Remove e-filing Remove Information Remove International law
article thumbnail

Voting Is Open! Pick the 15 Finalists to Compete At Startup Alley at ABA TECHSHOW 2024 in February

Above the Law - Technology

The summaries listed below are based on information provided by the startups in their applications. In some cases as noted, startups have not provided information or have asked that information be kept confidential. We also automate detecting a variety of confidential information.

Mediator 325
article thumbnail

Voting Is Open! Pick the 15 Finalists to Compete At Startup Alley at ABA TECHSHOW 2024 in February

Legal Tech Monitor

The summaries listed below are based on information provided by the startups in their applications. In some cases as noted, startups have not provided information or have asked that information be kept confidential. We also automate detecting a variety of confidential information.

professionals

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Are Electronic Signatures Legal?

Clio

Electronic signatures (or e-signatures) have become nearly ubiquitous in everyday life and business—from confirming your agreement to terms and conditions on a website, to using e-signature tools to sign a work contract. What is an e-signature? But are electronic signatures legally binding? What is an electronic signature?

e-records 102
article thumbnail

Trademark Extraterritoriality: Abitron v. Hetronic Doesn’t Go the Distance (Guest Blog Post)

Eric Goldman

On the one hand, it reflects concerns of international comity insofar as it ‘serves to protect against unintended clashes between our laws and those of other nations which could result in international discord.’ The same is true even in trademark treaties.

Court 75
article thumbnail

Section 230 Immunizes OnlyFans for User-Uploaded Video–Doe v. Fenix

Eric Goldman

For more on this topic, see Anupam Chander, Section 230 and the International Law of Facebook. Publisher/speaker claims: “Plaintiff alleges that Defendant allowed people to post defamatory information about him on their website, and did not remove the information. I think this ruling diverges from the uncited T.V.

Defendant 117