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
While AI promises efficiency and cost savings, a recent case in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of including unverified AI-generated content in courtfilings. The court discovered that eight of those cases did not exist. Walmart Inc. &
The pandemic caused civil courts in the United States to adopt technology at an unprecedented pace and scale, improving participation in court proceedings and helping users resolve disputes more efficiently. Pew researchers examined pandemic-related emergency orders issued by the supreme courts of all 50 states and Washington, D.C.
The plaintiff sued 163 defendants for online marketplace sales and got an ex parte TRO, including Amazon account freezes. After a couple of defendants showed up, the judge denied a TRO extension because of the possible lack of merit in the plaintiff’s infringement allegations. Then, the case fell apart. Proximate Damage.
JD E-Commerce America Ltd., The court is unclear about how Joybuy operates, but it appears that Joybuy (via the entity JD) runs its own online marketplace. The court says that Joybuy sufficiently established that it ran its own online marketplace and thus qualified as a service provider. Omnia Studios Ltd.
These are only the second and third non-profit projects to be approved to participate in the sandbox and the first in the nation to empower non-lawyers go give limited-scope legal advice about medical debt, according to Stacy Butler , director of the Innovation for Justice Program at the University of Arizona James E.
I previously blogged about one such case, where Squishmallow sued 90 e-commerce merchants in a sealed complaint and got a TRO. Alibaba and AliExpress did indeed fight back, filing a motion to dismiss that I discussed in my prior post. The court says, per Taamneh v. Typical SAD Scheme stuff.
While we are happy to lead an industry disruption, we welcome new competition, which we believe will help accelerate adoption of new AI-powered eDiscovery technologies by courts, law firms, and other stakeholders. We securely give fiduciaries access to assets when required with no password-sharing, no court orders, and correct titling.
This has been a hard case to follow online, because many of the key rulings have been filed under seal. Not only that, but this case makes it more likely that other plaintiffs and defendants will suffer lengthy, protracted litigation to reach similarly absurd conclusions. According to this court, it is.
By guest blogger Elizabeth Townsend Gard , John E. Koerner Endowed Professor of Law, Tulane University Law School [See part 1 about defendant opt-outs and part 2 about defendant defaults.] Eight months after filing, the first two Copyright Claims Board (CCB) Final Determinations have been handed down.
courts, they will be dealing with motions filed in court. This means that the ability to write a motion for court is central to a litigator’s potential for professional success–especially for mid-sized or smaller firms without the vast resources of Big Law. What is a court motion?
The pandemic caused civil courts in the United States to adopt technology at an unprecedented pace and scale, improving participation in court proceedings and helping users resolve disputes more efficiently. Pew researchers examined pandemic-related emergency orders issued by the supreme courts of all 50 states and Washington, D.C.
In litigation and intellectual property matters, it is the responsibility of docketing professionals to ensure that electronic court pleadings and documents are properly and timely filed, to maintain internal databases of docketed documents, and to facilitate access to documents by the firm’s legal professionals. I don’t care.
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. The court says it’s immaterial that there is a potentially long time delay between user registration and the purchases. Sadlock v.
Supreme Court TransUnion decision. On June 25, 2021, the Supreme Court issued a significant opinion on standing in the context of consumer class actions in TransUnion LLC v. The Supreme Court affirmed that certain members of a class action lacked standing—and therefore could not be members of the class. The Opinion.
But that undersells the level of inconsistency in courts’ interpretations of the law of copyright preemption. It’s that every new case related to the law of copyright preemption of contracts leaves lawyers with a potential new set of arguments to defend or argue against with the law of copyright preemption. 2d 426, 433 (8th Cir.1993)
Get free e-book Lawyers lose 40% of the time they spend working to inefficient, manual processes that cover work outside the practice of law. When an important hearing or filing due date changes, staff must adjust multiple related tasks by hand. If a key date shifts, any events associated with it are automatically rescheduled.
Get free e-book Lawyers lose 40% of the time they spend working to inefficient, manual processes that cover work outside the practice of law. When an important hearing or filing due date changes, staff must adjust multiple related tasks by hand. If a key date shifts, any events associated with it are automatically rescheduled.
Guy Rub , The Ohio State University Michael E. There are more than 300 opinions by federal courts dealing with the express preemption of contracts, and within them two main approaches have emerged. Until recently, the Sixth Circuit was the most prominent court that endorsed this approach. by guest blogger Prof. A third approach?
I have met lawyers who have a crazy idea: They HAVE to read EVERY email, document, Excel file, video, and every other bit of ESI produced in discovery. Lawyers have a duty of competency to their client, and candor to the court, to look at what is relevant to their case and responsive to discovery requests. That position is wrong.
Here is the short version of the dispute in a complex case: The Plaintiff brought a motion to strike the Defendants’ requests for production that were duplicative. The Court noted that many of the Defendants’ discovery requests were improper omnibus requests where no effort was made to tailor the discovery request to the issues in the case.
The City did not issue a litigation hold until three years AFTER the complaint had been filed. The Court stated that litigation hold was not effectively communicated and the officers listed in the City’s initial disclosures did not acknowledge receiving the hold notice. The Court applied the elements from Chin v. Stinson, at *5.
However, with a burn injury attorney by your side, you’ll be able to get through the court process and proceedings with ease and certainty. Although it won’t make your case move faster through the court proceedings, your lawyer is able to guide you through the process and translate anything you may not understand.
Dessert: sweet news about e-RUPI opening new doors for PPI issuers. For instance, it refused to lift ban on loading of e-wallets through credit lines. The next day, it filed a complaint against Coinbase. If the defending business fails in court, it faces punitive action. And hence, violate securities laws.
New data breach notification guidance from the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”), multi-million Euro penalties from DPAs in Germany, Spain and Norway, and court rulings on discriminatory use of algorithms, the one-stop-shop and GDPR’s territorial scope were all in the mix. Deliveroo algorithm ruled discriminatory by Italian court.
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.
That is, how the use of AI can be defended if its use is challenged by a judge or opposing party. Models can be trained by a human reviewer who codes files to improve the accuracy of a model. In e-discovery, models can be tailored to a dataset such as Continuous Active Learning (CAL). CAL is typically used to identify relevancy.
In 2021, an application was filed to the US Copyright office, for copyright registration of a comic book consisting of text and images (created partly by a human and partly by AI tool “ Midjourney ”). The term “person” has also been interpreted conservatively by the Courts in respect of copyright law.
For example, the Connecticut Insurance Department has stated that it has the authority to require that insurers provide the department with access to data used to build models or algorithms that are included in underwriting filings. The cover art used in this blog post was generated by DALL-E.
While we are happy to lead an industry disruption, we welcome new competition, which we believe will help accelerate adoption of new AI-powered eDiscovery technologies by courts, law firms, and other stakeholders. We securely give fiduciaries access to assets when required with no password-sharing, no court orders, and correct titling.
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.
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.
Is it advice, if I decide, yes, I’m going to get a patent, then I file it with a patent or trademark office, that’s the registration service. Or am I defending the deposition? Are you defending the deposition? And it’s not nearly as sexy as saying I’m going to represent you in court. Am I giving advice for patent law?
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).
Or courts or states? I think there’s lots of low hanging groups that that the team and I have been looking at thinking through, and one of them is taking our doctor alarm 775 million judicial opinions, briefs, pleadings, motions that are filed at the district court level, because that’s actually where most of the work is done.
the Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act does not reach trademark infringement that occurs outside of the United States (US). Moreover, the US Supreme Court has resurrected a long-disused canon of statutory construction : The presumption against extraterritorial application of US statutes. Hetronic International Inc. ,
The challenge to that law is pending with the US Supreme Court now]. The court enjoins the content blocking requirements and defers on the rest. The court enjoins the content blocking requirements and defers on the rest. This particular one requires “digital service providers” to age-authenticate all users.
” 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. Case citations : J.B.
The mother filed a lawsuit, arguing that her use of the song was fair use. The court ruled in her favor, emphasizing the importance of considering fair use before issuing takedown notices. The parties eventually settled out of court, but the case raised questions about the boundaries of fair use in artistic expression.
Or courts or states? I think there’s lots of low hanging groups that that the team and I have been looking at thinking through, and one of them is taking our doctor alarm 775 million judicial opinions, briefs, pleadings, motions that are filed at the district court level, because that’s actually where most of the work is done.
A CID is a type of Commissioner-authorized subpoena, enforceable in court, that subjects the recipient to a number of formalized processes and timelines. If disagreements remain, companies have the option of filing a petition to quash within 20 days after receipt of the CID. 18] In FTC v. Shire ViroPharma, Inc. ,
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. ” I’d love for the court to explain how blocking users from contacting each other on apps differs from “content moderation.”
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