[3]The Georgia statute also included provisions about unauthorized use of trademarks and copyrights to assume a false identity.

The ACLU also argued that the Georgia statute would give that state too much authority over the World Wide Web.

[6] The court also held that Georgia already had less-restrictive means for achieving the specific goals of the statute, including protections for trademarks and trade secrets.

the statute was found to be unconstitutionally vague because the average person would be unable to determine how to avoid the proscribed criminal penalties.

[1][2] In turn, the ruling has been cited as an important early precedent in the application of American constitutional rights to the then-new medium of Internet communication.