![Judge Goes Rogue and Rejects Snap's Section 230 Defense for [Reasons]--Neville v. Snap](https://blog.ericgoldman.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/IMG_8558-150x150.jpg)
Judge Goes Rogue and Rejects Snap’s Section 230 Defense for [Reasons]–Neville v. Snap
The plaintiffs are parents of Snapchat users who purchased fentanyl from other Snapchat users and suffered overdoses. They sued Snapchat for a wide ranges of tort claims. To get around the clear Section 230 barrier to those claims, the plaintiffs…
Internal Search Results Aren’t Trademark Infringing–PEM v. Peninsula
This is a case involving a trademark owner and a competitive keyword advertiser. The trademark owner memorably (and ridiculously) characterized the rival as engaging in “keyword conquesting,” a term I encourage you never to use. The court already sent that…
Judge Rejects a Motion With the “Exploding Head” Emoji–DePietro v. Levitt
This is a class-action employment lawsuit. The parties settled and sought judicial approval of the settlement terms and associated attorneys’ fees. They didn’t get the approval. The judge balks at several terms of the settlement, including the attorneys’ fee request….
A Judge Enumerates a SAD Scheme Plaintiff’s Multiple Abuses, But Still Won’t Award Sanctions–Jiangsu Huari Webbing Leather v. Schedule A Defendants
This is a SAD Scheme case. The plaintiff, Jiangsu Huari Webbing Leather, owns U.S. Patent No. 11,478,673 for an outdoor exercise product (“a rectangular-shaped buckle-and-belt mechanism, embodied in a Hanging Exercise Product that is sold online”). The plaintiff sued 163…