Israeli Man Loses Spam Lawsuit Against Retailers, Must Pay NIS 60,000
Translated & summarized from Vesty by baba
An Israeli man sued Super-Pharm and McDonald's for allegedly sending unsolicited promotional messages with SMS receipts, violating anti-spam laws. The court ruled that the messages were primarily service-oriented receipts, with incidental advertising permissible. The man lost his case and was ordered to pay NIS 60,000 in legal fees to the companies. He plans to appeal the district court's decision to the Supreme Court.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- An Israeli man lost a lawsuit against Super-Pharm and McDonald's for alleged spam violations.
- The court ruled that SMS receipts with minor advertising are permissible service messages.
- The man must pay NIS 60,000 in legal fees to the two retail chains.
- He received promotional content with electronic receipts despite objecting to marketing.
- The man intends to appeal the district court's decision to the Supreme Court.
An Israeli man who sued retail chains Super-Pharm and McDonald's, alleging they violated anti-spam laws by sending promotional material without consent, has lost his case. He claimed both chains sent him marketing messages along with SMS receipts, despite his explicit objections and requests to opt out. The man argued that Super-Pharm sent him promotional content with electronic receipts after he provided his phone number for receipt purposes only, and that McDonald's included promotional links and offers even when he selected "skip mailing" on their screens.
Both Super-Pharm and McDonald's countered that the messages were legitimate service communications, not prohibited advertising. They stated that the SMS messages, including links to electronic receipts, were sent at the customer's request and merely duplicated information found on standard paper receipts. The core legal question was whether sending an SMS receipt containing promotional content constituted a violation of the anti-spam law.
The judge ruled in favor of the retail chains, determining that the primary purpose of the SMS messages was to deliver the requested purchase receipt, classifying them as informational and service-oriented. Any advertising included was deemed minor and incidental to the main purpose. The court found that the electronic receipts were functionally identical to paper ones, which are legally permitted to contain advertisements. The judge stated that when a consumer requests an electronic receipt, their consent extends to reasonable marketing content within it, similar to what would appear on a printed receipt.
Consequently, the judge dismissed the man's requests to certify the lawsuits as class actions. He was ordered to pay NIS 30,000 in legal fees and attorney's costs to Super-Pharm and an additional NIS 30,000 to McDonald's. The man intends to appeal the district court's decision to the Supreme Court, believing the verdict to be legally and factually incorrect.
Mentioned
