As posted on How Appealing, the LA Times reports that the California Supreme Court will soon hear an interesting case about whether emails sent on or to a privately owned computer system constitute "trespass to chattels" (that is, trespass on private property other than real estate). In this case, a disgruntled former Intel employee began sending lots of emails to to current Intel employees for what seems (at least to me) to be a legitimate purpose: advising employees about Intel's workers' compensation policies and other employment practices. Intel claims there was damage caused by this "use" of their private servers, by (for instance) reducing worker morale.
An appeals court has already ruled 2-1 that the former employee's emails do constitute trespass to chattels, a decision that raised an immediate outcry from people afraid of the consequences of such a decision on email as a medium of communication. For instance, from the article, "The ruling against Hamidi [the employee], if allowed to stand, could potentially turn millions of Americans who use the Internet into law breakers, McSwain said. 'You cannot have a situation where anything, even the movement of electrons, constitutes trespass,' he said. 'The court needs to put a stop to this madness.'" Corporations, on the other hand, are stumping strongly for the California Supreme Court to affirm the lower court's decision.