Remove 2008 Remove Court Remove Failure-to-appear
article thumbnail

Understanding the CCB’s First Two Final Determinations (Guest Blog Post–Part 3 of 3)

Eric Goldman

Consistent with the CCB’s small claims court ethos, the case involved both a pro se claimant and respondent. Eight months after filing, the first two Copyright Claims Board (CCB) Final Determinations have been handed down. Mitrakos, 22-CCB-0035 , February 15, 2023, and Oppenheimer v. Prutton, 22-CCB-0045 , February 28, 2023.

e-filing 105
article thumbnail

Section 230 Immunizes Snap, Even if It’s “Inherently Dangerous”–L.W. v. Snap

Eric Goldman

The court treats this as a surprisingly easy Section 230 case and dismisses the case. By definition, Snap’s failure to remove CSAM distributed on Snapchat by third parties, and Apple’s and Google’s choice to allow Snapchat to remain available for download in their online stores, involve “reviewing. Next stop: the 9th Circuit.

professionals

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Instagram Defeats Lawsuit Claiming It Was a “Breeding Ground” for Sex Traffickers–Doe v. Backpage

Eric Goldman

The court responds: “Doe’s breeding ground theory essentially seeks to hold Meta liable for failing to remove traffickers’ grooming messages and posts advertising their victims for sex.” Finally: in passing, the court says “Her trafficker was convicted in a criminal trial and sentenced to 40 years in prison.”

Lawsuit 88
article thumbnail

Section 230 Once Again Applies to Claims Over Offline Sexual Abuse–Doe v. Grindr

Eric Goldman

The plaintiffs claimed this case is about “a failure to implement basic safety measures to protect minors.” ” The court calls that positioning “disingenuous.” ” The court explains: Pritt and John met and exchanged personal information that led to an in-person meeting and the sexual assault of John.

article thumbnail

Grindr Defeats FOSTA Claim–Doe v. Grindr

Eric Goldman

The court holds that Section 230 applies to the claims. ” The court responds that “Grindr’s match function relies on and publishes a user’s profile and geolocation data, which is third-party content generated by the user.” The court rejects Doe’s attempted Lemmon v. ICS Provider. Publisher/Speaker Claims.

Lawsuit 98
article thumbnail

Evaluating the Constitutionality of Viewpoint-Neutral Trademark Registration Laws That Do Not Restrict Speech—Vidal v. Elster (Guest Blog Post)

Eric Goldman

By guest blogger Lisa Ramsey , Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law The Supreme Court will likely hold in Elster that Section 2(c) is consistent with the First Amendment, but will it clarify how to balance trademark and free speech rights? After the Supreme Court granted cert in Vidal v. Tam (2017) and Iancu v.

Court 106
article thumbnail

Five Decisions Illustrate How Section 230 Is Fading Fast

Eric Goldman

Having manufactured the requirement of that the claim must be based on “particular” content to trigger Section 230, the court says none of the claims do that. ” I’d love for the court to explain how blocking users from contacting each other on apps differs from “content moderation.”

Court 105