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
In what it described as a case pitting “real lawyers against a robot lawyer,” a federal court in Illinois has dismissed a law firm’s suit against the self-help legal service DoNotPay. District Chief Judge Nancy Rosenstengel. DNP is a web-based company purporting to use AI to provide legal services virtually.
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 court dismisses the case entirely with leave to amend. The court responds: “Plaintiffs do not clearly identify the ‘product’ at issue or the ‘design defect’ it allegedly contains.” These arguments revisit well-trodden legal ground, but the plaintiffs tried a modest innovation.
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.”
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.
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.
Judge Breyer of the Northern District of California had none of it. 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.
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.
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.
First, the trademark rules on the street can differ widely from the doctrines drawn up in appellate courts. The rule of law is nominally satisfied if the defense gets an opportunity to correct those errors, but in practice the SAD Scheme TRO often has irreparable consequences, and further proceedings in the court are irrelevant.
If not, why didn’t it work and what lessons can we learn from its failure? The post SHOP SAFE Act Reintroduced, Because Some Congressmembers Really Want to Kill Online Marketplaces appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. This week, Sens. As a result, it remains terrible. What have we learned since then?
” [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.
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.
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. The Supreme Court says that the term “aiding and abetting” in the statute should be interpreted using the common law.
In what it described as a case pitting “real lawyers against a robot lawyer,” a federal court in Illinois has dismissed a law firm’s suit against the self-help legal service DoNotPay. But DoNotPay — represented by real, not robot, lawyers — moved to dismiss the lawsuit, asserting that MillerKing lacked standing to sue it in federal court.
While telephone appearances have been common for many years, the COVID-19 pandemic ushered in a new era for court proceedings with remote participants. Now, many courtrooms allow video conferencing and other mechanisms to enable virtual appearances by attorneys. What technology is needed to make virtual court proceedings work?
Fortunately, a federal district judge preliminarily enjoined the AADC as unconstitutional. 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. I hope it was worth the wait.] their website).
Two top-line takeaways you might get from this post: A two-click formation process avoids the risk of judges moving the goalposts about formation, and If you are amending your TOS, have an airtight plan for building a credible evidentiary record. In re: StubHub Refund Litigation , No. 22-15879 (9th Cir. Citing Sellers v.
Law specialization has become increasingly common — almost a necessity. . Abraham Lincoln, licensed to practice law in 1837 in Illinois, may be the archetypal general practice attorney. The Lincoln Legal Papers Project identified over 5,600 cases and nearly 100,000 documents related to Lincoln’s law practice. Commoditization of Legal Documents.
But danger lurks behind certain tech when working from home. SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES. Working remotely, whether part-time or full-time, requires a variety of technology. And, to be sure, remote-work tech tools are loaded with treats that keep our businesses humming while we work from home. But the remote-work environment complicates things.
Supreme Court adopted a code of ethics. While the justices maintain that this code is simply a codification of existing practices, such codification marks a step in the right direction when it comes to the Court’s transparency restoring public trust and confidence in the judiciary. Last month, for the first time in history, the U.S.
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. Mitrakos, 22-CCB-0035 , February 15, 2023, and Oppenheimer v. Prutton, 22-CCB-0045 , February 28, 2023.
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.
The ICO must obtain a court warrant to conduct a dawn raid. unlawfully obtaining personal data); and the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that evidence of the failure or commission of the offence is to be found on the premises. What is a dawn raid? When can the ICO conduct a dawn raid?
Zoom-Cat Lawyer became a viral sensation with the leak of a video of a court hearing conducted on Zoom. Present on the call were a judge and two lawyers, one of whom could not remove a filter that made him appear to be a cat. It can support many of your practice ideals, from positive client feedback to high job satisfaction.
12] Herzberg’s family sued Uber, the owner of the vehicle, but whether Uber or its programmers would have been found liable in civil court isn’t clear—the parties reached a confidential settlement. [13] 2] Ahead, a driver-operated car struck a pedestrian, throwing her into the Cruise’s path. If there is no driver, who is liable?
The Consequences of Frivolous Lawsuits Waste of Time and Resources Frivolous lawsuits clog up the court system and increase the backlog of cases that are waiting to be resolved. Usually these types of claims are filed specifically for strategic reasons, and often even, dare we say— absurd. In other words, they can be a royal pain in the ….
Failure to do so may result in a range of unwanted consequences from the exclusion of evidence to disciplinary action. Failure to do so may result in a range of unwanted consequences from the exclusion of evidence to disciplinary action. Lawyers have an ethical duty under Illinois Rule of Professional Conduct (ILRPC) 1.6 Id., ¶ 119.
In the realm of law, effective communication can be the difference between success and failure. The goal is to convince your audience—be it a judge, a jury, or another attorney—of the validity of your argument. Legal writing, specifically the ability to craft compelling arguments, is a skill that holds immense power.
” 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. .” ” 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.
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 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 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.
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.
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. The court grants the Section 230 dismissal for all but one set of allegations. The court could have handled this doctrinally other ways.
[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.
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.”
In her new book, The Fight for Privacy , Danielle Keats Citron argues that failure to adequately protect digital privacy could have a chilling effect on the public’s ability to exercise their first amendment rights to free expression. Conference of Catholic Bishops. How did The Pillar obtain this sensitive information?
My blog post on the district court rulings. Section 230’s availability in such situations is uncertain, but on appeal, a TAFS[FN] judge displays the obvious-in-retrospect bias of preferring more guns in the hands of more people, no matter how many tragic outcomes might ensue. [FN: In this case, the answer is no.
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.
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.
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