The question requires an in depth analysis of the Unsolicited Electronic Messages Act 2007 and a conclusion as to whether the Act has clearly distinguished and demarcated the criticisms pointed out by the EFF.
Thus the act has tried to deter people so that such technologies are used effectively.(s.3)
Further it has been stated that an electronic message in order to be classified as spam must be commercial in its nature. It has been said that a non commercial e mail can be said to be commercial if a hyper link directs the receiver to a page which markets or promotes any product. It has also been stated that an email would be said to be a spam if it is sent without the consent of the receiver.
The issue that was raised by the EFF will now be considered. Firstly it was argued that the decision by the court of first instance did not distinguish between a junk mail and a mail which required information from Intel sent by Hamidi. It can be said that the Act clearly states that certain messages which tend to occur between the client and the organisation are not considered to be commercial electronic messages. This includes certain messages which tend to facilitate or which tend to complete a commercial transaction which had been agreed upon by the recipient that he would enter into an agreement with the person who authorised such a message being sent. (s.6)