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
She got less than 2,000 votes in the June 2024 primary. The TOS doesn’t impose such a duty: “nothing in the Terms promises or guarantees that Defendant will work with a user to restore access to an account at all, let alone on a specific timeline. 2024 WL 4565091 (N.D. Her claims go nowhere. ” Cites to Lewis v.
violations; but I also think it’s clear this lawsuit is going to fail eventually. 2024 WL 4882638 (C.D. 25, 2024) The post Amazon Must Defend “Yelp Law” Claim–Ramos v. ” Case Citation : Ramos v. Amazon.com, Inc. Amazon appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog.
Despite the busy 2024 litigation year against companies offering AI platforms in 2024, significant intellectual property questions remain unanswered as the calendar turns to 2025. 1] Proving Defendants Use of Training Data Inputs. In Millette v. OpenAI, Inc.,
Toyota brought a SAD Scheme case against 103 defendants before Judge Daniel in the Northern District of Illinois. If these justifications sound familiar, it’s because these are the generic rotely-made defendant-unspecific allegations that are copied and pasted into most SAD Scheme complaints. Seriously, Toyota? Do better).
Recapping a couple of doomed-from-inception lawsuits. Google LLC , 2024 WL 3427161 (D. July 16, 2024) Lance Benedict is a musician. A defendant also does not “use” the mark under the Lanham Act if it merely produces search results that contain the plaintiff’s mark.” 2024 WL 3421685 (Mass. Benedict v.
299 limits joinder in patent cases to defendants who infringe using “the same accused product or process.” ” Congress enacted this requirement to restrict patent trolls who were filing lawsuits against defendants who had nothing in common but the allegation that they were infringing the same patent.
The plaintiff claims that the defendant company is engaging in a form of corporate identity theft, trading on its license number, and that Angi promoted the interloper as a certified contractor without doing proper verification. Angi unsuccessfully defends on Section 230 grounds. Encor Solar LLC, 2024 WL 4062051 (D.
Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants knew they were collecting biometric data from Illinois citizens, including children, in violation of Illinois state law.” 2024 WL 3842563 (W.D. May 29, 2024) The post AWS Can’t Shake BIPA Lawsuit for Providing Services to NBA 2K–Mayhall v.
A reminder: this lawsuit is a battle royale. Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation , 2024 WL 4532937 (N.D. 24, 2024) This ruling involves the school districts’ claims against social media for their alleged role in providing resource-intensive mental health support for students.
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. See ECF No.
The US government brought a civil lawsuit against the defendants for 203 violations. A reminder that if the US government had prosecuted the defendants for violating the Clean Air Act, Section 230 would have been irrelevant (it doesn’t apply to federal criminal prosecutions). The defendants sell this hardware.
Recently, the companys aggressive enforcement of its intellectual property (IP) has taken center stage, with high-profile lawsuits targeting game modders, emulator developers, and companies like Pocketpair, the creators of Palworld. The lawsuit seeks damages and an injunction against the games continued distribution?
“Plaintiff alleges Defendants downloaded and copied Plaintiff’s copyrighted materials from YouTube, and then re-uploaded infringing versions of Plaintiff’s copyrighted media content to their YouTube channels.” ” Viral DRM sued 20 defendants enumerated in a Schedule A and got an ex parte TRO. Jurisdiction.
If that rings a bell, it’s because just yesterday I blogged on a DIFFERENT fish painter, DeYoung, who also brought an IP lawsuit against a print-on-demand service (Pixels). Note: this case is functionally moot because the defendant, Sunfrog, is already defunct.
The user took the matter to court (pro se), where the lawsuit failed: Contract Breach. “Plaintiff does not allege any facts indicating that Defendant was contractually prohibited from removing her Google account.” “Defendant Google is a private business, not a state actor.” July 26, 2024).
[Note: the defendants in this case are enumerated on an “Annex A” instead of “Schedule A.” Judge Harjani says the plaintiff’s papers contain “a fair amount of conclusory language about a logical relationship among all defendants but not much, if any, facts to actually support that relationship.”
The court says that Printify took appropriate steps when it learned of infringing items via Atari’s lawsuit: First, Printify searched its own database for the 70 URLs identified by Atari in ECF No. 2024 WL 283641 (S.D.N.Y. RedBubble * IP Lawsuits Against Print-on-Demand Vendors Continue to Vex the Courts–OSU v.
The plaintiffs claim that purchasing the defendant’s initial loss leader offering caused the plaintiffs to subscribe to a hidden monthly recurring charge. Invoking the arbitration clause in the TOS, the defendant sought to send the lawsuit to arbitration. The 2024 district court opinion. Case Citation : Seneca v.
He then sued the court document repository websites (and other defendants) for defamation, false advertising, and more. The trial court anti-SLAPPED that lawsuit. In dismissing the case, the court says sardonically: In most respects, O’Kroley didn’t accomplish much in suing Google and the other defendants. 2024 WL 2745115 (Cal.
Lloyd brought a pro se lawsuit against Facebook raising a myriad of concerns. ” The Rehabilitation Act “does not apply to defendants who are private entities that do not receive federal funds.” Among other reasons, “her negligence claim treats defendants as the publishers of the harassing posts.”
Brett Trout In a recent decision by the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court (CoA) dated December 20, 2024, the court underscored the critical importance of precise patent drafting. The case involved Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which faced significant challenges to its patent due to inaccuracies in its patent claims.
The court dismisses Bloom’s lawsuit against US Weekly. But a desire to turn a profit does not in and of itself indicate a defendant acted with actual malice… plaintiff’s theory that defendant chose the photograph of plaintiff for its commercial appeal defies reason. A360 Media LLC , 2024 WL 2812905 (S.D.N.Y.
” “Aereo involved the removal of copyright-protected works from their usual channels of distribution by the defendant, even if that diversion was only completed when directed by an end user. Congress specifically outlawed something, and the defendant was doing more or less that precise thing, with a few superficial tweaks.”
You may have heard about Squishmallow’s recent lawsuit against Build-a-Bear over plushy knockoffs. Twitter , “the Court [referring to himself in the third person] paid insufficient heed to the requirement that Kelly Toys provide proof of the Alibaba Defendants’ knowledge.” Typical SAD Scheme stuff.
Take a look at the numbers: Amazon restrained $155k+ of the defendant’s money. That’s just for one of the many defendants in this case. “Defendant admits that it profited $32.30 The defendant fought back with its own damages expert. Would fair use apply? This post focuses on the case economics.
eBay defeats the lawsuit. In that case, the defendant created a marketplace for aftermarket car apps, which naturally included defeat devices. ” Having apparently not learned from that case, the EPA tried the same arguments against a more sympathetic defendant (eBay) and got an unsurprising outcome. .”
Snapchat successfully defends on Section 230 grounds. The court responds: The result in Lemmon makes sense, of course, because the plaintiffs there did not attempt to hold the defendant liable for publication of third-party content. 2024 WL 678248 (Conn. She sued Snapchat for her harms. Case citation : V.V. Meta Platforms, Inc.
In my previous post , I summarized: This lawsuit involves troubling allegations that Facebook executives ( allegedly , Nick Clegg, Nicola Mendelsohn, and Cristian Perrella) took bribes from OnlyFans-related entities to spike Facebook and Instagram posts that promoted competitors of OnlyFans. Instagram, LLC, 2024 U.S. LEXIS 171462 (N.D.
by guest blogger Kieran McCarthy With as much scraping as is happening for AI training and enhancement these days, it’s amazing to me that there aren’t more lawsuits happening over scraping. Recent Licensing Agreement : In May 2024, OpenAI entered into a formal partnership with Reddit, granting OpenAI access to Reddit’s Data API.
I don’t know how many lawsuits they’ve filed because the team is filing many (all?) If this is correct, then these lawsuits aren’t designed to protect consumers at all, and they may turn an important consumer protection law into a net statutory loss. Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC, 2024 WL 1122415 (C.D.
The lawsuit names Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, the prosecuting attorney for a county in Idaho and members of the Idaho Code Commission as defendants. The ACLU brought the lawsuit on behalf of two families, known as the Poe and Doe families, who both have transgender children currently receiving gender-affirming care in Idaho.
In the Sid Avery lawsuit, Pixels ultimately won at trial that it was not sufficiently vertically integrated for copyright purposes, so we’ll see if the judge’s tone changes on summary judgment. Pixels.com, LLC , 2024 WL 885356 (W.D. RedBubble * IP Lawsuits Against Print-on-Demand Vendors Continue to Vex the Courts–OSU v.
And the legal industry is taking notice: according to the American Bar Associations 2024 Legal Technology Survey Report , 47% of firms used legal analytics in the previous year. By leveraging AI and other technologies, law firms can uncover patterns and trends across vast datasetsturning raw information into actionable insight.
The technology may be able to determine a criminal defendants competence to stand trial. How will it interact with a defendants right against self-incrimination? Nonetheless, we can foresee future legal battles, even class action lawsuits, arising in this arena. However, how reliable will this evidence be?
In the last month, two more copyright lawsuits over city council videos have triggered my alerts. Kilgore , 2024 WL 5295080 (W.D. 14, 2024) A magistrate judge recommends sending a 512(f) case to trial. Both cases included a 512(f) claim, and both 512(f) claims survive the preliminary dismissal efforts.
Understanding Litigation Finance Litigation finance is when a third-party invests in a lawsuit in hopes of sharing in the profits of a successful verdict. Instead of funding individual suits based a case’s merits, litigation funders have trended towards funding portfolios of cases based on factors such as common defendants or practice area.
The cases reached important milestones last Fall, when both the federal and state court judges denied the social media defendants’ Section 230 motions to dismiss. Today’s post focuses on the social media defendants’ efforts to dismiss the parallel lawsuits by the school districts.
“Waterman alleges no facts that Defendant had the ability to control the acts of its users or that Defendant was able to use simple measures to remove the infringing material from its platform.” 2024 WL 5413655 (C.D. 30, 2024) The post TikTok Defeats Copyright Lawsuit Over Users’ Uploads–Waterman v.
This well-publicized lawsuit is an example of Musk waging lawfare over a critic’s speech. He calls out Twitter for its bad choice: This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech…X Corp. He calls out Twitter for its bad choice: This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech…X Corp.
In 2014, the defendant launched a website called “The Texas Tamales Warehouse” but was driven off of that. Having established its trademark rights, in the most recent ruling, Texas Tamale unsurprisingly gets an injunction against the defendant. CPUSA2, LLC , 2024 WL 2836241 (S.D. 2024 WL 2847139 (E.D.N.Y.
Immediately after the plaintiff filed its papers on November 1, Judge Daniel sua sponte issues an order that starts: experience has shown that not all defendants named in a Schedule A case work together. ” However, the complaints rarely or never back up this claim with any defendant-specific supporting facts. 1:24-cv-11301 (N.D.
This lawsuit seeks to hold Letgo liable for the murders. It said 230 was not available to Letgo because, per Accusearch , “Plaintiffs have sufficiently pleaded, for a motion under Rule 12(b)(6), that Defendants contributed in part to the allegedly offending ‘verified’ representation.” 2024 WL 372218 (10th Cir. Negligence.
MG Freesites because the defendant in that case hosted the video and allegedly exercised other content moderation steps around it. FOSTA The plaintiff invoked the FOSTA exception to Section 230, which required the court to decide if plaintiffs to show the defendant had the higher scienter required by 1591 or the lower scienter of 1595.
If you’re keeping score, 1-800 Contacts won 5 Polaroid factors (one only slightly) and 1 factor was irrelevant; while the defendant prevailed on 2 factors. In other words, if the defendant promoted the mimicry page using advertising beyond than keyword ads, the legal analysis would not change. The Consumer Survey Tangent.
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