anti-spam laws are not general false advertising laws

Chen v. Sur La Table, Inc., --- F.Supp.3d ----, 2023 WL 1818137 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 8, 2023)

Chen alleged that Sur La Table violated the Washington Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA) and the Washington Consumer Protection Act (CPA) by transmitting at least 22 commercial emails with purportedly false or misleading information in their subject lines. The subject lines allegedly falsely or misleadingly indicated that the person could receive a specified percentage-off discount on their entire purchase or on one item of their choosing, e.g.: “xx% Off Your Purchase,” “xx% Off Your Order,” or “xx% Off One Item.”

"See what's new--and take 20% off your order!"

In fact, Chen alleged, approximately 25% of its products—including its most popular products—were excluded from the advertised sale.

CEMA: CEMA prohibits the sending of commercial electronic mail messages that either:

(a)   Uses a third party’s internet domain name without permission of the third party, or otherwise misrepresents or obscures any information in identifying the point of origin or the transmission path of a commercial electronic mail message; or (b) Contains false or misleading information in the subject line.

The court found that, based on text, legislative history, caselaw, and general anti-spam principles, “false or misleading information” meant false or misleading information about the commercial nature of the email, with the legislative history using examples like “hi There!”, “Information Request” and “Your Business Records.”

Since the CPA claim was based upon a violation of CEMA, that was dismissed too, with leave to amend.