Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

United States v. Ackerman

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided August 5, 2016No. 14-3265PublishedCited by 78 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGorsuch, Circuit Judge, joined by Phillips, J.,

HARTZ, J., joined Parts I, II, III(A), and IV.

Walter Ackerman’s email never made it to its intended recipient. It didn’t because AOL, Mr. Ackerman’s internet service provider (ISP), has an automated filter designed to thwart the transmission of child pornography. After that filter identified one of four images attached to Mr. Ackerman’s email as child pornography, AOL instantly stopped delivery and the company soon shuttered Mr. Ackerman’s account.

How does AOL’s screening system work? It relies on hash value matching. A hash value is (usually) a short string of characters generated from a…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Ornelas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. United States v. PlaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. United States v. JacobsenSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by78 opinions

  1. United States v. Rivera-MoralesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2020
  2. Dutcher v. MathesonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016
  3. United States v. William MillerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
  4. Rhiannon Nugent v. Spectrum Juvenile Justice Servs.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023
  5. Alpine Securities Corporation v. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2024

73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API