September 22, 2006
New York v. Direct Revenue Amicus Brief
By Eric Goldman
David Post, Scott Christie and I have filed an amicus brief in New York v. Direct Revenue LLC, No. 401325/06 (N.Y. Supreme Ct.), one of Spitzer's office's high-profile enforcement actions against adware companies.
Among other aggressive positions, the NYAG's office argues that Direct Revenue committed deceptive trade practices by disclosing certain information only in the EULA. Our amicus brief notes the potential implications of this argument given the ubiquity of clickthrough agreements as a disclosure mechanism on the Internet. We don't opine on Direct Revenue's specific practices, but we express concern that the expedited procedure chosen by the NYAG's office isn't the right venue to set precedent implicating the practices of millions of companies.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Focusing on the EULA misses the point of the DirectRevenue case. See a response: http://internetandclassactionlaw.blogspot.com/2006/09/bad-facts-make-bad-law.html
Posted by: D. Fish at September 25, 2006 11:20 AM