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
This is another lawsuit involving the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFTs. (Q: In this lawsuit, BAYC sued an “appropriation artist,” Ripps, who sought to comment on anti-Semitic aspects of the BAYC NFTs. I’ve documented dozens of ways that 512(f) claims have failed, so the failure of this claim isn’t surprising.
“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] 1] The taxi was one of around 950 autonomous Cruise (a robotaxi service owned by General Motors) vehicles operating across the United States by October of that year. [2]
[Eric’s note: this is the post you’ve been waiting for: Prof. Ochoa’s definitive analysis of the Supreme Court’s Warhol opinion. This post is 11,000+ words long, so you may want to block out some time to enjoy this properly.] By Guest Blogger Tyler Ochoa By a 7-2 vote, the U.S. Goldsmith , No. 21-869 (May 18, 2023).
” This does not persuade the judge: the Court must treat Defendants as publishers or speakers, regardless of how their claims are framed, because their theories of liability plainly turn on Defendants’ alleged failure to monitor and remove third-party content. To get around Section 230, the plaintiffs attempted the Lemmon v.
Section 230 preempts her lawsuit against Facebook: “Ninth Circuit precedent interpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § Doe claims she was sex-trafficked on Instagram. 230, forecloses Doe’s claim as currently pled, because she seeks to hold Meta liable for content created by her trafficker.”
Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. Doe met each man in person and was sexually assaulted and raped. Three of the men are in jail; one is on the lam. Doe sued Grindr for strict products liability, negligence, and FOSTA. The district court dismissed the case.
Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. Ultimately, the alleged “defect” here is only relevant to Doe’s injury to the extent it made it easier or more difficult for other users to communicate with Doe, and thus Doe seeks to hold Grindr liable for its failure to regulate third party content.
This is another lawsuit against an Internet access provider (IAP) for user-committed copyright infringement via P2P file sharing. NOCIs to Grande between 2011 and 2017. For more background on this issue, see this rrcap and the links at the bottom of this post. My post on a pre-pandemic district court ruling in this case.
9, 2024) The lawsuit alleges Meta addicts teens and thus violates DC’s consumer protection act. Given the tenor of these opinions, how are any plaintiffs NOT getting around Section 230 at this point? District of Columbia v. Meta Platforms, Inc., LEXIS 27 (D.C. Superior Ct. Like other cases in this genre, it goes poorly for Facebook.
The complaint was brought under the FCA’s qui tam provisions, whereby a private citizen can bring a lawsuit on behalf of the government. The underlying failures alleged in the settlement occurred between 2018 and 2023. The settlement also underscores the need to provide a channel for personnel to escalate perceived compliance failures.
[Trump came close to repealing Section 230 in the 2020 lame-duck Congressional session (while he was also busy fomenting the J6 insurrection). With him returning to the presidency, the odds are extremely high that he will finish this project and repeal Section 230 in the near future. Charles and Romelus filmed each other while they raped Plaintiff.
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