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
But that all came crashing down after I reported in 2016 of Bluford’s settlement of a lawsuit charging him with impersonating a lawyer, forging legal documents and fraudulently swindling two clients. As of this writing, the lawsuit is ongoing. As of this writing, the lawsuit is ongoing. LexisNexis Firm Manager.
On June 30th, 2008, four years after images of torture at Abu Ghraib horrified people all over the world, a group of victims filed suit against CACI, the Virginia-based private security company hired by the U.S. In fact, this is the first lawsuit where victims of U.S. post-9/11 torture will get their day in court.
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.
And even though the creators of popular services know, and you know, and I know, and the Supreme Court knows , and every judge that decides every opinion on these issues knows, that no one is reading these documents, the legal system has collectively decided this system sufficient to bind everyone to a legal agreement. See Bruni v.
The City of New York, 50 unnamed NYPD officers, and the former NYPD Commissioner are involved in a civil rights lawsuit over allegedly issuing summonses without probable cause, violating the First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. In all, the Court noted a total of fewer than 25 emails produced from key players.
This is a confusing lawsuit that has been through several names, including “Sarah v. ” The court previously described the core allegations: The plaintiffs allege that Onision “ran several YouTube channels” that “targeted minor audiences” and allowed Onision to “groom and lure underage girls.”
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.
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 2021, the court dismissed the non-FOSTA claims but did not dismiss the FOSTA claim. Reddit cert petition was pending before the Supreme Court. A few weeks later, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the Reddit case). Marriott * Section 230 Helps Salesforce Defeat Sex Trafficking Lawsuit–GG v. Case Citation : Doe v.
” 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.
The court treats this as a surprisingly easy Section 230 case and dismisses the case. Twitter , the court disagrees: Unlike in Lemmon and Roommates.com , the harm Plaintiffs allege here doesn’t flow from a design defect. ” The plaintiffs also sued Google and Apple for carrying Snap in their app stores. Next stop: the 9th Circuit.
Section 230 preempts her lawsuit against Facebook: “Ninth Circuit precedent interpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § This judge focused solely on Ninth Circuit precedent, which makes sense because this court is in the Ninth Circuit’s territory and that will help with any appeal).
On remand, the court dismisses the remaining defendants primarily due to Section 230, with leave to amend. The court summarizes the facts: Plaintiff alleges she was trafficked as a minor and her traffickers filmed her while she was engaged in sex acts. . The court says Section 230 preempts it in this case. The Lemmon v.
Analogous to how narrowing interpretations rendered the SAVE Act irrelevant (FOSTA’s precursor), the court’s interpretations decrease the odds that the government will bring FOSTA-based prosecutions. ” Later, the court recapitulates: “FOSTA does not criminalize promoting prostitution broadly. .”
Readers with good memories will recall that I have blogged several other cases against Salesforce with similar allegations, with mixed results in court. Salesforce decision closely, the court concludes that Salesforce doesn’t qualify for Section 230 immunity in the FOSTA case. Salesforce invoked the Fifth Circuit’s Doe v.
This lack of clarity can lead to disputes and even lawsuits. 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. Shepard Fairey’s “Hope” poster : During the 2008 U.S.
This is another lawsuit against Grindr claiming that Grindr made it too easy for underage users to sign up and meet other users for sex. ” The court completely dismisses the case per Section 230. ” The court says this is different from Lemmon because “the harm C.D. Internet Brands and Lemmon v. was heinous.
Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. 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.”
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.
9) Supreme Court Tamps Down on Jawboning and Government Social Media Lawsuits. The Supreme Court is taking a steady stream of Internet Law cases, a trend that will continue for some time. Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear the TikTok ban, and Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear Free Speech Coalition v.
Capitol Records (the successor to EMI) sent its first cease-and-desist letter to Vimeo in 2008 and sued Vimeo for copyright infringement in 2009. Yes, this is a 15-year-old lawsuit.[FN] FN] [FN: This lawsuit is almost old enough to drive a car. The district court’s rulings became final in 2021.
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