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
Seeking redress, Plaintiffs sued Defendants on the theory that their design decisions and failure to disclose the dangers of their products were the cause of D.G.s Plaintiffs further allege that D.G.s gaming has resulted in serious harm, including emotional distress, lost friends, and problems in school. addiction and Plaintiffs injuries.
This lawsuit purports to focuses on the allegedly defective operation of the services’ reporting tools, but the plaintiffs’ goal was to hold the services accountable for their alleged inaction in response to some reports. These arguments revisit well-trodden legal ground, but the plaintiffs tried a modest innovation.
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. The legal headlines are more of a trickle than the flood I was expected. OpenAI and Google are paying Reddit to access Reddit content. That’s the rub.
Online addiction lawsuits are proliferating across the country, a trend that will continue so long as plaintiffs think they can win. What happens at the end of these lawsuits remains to be seen. This decision largely rejects the defendants’ motion to dismiss, which will induce more plaintiff lawyers to bring more cases.
Less distressing but equally true (if only marginally less dated a cultural reference) is that the Internet is for porn. While online services inevitably get used for both types of content, service providers tend to treat them very differently, given that adult pornography is generally legal in the U.S. whereas CSAM is illegal everywhere.
For more on Chase’s tragedy, see the People magazine story or the Social Media Victims Law Center’s press release about the lawsuit. This is a standard argument in minors’ lawsuits against social media). April 14, 2025). April 11, 2025) This is a pro se/IFP case. Case Citation : Nasca v. Bytedance Ltd.,
Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. Doe met each man in person and was sexually assaulted and raped. Three of the men are in jail; one is on the lam. Doe sued Grindr for strict products liability, negligence, and FOSTA. The district court dismissed the case.
I previously summarized this lawsuit: The plaintiff sells remanufactured printer ink cartridges. For reasons unclear to me, the plaintiff thought it would be a good idea to sue Amazon over its competitors alleged misdeeds, going so far to breathlessly issue a press release that it had filed a $500 million lawsuit against tech giant Amazon.
This lawsuit is against IRBsearch, a data aggregator of public records and other material allegedly scraped from the web. The other FCRA claims already address the defendant’s alleged failure to provide proper disclosures to the consumer. [A reminder that I don’t do April Fools gags.]
The panel says wearily that “This action is Loomers fourth lawsuit about this alleged conspiracy” but sidesteps the obvious res judicata problem. All of those prior lawsuits failed, and this one does too, in a perfunctory memo opinion. It’s hardly surprising that Loomer lost this lawsuit.
2025 WL 1314179 (N.D. May 6, 2025) Prior blog posts ( 1 , 2 ). 2025 WL 1266928 (N.D. May 1, 2025) The plaintiffs allege that Apple impermissibly stores CSAM in its iCloud storage. The court sidesteps the heavy policy issues raised by the plaintiffs’ lawsuits. MG Freesites, Ltd., Reddit, Inc. Cite to Doe v.
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