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
The defendant conceded summary judgment on liability, and the court held a trial on damages. This post covers the court’s ruling following the damages trial. Setting the Damages Range The court rejects KMC’s innocent infringement defense. Matthew McDermott is a freelance photographer. The New York Post story.
District Court for the Southern District of New York suggests that CISOs might be outside of point-blank range. In October 2023, the SEC filed a complaint alleging that SolarWinds and Brown had failed to establish adequate cybersecurity measures before and after the SUNBURST attack. By Gaurav Lalsinghani, J.D.
2023 WL 5017711 (D. With regard to Plaintiffs’ failure to warn claims, Section 230 immunity does not apply since the conduct at issue was Defendants’ conduct and not the conduct of third parties. ” * Doe v. Grant, 2021 Ariz. LEXIS 1327 (Az. Superior Ct. March 31, 2021). Mindgeek USA, Inc., Puppies, 2020 Ariz.
Developers of artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems notched a victory last week when a federal judge dismissed claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) premised on the use of copyrighted works in AI training data, holding that the plaintiffs had failed to show any concrete harm and therefore lacked standing to bring their claims.
The court dismissed the case without prejudice. ” “Plaintiff appears to argue Twitter’s placement of information in “social media feeds” renders it an information content provider. .” A Twitter user sued over his account suspension. Blog post coverage of that ruling here. The user tried again. Same result.
The court summarizes: “Meta claims that it raised issues with Plaintiffs, including “nominative fair use,” “commentary,” and “the un-likelihood of confusion based on the appearance of the marks in the actual marketplace, as they will be encountered by consumers.””
The court dismisses the lawsuit. Failure to Honor Counternotice. The court says Google’s “alleged failure to comply with § 512(g) does not create direct liability for any violation of plaintiffs’ rights. Google, LLC , 2023 U.S. March 31, 2023). ” Cites to Martin v. Google , Zhang v.
” In July 2023, it made a post entitled “ Oliver D. To get around this, Smith argued that blackmail is a crime, but the court cited Coffee v. Finally, Smith claimed that Substack’s “sheer failure to respond to [his] multiple reports, queries, and complaints was negligence.” Substack is entitled to immunity.
The Court Opinion Greer was a target of one of Kiwi Farms’ attacks. “Kiwi Farms users provided a Google Drive link to a full copy of Mr. Greer’s book.” The district court dismissed the contributory claim because the defendants didn’t materially contribute to the infringement. CloudFlare’s block ).
Those items got indexed in Google and appeared in Benedict’s vanity searches. Apparently the publication took place in 2019 and he filed suit in 2023. To get around it, Todino argued that he was suing for failure to remove the postings. (I Benedict complained to Google with predictable (non)results. ” Defamation.
The court summarizes the plaintiff’s allegations: Plaintiff alleges that in October, 2020, he received a negative review on Nextdoor from a former customer. “Duffer seeks to hold Nextdoor, a service provider, liable for its failure to remove material posted by users of its website. . ” The court cites Force v.
Today was the 2023 Super Bowl of Internet Law at the U.S. Supreme Court [FN]. Twitter won its decision unanimously, and the Supreme Court per curiam punted the Google case back to the 9th Circuit with the clear message that the plaintiffs should lose. SCOTUS issued two eagerly awaited decisions in the Twitter v. Twitter, Inc.
Watch it at [link] Despite the obvious overlaps, the district court ruled for Epic because it thought the emote took such a small amount of the dance and short dance routines aren’t protected by copyright. This opinion forces the court to address the boundaries of choreographic copyright, a lightly litigated topic.
However, with scant followup media attention, this lawsuit (filed in August, dismissed in December) rocket-docketed to failure faster than remanufactured printer cartridges run out of ink. * * * Note: The litigation GoFundMe page is still up. They have raised a total of $150 of their $500k goal. Cites to McCarthy v. Amazon , Ratermann v.
On May 11th, the court ruled on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss , granting in part and denying in part. On May 11th, the court ruled on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss , granting in part and denying in part. The court also held that plaintiffs were permitted to proceed pseudonymously. GitHub, Inc.
August 9, 2023) This case involves StubHub’s obligations to provide refunds due to COVID cancellations. The district court said that the buyers who made their purchases on the website had to go to arbitration, but the buyers who made their purchases on their mobile devices could stay in court. 22-15879 (9th Cir.
Mitrakos, 22-CCB-0035 , February 15, 2023, and Oppenheimer v. Prutton, 22-CCB-0045 , February 28, 2023. 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.
Even better, posting has enabled me to think through a doctrine (like failure to function ) or category of cases (like tagmark litigation) that I was already pondering, setting the initial groundwork for what would become a more extended study in the form of a law review article or essay. Note 1: all guest bloggers do it purely for the glory.
Thus, the court says: “the steps a business would need to take to sufficiently estimate the age of child users would likely prevent both children and adults from accessing certain content. The age estimation and privacy provisions thus appear likely to impede the “availability and use” of information and accordingly to regulate speech.”
Key takeaways from October include: Employee monitoring: Following new guidance issued by the UK ICO, employers may want to review their existing employee monitoring to ensure it meets the regulator’s latest expectations, including ensuring that any monitoring is necessary, proportionate, and conducted transparently.
When active, a “Message” button will appear near the top of your organization’s Page, enabling members to easily reach out for a variety of reasons. Prospective new clients who visit your law firm’s company page on LinkedIn will be able to click on a Message button and communicate directly with the Page.
After just a couple of years at the ARDC—an entity charged by the Illinois Supreme Court with upholding the legal profession’s integrity in Illinois—Larkin began to realize he might have found the place where he could accomplish his mission. “As He was a gentleman when he appeared before the court,” Grogan said. “He
Here is the latest faculty scholarship appearing in the University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies Research Papers series found on SSRN. With minimal guidance from legislatures or courts, community supervision agencies set the policies that govern the presentence investigation and report process.
There are two critically important cases over “social media addiction” pending in California state court and as an MDL in the federal Northern District of California. It is an all-out brawl in federal court, with no-expense-spared battles over each and every picayune litigation issue.
As a result, the court finds that much of the lawsuit is a SLAPP. In a highly technical ruling, the court rejects Twitter’s CFAA claim on a motion to dismiss and rejects Twitter’s other claims, including breach of contract, on an anti-SLAPP motion to strike.
Heuberger , 2023 WL 5334192 (D. Viewing Heuberger’s comments in the light most favorable to Route, the Court concludes that at least some of Heuberger’s comments are not a “performance assessment of, or other similar analysis of,” Route’s services. Alderwood Surgical Center, LLC, 2023 WL 3435305 (W.D.
Ochoa’s definitive analysis of the Supreme Court’s Warhol opinion. Supreme Court affirmed the Second Circuit’s ruling that the reproduction of Andy Warhol’s Orange Prince on the cover of a magazine tribute was not a fair use of Lynn Goldsmith’s photo of the singer-songwriter Prince, on which the Warhol portrait was based.
The court rejects the request. The court says that the cited statutes all lack private causes of action, plus 230 preempts civil claims based on federal criminal statutes (cite to Gonzalez v. June 8, 2023) The post Section 230 Ends Another Suspended Twitter User’s Lawsuit–Zhang v. Case citation: Zhang v. Twitter Inc.
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.
The professional/personal distinction remains hot for politicians using social media–that issue is headed to the Supreme Court). The court doesn’t endorse this test. The Court will also likely consider ‘control’ as a significant determining factor.”
A: because they spend so much time in court proceedings). Protip: if you want to win in court, don’t self-describe as an “appropriation artist”). The court treats Ripps’ collection as competing against and putting downward price pressure on the original NFTs. Q: why are the apes so bored?
The court dismisses the lawsuit against Amazon. In a footnote, the court adds that the decedents’ age doesn’t affect the analysis: The fact that Amazon allegedly continued to sell the Sodium Nitrite to “children” after it “knew [the Sodium Nitrite] was used for suicide” does not change this conclusion.
“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] 4] In mid-November of 2023, Cruise halted its entire fleet of autonomous vehicles (AVs) amid a safety investigation. [5] If there is no driver, who is liable?
Here is the latest faculty scholarship appearing in the University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies Research Papers series found on SSRN. Together with other democratic rights that appear in state constitutions but not the federal charter, the right to amend recognizes popular sovereignty as an active commitment.
Thats the basis for a recent opinion from a Florida federal district court that could have major implications for online services CSAM detection and reporting practices. Nevertheless, many choose to do so voluntarily, yielding nearly 36 million reports to the CyberTipline in 2023 alone. whereas CSAM is illegal everywhere.
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.
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.
By Rick Clark The Masters Conference for Legal Professionals in New York City hosted by Morgan Lewis LLP on July 24th was replete with insights on applying AI to eDiscovery, collecting and reviewing text and chat app data and information governance. This approach helps to tell the whole story while saving time and reducing costs.
As a result, state legislatures, both red and blue, are producing a flood of Internet censorship laws will tie up the courts for years. Among other things, the Supreme Court rejected the arguments that legislatures could treat the Internet like telephony or broadcasting. The CDA essentially required websites to authenticate user age.
2023 In today’s digital age, personal information can be bought, traded, and sold by anyone with an internet connection. By Lauren Barland LL.M. From our health and dietary habits to our sexual and romantic preferences, companies are collecting sensitive data on a massive scale, posing significant threats to privacy.
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. The settlement also underscores the need to provide a channel for personnel to escalate perceived compliance failures.
My blog post on the district court rulings. Wrapping up this discussion, the court says: we need to decide whether § 230(c)(1) precludes the plaintiffs’ claims only if they have stated a cause of action against Armslist LLC. Armslist publishes users’ classified ads for guns. In this case, the answer is no.
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.
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