This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Yesterday, I reported here on a lawsuit filed March 20 in U.S. District Court in Manhattan by a legal tech executive who alleges her former company owes her over $1 million in stock and that her former boss sexually harassed her. “It is my understanding Ms.
It launched in 2017 to great fanfare, promising to “revolutionize legal services” through its dual-entity model of both a law firm and a technology company. In 2017, Forbes named the three founders to its “30 Under 30.” As of this writing, the lawsuit is ongoing. Following my report, QuickLegal quickly shut down. Gavelytics.
“So often when attorneys are writing court documents or preparing for oral arguments and they want to know what their judge thinks about different issues in their case, they have very little information to go off of. . federal courts. The company’s roadmap calls for it to eventually expand into state courts as well.
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. The court said that the trademark owner had been using the trademark since 1985 and registered the trademark in 2006. CV H-17-1068, 2017 WL 2957912, at *8 (S.D. ” Say what? ” Uh oh.
This is one of several ideologically motivated lawsuits against YouTube for allegedly engaging in “discriminatory” content moderation. But courts don’t always use facts like that for petard-hoisting, instead grounding their rulings in legal doctrines and admissible evidence. Yet, the court bails YouTube out.
His lawsuit against Facebook was dashed by Section 230 in the district court. The Supreme Court denied cert. Thereafter, he tried to vacate the district court decision, which triggered a new cycle of rejection by the district court, the 9th Circuit, and the Supreme Court. Initiative v. Sessions, 697 F.
Updates on recent legal developments and court cases impacting the Iowa agricultural industry, such as lawsuits over environmental issues or disputes between farmers and agribusinesses. Information on the rights and responsibilities of Iowa farmers and agricultural businesses, such as labor laws and workplace safety regulations.
This is another lawsuit involving the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFTs. (Q: A: because they spend so much time in court proceedings). In this lawsuit, BAYC sued an “appropriation artist,” Ripps, who sought to comment on anti-Semitic aspects of the BAYC NFTs. Q: why are the apes so bored? Alper Automotive v.
I’ve written a number of times about LawX, a lab program launched in 2017 in which law students use design thinking to analyze and address critical issues in access to justice. Earlier this month, the LawX students presented their findings to the Utah Supreme Court and Utah’s Administrative Office of the Courts.
Ochoa’s definitive analysis of the Supreme Court’s Warhol opinion. For nearly 30 years, the framework for judging fair use cases has been remarkably stable, based on Justice Souter’s masterful opinion for a unanimous Court in Campbell v. [Eric’s note: this is the post you’ve been waiting for: Prof. 569 (1994).
My roundup of the top Internet Law developments of 2023: 10) California court bans targeted advertising (?). Facebook , a California appeals court shocked the advertising community by suggesting that using common demographic criteria for ad targeting, such as age or gender, may violate California’s anti-discrimination law.
Next, from the early 2000s until 2017, the primary legal theory that was used to deter web scraping was the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act or the CFAA. And then, in 2017, the famous hiQ Labs, Inc. Lawyers are increasingly confident that courts will enforce the breach of contract claim against scrapers and obtain the relief thy want.
“Cruise”ing for “Waymo” Lawsuits: Liability in Autonomous Vehicle Crashes By Caroline Kropka On October 2, 2023, a driverless vehicle traveled down a San Francisco street. [1] 18] Because Japan was the appropriate forum, the court did not have authority and had to dismiss the case.
” In Federal Court Responding Party Presumed to Bear Subpoena Costs, but Requesting Party Must Avoid Imposition of Undue Burden and Expense A case from the Northern District of Illinois provides a good analysis of when costs responding to subpoenas may be shifted to the party seeking the documents. Cardinal Growth, L.P. ,
In 2017, Google ran into these very issues. The court, however, focused on HIPAA’s explicit exemption for research purposes, which allows sharing of information to the extent that the identifiers are removed. Accordingly, the court held in favor of Google.
In 2017, Google ran into these very issues. The court, however, focused on HIPAA’s explicit exemption for research purposes, which allows sharing of information to the extent that the identifiers are removed. Accordingly, the court held in favor of Google. However, besides Dinerstein, this space has not seen many other lawsuits.
2024* On March 21, 2024, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a landmark antitrust lawsuit against Apple, which could have significant ramifications on the smartphone ecosystem. By Aaron Kamath, LL.M. These apps usually host or connect other apps and services without developers having to use the iPhone’s APIs or code.
In 2017, I bypassed the list to focus on a single overarching development, The Year of Women in Legal Tech.). Do courts fully reopen or not? Also last year, the Minnesota Supreme Court approved a pilot project to permit “legal paraprofessionals” to provide legal services in certain matters. The victim of this limbo is progress.
Pre/Dicta , claiming itself the only litigation analytics platform that makes predictions about the outcome of federal lawsuits, announced the acquisition of Gavelytics, a pioneering judicial analytics platform for state court cases. take place.
The court accepts that the employer believed the works were created within the scope of employment, so the associated takedown notice wasn’t sent in bad faith. So does the rest of the employee’s lawsuit. Shande will get his day in court. Benjamin * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017?
According to documents Snap has filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Snap has been using the name “Spectacles” in association with electronic publishing services since August 14, 2017, obtaining a federal registered trademark for that use on January 21, 2020 (Reg. 5,964,422).
Supreme Court TransUnion decision. Individuals whose personal information was compromised in a data breach have had mixed success in bringing lawsuits in federal court against the companies that held their data. Recent Circuit Court Decisions: Tsao, McMorris, and In re Equifax The U.S.
The court brushes aside of all of Source Capital’s claims. It may or may not be related to this lawsuit, but Google recently sued “bad actors who set up dozens of Google accounts and used them to submit thousands of bogus copyright claims against their competitors. Benjamin * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017?
We help lawyers make evidence-based decisions about the venues they choose and the arguments they make by focusing on the jurisprudence of the judges and courts they interact with. Traction: Active in all 50 states, we have a network of over 12,000 attorneys, 12,000+ expert witnesses, 300+ court reporters, and 150+ interpreters.
Instead, Hunley and Brauer filed a class-action lawsuit against Instagram, alleging that Instagram was vicariously liable for, or was liable for encouraging or contributing to, the alleged direct infringement by others, by providing an “embedding” tool that easily could be used to facilitate public display of their photos. Supreme Court.
So often when attorneys are writing court documents or preparing for oral arguments and they want to know what their judge thinks about different issues in their case, they have very little information to go off of. federal courts. The company’s roadmap calls for it to eventually expand into state courts as well.
The Supreme Court ruled on February 25, 2015, that state regulatory boards, composed mainly of active market participants, are not immune from antitrust liability unless actively supervised by the state government. Soon after, in June 2015, LegalZoom cited the Supreme Court decision on teeth whitening in a $10.5
In 2017, I bypassed the list to focus on a single overarching development, The Year of Women in Legal Tech.). Do courts fully reopen or not? Also last year, the Minnesota Supreme Court approved a pilot project to permit “legal paraprofessionals” to provide legal services in certain matters. The victim of this limbo is progress.
I got really really serious about Instagram probably 2017-2018. But what I did have happen is when I was working as an insurance defense lawyer, I had another female lawyer tell me to be very careful what I wore to court, which I still think a lot of that is true. So Erin Camp 24:08 It took a huge lawsuit. Yeah, it took forever.
We help lawyers make evidence-based decisions about the venues they choose and the arguments they make by focusing on the jurisprudence of the judges and courts they interact with. Traction: Active in all 50 states, we have a network of over 12,000 attorneys, 12,000+ expert witnesses, 300+ court reporters, and 150+ interpreters.
I got really really serious about Instagram probably 2017-2018. But what I did have happen is when I was working as an insurance defense lawyer, I had another female lawyer tell me to be very careful what I wore to court, which I still think a lot of that is true. So Erin Camp 24:08 It took a huge lawsuit. Yeah, it took forever.
The appellate court refers to Doe’s behavior as “ capping.” The court dismissed the case on Section 230 grounds. Knowing CSAM Possession The district court dismissed the CSAM civil claim on Section 230 grounds. The 11th Circuit affirms, but relies only partially on Section 230 grounds.
Section 230 preempts her lawsuit against Facebook: “Ninth Circuit precedent interpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § This judge focused solely on Ninth Circuit precedent, which makes sense because this court is in the Ninth Circuit’s territory and that will help with any appeal).
In 2021, the court dismissed the non-FOSTA claims but did not dismiss the FOSTA claim. Reddit cert petition was pending before the Supreme Court. A few weeks later, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the Reddit case). Marriott * Section 230 Helps Salesforce Defeat Sex Trafficking Lawsuit–GG v. Case Citation : Doe v.
” My post tried to translate this statement: Underneath this anodyne conclusion, the court is impliedly making two key points: (1) users’ activities do not contribute to evaluating the defendant’s 1591 exposure, and (2) the applicable scienter to get around 230 is 1591’s “actual knowledge” requirement.
The court treats this as a surprisingly easy Section 230 case and dismisses the case. Twitter , the court disagrees: Unlike in Lemmon and Roommates.com , the harm Plaintiffs allege here doesn’t flow from a design defect. ” The plaintiffs also sued Google and Apple for carrying Snap in their app stores. Next stop: the 9th Circuit.
On remand, the court dismisses the remaining defendants primarily due to Section 230, with leave to amend. The court summarizes the facts: Plaintiff alleges she was trafficked as a minor and her traffickers filmed her while she was engaged in sex acts. . The court says Section 230 preempts it in this case. The Lemmon v.
Analogous to how narrowing interpretations rendered the SAVE Act irrelevant (FOSTA’s precursor), the court’s interpretations decrease the odds that the government will bring FOSTA-based prosecutions. ” Later, the court recapitulates: “FOSTA does not criminalize promoting prostitution broadly. .”
Readers with good memories will recall that I have blogged several other cases against Salesforce with similar allegations, with mixed results in court. Salesforce decision closely, the court concludes that Salesforce doesn’t qualify for Section 230 immunity in the FOSTA case. Salesforce invoked the Fifth Circuit’s Doe v.
And this is one that the US Supreme Court has recognized is not really a bright line, in the case called Carpenter vs. United States from 2018. This is a case where the Supreme Court held that the government needed to get a warrant in order to obtain the cell phone locations of a person over a period of time.
Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. The district court dismissed the case. The Ninth Circuit affirms every point of the district court’s decision. The court says that Grindr’s claim is not a specific promise, is too general to be enforced (I guess it’s like puffery?)
Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. 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.”
Six4Three sued Facebook in 2015 (yes, this lawsuit has been ongoing for a decade) and somehow worked its way up to a Fifth Amended Complaint. In its most recent ruling, the trial court granted Facebook’s anti-SLAPP motion and awarded Facebook nearly $700k in attorneys’ fees. The appellate court affirms. ICS Provider.
This is another lawsuit against an Internet access provider (IAP) for user-committed copyright infringement via P2P file sharing. My post on a pre-pandemic district court ruling in this case. NOCIs to Grande between 2011 and 2017. The appeals court disagrees. As usual, a key non-litigant is Rightscorp, which sent 1.3M
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content