receiving the thousands of "bounced" messages and complaints associated with their mass e-mailings. For example, instead of transmitting from one consistent domain and using one consistent user name, Defendants transmit from numerous, constantly varying domains and employ randomly generated user names, making it appear as though Defendants' messages come from a number of different sources rather than one particular (traceable) account.

Defendants also intentionally forge the "from line" in the electronic return addresses of their messages to conceal the ISPs and accounts from which they transmit their e-mail. Often, Defendants use the domain name "aol.com" or the domain name of another well-known ISP in their messages to make it appear as though their messages are sent from a member of AOL or another well-known ISP. To mask the quantity of messages they send, Defendants append different sets of numerals -- which appear to have been automatically generated by a computer program -- to these forged domain names, making it appear that the messages were sent from different accounts within the forged domain. The purpose and effect of these practices is to prevent AOL from using technical means to block the unsolicited e-mail messages before they are delivered.

When Defendants incorporate AOL's registered mark and domain name in the return addresses of their messages, it creates the false and damaging misperception among the AOL members who receive these messages that AOL endorses or condones the Defendants' unsolicited bulk e-mail practices and the dubious products and schemes they promote. The complaints attached at Exhibit E hereto contain examples of Defendants' "aol.com" forgery and evidence the member confusion caused by Defendants' misappropriation of AOL's domain name and registered mark.

Defendants' transmission of unsolicited bulk e-mail to AOL has damaged, and continues each day to damage, AOL's business, its goodwill, and its relationship with its members. AOL's valuable trademark and service mark and associated goodwill also are diluted and damaged by their wrongful association with junk e-mail and junk e-mailers like Defendants. 

COUNT I  FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN  (All Defendants)

AOL repeats and alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 54 of the Complaint.

Defendants have engaged in acts of unfair competition by falsely and without authorization using AOL's domain name "aol.com" in the electronic headers of their unsolicited e-mail messages in connection with Defendants' sale, offering for sale, and distribution in interstate commerce of Defendants' services. Defendants' use of this domain name amounts to a false representation that AOL is the point of origin of Defendants' unsolicited, unwanted e-mail messages, in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

Particularly because "aol.com" incorporates and bears AOL's registered trademark and service mark, Defendants' misappropriation of AOL's domain name is likely to cause confusion and to deceive AOL members and others into the erroneous belief that AOL is connected to, affiliated with, approves, or condones Defendants' indiscriminate, unsolicited e-mail practices, causing serious and irreparable damage to AOL in the form of lost goodwill and business reputation.

It is difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that could afford AOL adequate relief for Defendants' continuing acts. AOL's remedy at law is inadequate to compensate it for the ongoing injuries caused by such acts.

COUNT II DILUTION OF INTEREST IN SERVICE MARKS   (All Defendants)

AOL repeats and alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 58 of the Complaint.

In connection with its provision of online and Internet services, AOL has registered and used extensively in interstate commerce the registered mark "AOL," which identifies its Internet and online services and which qualifies as a "famous" mark within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(1).

Defendants have knowingly and willfully, without AOL's consent or authorization, reproduced, counterfeited, and used the registered mark "AOL" after this mark became famous in interstate commerce, in connection with Defendants' sale, offering for sale, and distribution of Defendants' services.

Defendants' intentional and unauthorized use of the "AOL" mark in connection with its unsolicited messages is likely to dilute AOL's interest in the registered "AOL" mark in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(1), by linking the "AOL" mark to the transmission of unsolicited bulk e-mail, a practice that is widely condemned by the Internet community and which AOL does not maintain, tolerate, or condone.

COUNT III VIOLATIONS OF THE COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT (Defendants Gulf Coast Marketing, Ralph C. Goodson, Jr.,  TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr.)

 AOL repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 62 of the Complaint.

In connection with its provision of online and Internet computer services to its members, who are citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia and other states, AOL maintains computers and a computer system that are "protected computers" as the term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2)(B) because they are used in interstate commerce and communication.

AOL's Terms of Service specifically prohibit AOL members from using their AOL accounts to harvest or collect the e-mail addresses of other AOL members.

On information and belief, Defendants, either individually or through their agents, maintain or have maintained an AOL membership and have used that membership to harvest or collect the e-mail addresses of other AOL members.

Defendants have intentionally "exceeded authorized access," as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(6), to AOL's protected computers by harvesting or collecting the e-mail addresses of other AOL members, have obtained information via an interstate communication to which they were not entitled, and thereby have violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2).

By exceeding authorized access to AOL's protected computers, Defendants have caused AOL loss or damage aggregating at least $5,000 during a one-year period preceding the filing of this complaint.

Defendants threaten to continue to engage in the unlawful actions alleged herein, and unless restrained and enjoined will continue to do so, causing irreparable harm to AOL. It is difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that could afford AOL adequate relief for Defendants' continuing unlawful acts. AOL's remedy at law is, therefore, inadequate to compensate for the injuries threatened.

COUNT IV VIOLATIONS OF THE VIRGINIA  COMPUTER CRIMES ACT  (All Defendants)

AOL repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 69 of the Complaint.

In connection with the provision of online and Internet computer services to its members who are citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia and other States, AOL maintains in the Commonwealth of Virginia computers and a computer system that are "property" within the meaning of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-152.2.

Without authority, Defendants have repeatedly transmitted batches of unsolicited commercial e-mail messages to AOL's computers and computer system in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

In transmitting these batches of unsolicited commercial e-mail messages, Defendants knowingly falsified portions of the Internet "header" information on their e-mail messages for the purpose of attempting to conceal from AOL and its members the actual domain or IP address which served as the point of origin of the transmission.

Without authority, Defendants have obtained access to and used AOL's computers and computer system with the intent to obtain the use of AOL's property and services by false pretenses, in violation of Va. Code. Ann. § 18.2-152.3.

The foregoing acts of Defendants have caused injury to AOL, AOL's computers and computer system, and to AOL's business relations, reputation, and goodwill.

Defendants threaten to continue to engage in the unlawful transmissions complained of herein, and unless restrained and enjoined will continue to do so, impairing the services provided to AOL members and causing AOL irreparable damage. Because of Defendants' pattern and practice of using numerous and varying domain names and IP addresses from which to carry out their unlawful transmissions, AOL otherwise will be obliged to maintain multiple actions concerning the activities of these Defendants. It is difficult to ascertain the amount of compensation that could afford AOL adequate relief for Defendants' continuing unlawful acts. AOL's remedy at law is, therefore, inadequate to compensate for the injuries threatened.

COUNT V TRESPASS TO CHATTELS UNDER THE COMMON LAW OF VIRGINIA (All Defendants)

AOL repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 76 of the Complaint.

The computers and computer system that comprise AOL's e-mail system are the personal property of AOL.

Without valid authorization, Defendants have intentionally and repeatedly obtained access to, and made use of, AOL's computers and computer system to transmit unsolicited commercial e-mail to AOL members, for Defendants' own economic benefit.

Through their practice and pattern of repeatedly transmitting unsolicited commercial e-mail in high volume through AOL's computers and computer system, Defendants have wrongfully exercised dominion over AOL's computers and computer system in denial of AOL's rights to that property. Defendants wrongful exercise of dominion over AOL's computers and computer system has deprived AOL and its customers of the legitimate use of this commercially valuable system.

Under the common law of Virginia, Defendants' conduct constitutes trespass to AOL's chattels.

As a result of Defendants' trespass to AOL's chattels, AOL has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable injury, loss of reputation and pecuniary damages. AOL's damages include not only pecuniary injury, but the loss of its customers and the loss of the good will of its existing customers. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue these acts of trespass, thereby causing AOL continuing and irreparable damage.

Defendants' acts of trespass have been undertaken intentionally with malice, oppression and fraud, justifying the imposition of punitive damages in amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter Defendants and others from engaging in similar conduct.

COUNT VI COMMON LAW CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TRESPASS TO CHATTELS AND VIOLATE  FEDERAL AND VIRGINIA STATUTES (Defendants Gulf Coast Marketing, Ralph C. Goodson, Jr.,  TSF Marketing, TSF Industries, and Joseph J. Melle, Jr.)

AOL repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 83 of the Complaint.

On information and belief, Defendants have conspired and combined with third parties, including but not limited to designers and purchasers of the "Stealth Mass Mailer," the "Spammers Tool Box," and "Stealth" software, to send unauthorized bulk e-mails to and through AOL's computers and computer system to AOL members, wrongfully exercising dominion over AOL's computers and computer system, and depriving AOL and its members of the legitimate use of this commercially valuable system, and thereby committing trespass to chattels under Virginia common law.

On information and belief, Defendants have conspired and combined with third parties to transmit unsolicited commercial e-mail messages to and through AOL's computers and computer system located in the Commonwealth of Virginia, using false pretenses for the purpose of concealing from AOL the source and actual quantity of messages sent, and obtaining access to and use of AOL's computers and computer system with the intent to obtain property and computer services in violation of the Virginia Computer Crimes Act.

On information and belief, Defendants have marketed and distributed "Stealth Mass Mailer," the "Spammers Tool Box," and "Stealth" software to the aforementioned third parties, and provided technical support and training to them, in furtherance of these conspiracies.

The effectuation of these conspiracies through the transmission by Defendants' co-conspirators of unauthorized bulk e-mail to and through AOL's computers and computer system has damaged AOL and its protected computer systems by impairing the integrity and/or availability of data, programs, systems, and/or information, and has damaged AOL's business relations, reputation, and goodwill among its members.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff AOL requests entry of judgment in its favor and against Defendants : a. Granting permanent injunctive relief against Defendants and all persons acting in concert or participating with them, enjoining them from: (1) Acquiring or compiling AOL member addresses for the purpose of transmitting unsolicited e-mail to those AOL members; (2) Sending any unsolicited e-mail to AOL or its members or engaging in any other actions that result in the receipt of any unwanted mail by AOL and its members; (3) Sending any e-mail to AOL or its members bearing any false, fraudulent, anonymous, inactive, deceptive or invalid header information, or using any other artifice, scheme or method of transmission that would prevent the automatic return of undeliverable electronic mail to its original and true point of origin; (4) Using any AOL-registered trademark, service mark or registered domain name, or other symbol or representation, in their e-mail transmissions or in any other way that falsely indicates that AOL has endorsed or approved Defendants' products or services, that AOL is affiliated with or connected in any way to Defendants' businesses, or that any e-mail from Defendants originated from, or was transmitted through or by, AOL or any of its members. b. Awarding AOL compensatory damages, in an amount to be proven at trial, caused by Defendants' violation of the Lanham Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Virginia Computer Crimes Act, and Virginia common law; c. Awarding AOL punitive damages against Defendants, in an amount sufficient to punish and deter these Defendants and others from similar malicious, oppressive, and fraudulent conduct in the future; d. Awarding AOL and its attorneys its costs and attorneys' fees in prosecuting this action; and e. Granting AOL such other or additional relief as this court deems just and proper under the circumstances.

America Online, Inc. 

By_____________________________ 

Of Counsel

Everett C. Johnson, Jr.
Richard P. Bress
Jon L. Praed (VSB# 40678)
Elizabeth T. Carlson
Matthew R. Lewis
LATHAM & WATKINS
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1300
Washington, D.C. 20004-2505
(202) 637-2200

Randall J. Boe (VSB# 27951)
Charles D. Curran
22000 AOL Way
Dulles, Virginia 20166-9323
(703) 265-1428

Counsel for Plaintiff