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. On July 18, 2024, Judge Paul Englemayer dismissed most of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)s landmark cyber enforcement case against SolarWinds Corp. By Gaurav Lalsinghani, J.D.
The district court dismissed the complaint in 2022. After more time and money at the district court, Facebook should have no problem defeating it.” ” Unsurprisingly, on remand, the district court dismisses the contract breach claim. 2024 WL 5121035 (N.D. Lloyd’s breach-of-contract claim.”
The court says this implementation isn’t a sign-in-wrap because the CMG terms lacked a call-to-action: “the login through Facebook screen never informed Plaintiff that acceptance of a separate agreement was required before she could access the service, which is the defining feature of a sign-in wrap agreement.”
24 CV 01514-CM, 2024 WL 4711729 (S.D.N.Y. Raw Story Media, Inc. OpenAI Inc. , The plaintiffs, two news organizations, alleged that OpenAI had used their copyrighted works in training ChatGPT, one of the most prominent generative AI “chatbots” on the market today. See 17 U.S.C.
Google LLC , 2024 WL 3427161 (D. July 16, 2024) Lance Benedict is a musician. Those items got indexed in Google and appeared in Benedict’s vanity searches. 2024 WL 3421685 (Mass. To get around it, Todino argued that he was suing for failure to remove the postings. (I ” Defamation. ” Defamation.
The court concludes that this as a surprisingly easy Section 230 dismissal: ICS Provider. “Courts within the Second Circuit have routinely found that social media websites and online matching services are interactive computer services.” ” Cites to Mosha v. . ” Cites to Mosha v. Facebook , Herrick v.
” Angi responded that “its alleged failure to vet the accuracy of third-party content is immunized by Section 230,” which is absolutely true. .” ” Angi responded that “its alleged failure to vet the accuracy of third-party content is immunized by Section 230,” which is absolutely true.
The last time we blogged this case , the district court had sided with JLM, initially restricting Gutman’s use of the social media accounts and then awarding control over the accounts to JLM. The district court decided that JLM owned the accounts using a six-factor test it created. ” (Cite to Pierson v.
The court dismisses Bloom’s lawsuit against US Weekly. The court says these allegations aren’t enough to satisfy the actual malice standard. Elon Musk “secretly” fathered twins with his subordinate Shivon Zilis. When the news came to light, it triggered a “tabloid feeding frenzy.” Defamation.
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.” Maybe the court was thinking of Yahoo’s promise to Barnes to remove posts? Google in response.
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.
The superior court found that Facebook violated this law and awarded $35M in penalties and attorneys’ fees as well as an injunction. In December 2024, the appeals court affirmed everything. In December 2024, the appeals court affirmed everything. The state sued Facebook again in 2020.
The district court initially dismissed all of the claims for their lack of merit, after discussing Snap’s Section 230 defense irresolutely. Assuming the court is right the move isn’t pretextual, it’s still a Pyrrhic victory for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs tried again, with the same result. Section 230. Negligence.
” [A reminder that court-ordered identity and age verification requirements likely violate the First Amendment; the other claims may do so as well.] Similarly, allegations of failure to warn of an application’s potential danger do not remove the “publisher” status. She sued Snapchat for her harms. cite to LW v.
2024 WL 3914512 (C.D. July 31, 2024) The trademark owner Alsa sells chrome paint. The court says “Because Walmart does not pay search engines to return organic search results or index webpages, it does not “use” the marks in connection with the sale or advertisement of goods.” WTF are we doing in federal court???
The court summarizes the allegations: Roblox has a virtual currency designed for use on its platform called “Robux.” The court is unpersuaded. The court doesn’t appreciate this argument: these are children we’re talking about. [A reminder that I don’t do April Fools’ pranks.] Statutory Standing.
The underlying legal principles are not complicated: content rules in TOSes are negative behavioral restrictions on authors’ conduct, not marketing or contractual promises to readers that such content will never appear on the site. ” The TOS provides additional details about what YouTube considers impermissible animal abuse.
With the CAS’s demise, both sides essentially bet that the courts would side with them. The appeals court rejected the vicarious claims but upheld the contributory claims. Vicarious Infringement The appeals court says that Cox lacked the requisite “direct financial interest” in subscribers’ infringements.
[This is one of those opinions that is a slog to blog because the court’s statutory analysis made my head hurt. The first question the court must resolve is whether ringless voicemails qualify as “telephone calls” for purposes of the Telemarketing Sales Rule, which prohibits deceptive or abusive telemarketing practices.
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.
This opinion is a companion to the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s decision in Good v. The highest New York state court agrees. Consistent with this principle, courts have examined whether the offeree of a web-based contract was put on inquiry notice of the contractual terms.
By Rick Clark The Future Lawyer 2024 Conference was held in Boston, MA, and hosted by Ropes & Gray LLP in their Prudential Tower offices. ” She highlighted at this conference that coming in second is still a win, contrasting it with the failure of those who merely follow the crowd like lemmings. .”
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.
The court says no. If users select “continue with email,” as the court assumes the named plaintiff Campos did, they see this (quite ugly) Screen 2: What is that background? Turning to the merits, the court concludes that “Tubi has not established that it reasonably communicated the existence of its TOU to Campos.”
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.
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.”
The district court dismissed the case. The Ninth Circuit affirms every point of the district court’s decision. ” BTW, I disagree with the court’s summation of the Internet Brands case; I feel the Ninth Circuit got that one wrong because that case was always about third-party content.
The court’s reaction is predictable if chilling. Rather than turning the analysis on formation issues, the court strikes down Ticketmaster’s efforts as unconscionable–and the weak formation practices exacerbate the unconscionability problem. to be unenforceable, as individuals do not have inquiry notice.”
My post on a pre-pandemic district court ruling in this case. The appeals court disagrees. The court says Grokster didn’t shrink contributory doctrines; instead, “Grokster expanded the doctrine of contributory infringement” to include the new inducement doctrine. NOCIs to Grande between 2011 and 2017.
[This blog post covers two decisions in the same lawsuit: the ruling on X’s initial motion to dismiss from September, which apparently never triggered my Westlaw or Lexis alerts, and then a ruling on X’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint that the court issued this week. ” The court cites to Murphy v.
9, 2024) The lawsuit alleges Meta addicts teens and thus violates DC’s consumer protection act. 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. District of Columbia v. Meta Platforms, Inc., LEXIS 27 (D.C.
On October 22, 2024, the U.S. 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. million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act (the “FCA”).
Here is the latest faculty scholarship appearing in the University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies Research Papers series found on SSRN. 2024) by RENAGH O’LEARY , UW Law School Community supervision agencies and officers do not just supervise people on probation and parole. Supervising Sentencing 57 UC Davis L.
She got less than 2,000 votes in the June 2024 primary. “several of her causes of action are based at least in part on the alleged failure to keep her account secure…and are therefore precluded by the Terms of Service and Terms of Use.” The court dismisses the case (with leave to amend, but an amendment will fail).
I’m still blogging Section 230 cases as I see them, even though these posts are likely to have only historical value. ] * * * The court summarizes the horrifying allegations: In April 2022, Defendant Bendjy Charles (“Charles”) and Romelus raped Plaintiff. The court dismisses OnlyFans per Section 230.
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