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 evolution of generative AI (artificial intelligence) has captured the attention of many Americans during the first few months of 2023. Federal statutes do not provide clear answers to these questions, so courts will need to confront them. This free database provides public records of lawsuits in federal trial and appellate courts.
Our projects in 2023 included a brand-new dictionary with thousands of legal and business terms, as well as numerous 50-state surveys on topics extending from family law, personal injury, and criminal law to employment law and consumer protection. Supreme Court Center by adding biographies of each Justice.
Although the case was just settled, this lawsuit was not Nikes first foray into patent infringement litigationnor is it likely to be its last. In its lawsuit, Nike sought both damages and a permanent injunction to stop Lululemon from producing the allegedly infringing designs. The lawsuit was settled in 2021.
Talk about court red-handed Thomas Claburn Demonstrating yet again that uncritically trusting the output of generative AI is dangerous, attorneys involved in a product liability lawsuit have apologized to the presiding judge for submitting documents that cite non-existent legal cases.
It has been a while since I have written about the copyright lawsuit by legal research giant Thomson Reuters against the no-shuttered legal research startup Ross Intelligence, in which TR alleges that Ross stole copyright content from Westlaw to build its own completing legal research product. See all stories about this lawsuit.
I previously blogged on this issue in 2023. Thus, lawsuits like this expose the damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t dilemma facing Internet services who are compelled to do age authentication. Second, the court turns to the TOS formation question. The court sends the case to arbitration.
The lawsuit claims the BPOs were TikTok’s proxies. ” The court says this may have happened here: According to the complaint, TikTok required all content moderators to use its proprietary TCS software. ” Finally, the court cites the allegations that TikTok created harm by setting unreasonable productivity standards.
This long-running lawsuit started in 2019. When I first blogged this case in January 2021, I wrote: This lawsuit, like many others before it, claims that UGC services like YouTube commit illegal discrimination based on how they moderate content. Elenis Supreme Court ruling, but I wonder how it might apply to this case.
This is a competitive keyword advertising lawsuit. A rival, Colibri, displayed in the trademark in its Google keyword ads, but it claims it has stopped doing so after the lawsuit was filed. The court denies a preliminary injunction. To analyze this, the court applies the standard likelihood of consumer confusion factors.
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.
The court dismissed the case without prejudice. ” Zhang tried the breach-of-contract workaround, but the court says flatly: “There is no exception under Section 230 for breach of contract claims.” 2023 WL 5493823 (N.D. 23, 2023) The post Lawsuit Over Twitter Suspension Fails Again–Zhang v.
Represented by lawyers Maria Cristina Armenta and Credence Elizabeth Sol (who keep expanding their oeuvre of failed lawsuits against Internet services), Daniels claimed YouTube had to comply with 1983 because YouTube became a state actor. In 2021, the court quickly shut down that misguided argument. 2023 WL 2414258 (N.D.
2023 Taylor Swift’s fans, affectionately called Swifties, closed out 2022 with an antitrust complaint filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court against Ticketmaster, the online ticketing giant. The post Swifties’ Ticketmaster Lawsuit Reveals ‘Anti-Hero’ Behavior appeared first on Berkeley Technology Law Journal.
Recapping a couple of doomed-from-inception lawsuits. Apparently the publication took place in 2019 and he filed suit in 2023. The court cites the old Lycos case for the proposition that 230 applies to failure to remove, even after notice. The court cites to Hassell v. Was the court offering him free legal advice?
The court dismisses the lawsuit on summary judgment. The court focuses on the likelihood of consumer confusion. The plaintiff invoked initial interest confusion, but per Network Automation, the court merges IIC back into the standard multi-factor test. The court says the call logs are ambiguous. clickthrough rate.
The court says that SMS’s photos clear the very low copyrightability threshold. ” Because the products are allegedly identical, the court says there are only so many ways to depict them. ” Because the products are allegedly identical, the court says there are only so many ways to depict them. Pharmaaid Corp. ,
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.
With respect to the channel removal, the court says: “YouTube had no obligation to host or serve content…YouTube had the discretion to take down content that harmed its users… YouTube had the discretion to terminate channels without warning after a single case of severe abuse.” ” Cites to Daniels v.
Probably not intentional, but ‘150 person-hours’ of work were still lost Brandon Vigliarolo The New York Times has filed a letter in its copyright infringement case against OpenAI and Microsoft, alerting the court that the ChatGPT maker accidentally deleted a bunch of data that may have been evidence.
We used to see lawsuits like this 15+ years ago, but we don’t see them any more because they are so obviously doomed by Section 230. The court applies the standard three-part Section 230 test: ICS Provider. ” The court is confused. ” The court is confused. Bradford, 2023 U.S. LifelongLearning.
We added numerous surveys to this resource during the course of 2023. If they are concerned about losing this bond for various reasons, such as the breakdown of the parents’ relationship, they generally can ask a court to grant visitation with a grandchild. per hour, but some states require employers to pay a higher minimum wage.
The court says that the merchant made a descriptive “fair use” of the “emoji” term, but the court didn’t actually say that “emoji” qualifies as a descriptive trademark, instead of an arbitrary mark, for stickers. ” Trademark law does not restrict that usage. ” That’s true.
The court rules for Reddit on all counts. The court says Rogozinski doesn’t have priority over Reddit. The court does not credit Rogozinski’s role in creating the subreddit as a use in commerce, and Rogozinski’s other uses (such as the book title) don’t count either. 2023 WL 4475581 (N.D.
This paper explains the scheme, how it bypasses standard legal safeguards, how it’s affected hundreds of thousands of defendants, and how it may have cost the federal courts a quarter-billion dollars. 32nd Annual DePaul Law Review Symposium , Chicago, April 14, 2023. The paper concludes with some ideas about ways to curb the system.
The past year was marked by many more filed cases than decisions, and those decisions that were issued largely demonstrated how well-known pitfalls will also hamper this new wave of AI lawsuits. Courts have widely rejected claims that AI models themselves are unlawful derivatives of the copyrighted works they were trained on. [3]
, Atari sought a preliminary injunction, which the court denies because “Atari has not shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits.” ” In support of Printify’s position, the court summarizes: Printify does not design the products, does not manufacture or print the products, and does not ship the products.
In response, she has brought several trash lawsuits, which have gone as well as you’d expect. Her latest trash lawsuit claimed that social media, the government, and Procter & Gamble were all doing the RICO against her. The court dismisses the lawsuit on several grounds, including res judicata. The complaint.
2023 WL 5017711 (D. July 28, 2023). Platkin, 2023 WL 6389744 (D.N.J. 29, 2023): the content at issue in this case is the digital firearms information that DD published, from 2012 through 2020, to its own website, DEFCAD. Miller, 2023 WL 6385816 (E.D.N.Y. ” * Doe v. Grant, 2021 Ariz. LEXIS 1327 (Az.
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. In an April 2023 summary judgment ruling , the plaintiff established that it “possesses the legally protectable, incontestable trademarks TEXAS TAMALE and TEXAS TAMALE COMPANY.” ” Say what?
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.
This well-publicized lawsuit is an example of Musk waging lawfare over a critic’s speech. As a result, the court finds that much of the lawsuit is a SLAPP. By declaring the lawsuit a SLAPP, the court concludes that Twitter misused the court system in an attempt to suppress CCDH’s speech.
2023 Taylor Swift’s fans, affectionately called Swifties, closed out 2022 with an antitrust complaint filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court against Ticketmaster, the online ticketing giant. By Shabrina Defi Khansa, LL.M. In July 2022, the FTC also blocked Meta from acquiring a small virtual reality startup.
District of Columbia , 2023 WL 5964764 (D.C. ” Investigations like this should make everyone nervous that they are motivated by censorship and will in fact change content moderation practices, but the court doesn’t seem worried about that at all. .” City of Delray Beach, 2023 WL 6037456 (S.D. Six4Three v.
In so holding, however, the Court declined to resolve the logically antecedent question of whether the discovery rule applies to the three-year copyright statute of limitations, finding “that issue is not properly presented here, because Warner Chappell never challenged the Eleventh Circuit’s use of the discovery rule below.” Nealy , No.
.” For reasons unclear to me, the plaintiff thought it would be a good idea to sue Amazon over its competitors’ alleged misdeeds, going so far to breathlessly issue a press release that it had “filed a $500 million lawsuit against tech giant Amazon.” Cites to McCarthy v. Amazon , Ratermann v. Pierre Fabre , Eberhart v.
In 2023, the justice tech ecosystem continued to grow rapidly, with a significant increase in solutions addressing access to justice-related challenges for consumers. featured in ABA Journal , Pulse 2.0 , Bob Ambrogi’s LawNext podcast , and Accelerator Insider , and its executive director, Maya Markovich, was named to the 2023 Fastcase 50.
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. Sessions, 697 F. App’x 7 (D.C.
Yet, remarkably, the court doesn’t cite the HomeAway case at all. The court cites to L.H. As usual, I cringe at the court’s “conduit” language. As the court make clear, GMB undertakes a variety of trust and safety efforts, so it’s not a typical communications “conduit.”
In 2023 alone, 62 million Americans sought medical attention for preventable injuries. The numbers below paint a clear picture of both the human toll and economic burden that injuries create nationwide: 62 million peopleabout one in fivesought medical attention for an injury in 2023 ( National Safety Council ). Of the over 1.3
This is another lawsuit between personal injury law firms over competitive keyword ads. The court says the plaintiff’s allegations sufficed for now. The court says this rejoinder has to wait until summary judgment. 2023 WL 3340214 (W.D. Groupon * Georgia Supreme Court Blesses Google’s Keyword Ad Sales–Edible IP v.
This is yet another online content removal lawsuit, and it reaches the obvious and inevitable result that dozens of cases have reached before it. The lawsuit against Facebook for refusing the film ads is an easy dismissal. The court dismisses the contract and IIED claims on Section 230 grounds. 2023 WL 5749258 (N.D.
In the mid-2010s, plaintiffs filed about 20 lawsuits filed around the country seeking to hold social media services liable for allegedly facilitating terrorist attacks. Twitter, produced Supreme Court rulings last year. In light of that conclusion, the court declined to rule on the parallel Gonzalez v. Google and Taamneh v.
The district court initially dismissed Adler’s trademark claims , but the Fifth Circuit unfortunately revived the claims citing initial interest confusion (UGH). ” This sounds like a lot of potentially confused consumers, but the court isn’t persuaded by the volume.
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