New Article: “The United States’ Approach to ‘Platform’ Regulation”
I’ve posted a new 5,000 word article, The United States’ Approach to “Platform” Regulation. The abstract: This paper summarizes the United States’ legal framework governing Internet “platforms” that publish third-party content. It highlights three key features of U.S. law: the…
Do Mandatory Age Verification Laws Conflict with Biometric Privacy Laws?–Kuklinski v. Binance
California passed the California Age-Appropriate Design Code (AADC) nominally to protect children’s privacy, but at the same time, the AADC requires businesses to do an age “assurance” of all their users, children and adults alike. (Age “assurance” requires the business…
Service Provider to a Ponzi Scheme Operation Qualifies for Section 230–Wiand v. ATC Brokers
[This opinion was issued 6 months ago, but it just showed up in my alerts.] This case involves an alleged Ponzi scheme involving foreign currency exchanges (“forex”). In addition to the direct participants in the scheme, the CFTC pursued Spotex,…
Services Aren’t Liable for Ignoring the DMCA’s 512(g) Counternotification Procedures–Hopson v. Google
This case involves a UGC anime site called Gelbooru, run by Hopson. Rightsowners sent DMCA takedown notices targeting the site to Google. (Lumen has many takedown notices containing the word “Gelbooru”). Google stripped out the notices’ identifying information and forwarded…
The First Amendment Limits Trademark Rights, But How?–Jack Daniel’s v. Bad Spaniels (Guest Blog Post)
by guest blogger Lisa P. Ramsey [Lisa P. Ramsey is a Professor of Law at the University of San Diego School of Law. She writes and teaches in the trademark law area, and was one of the signatories of the…
Venkat’s Blog Post Unjustly Removed from Google Search Results Due to EU RTBF Takedown
This is not the first time my blog has been subject to right-to-be-forgotten (RTBF) takedowns. See, e.g., this post (scroll down for the updates). But every time the RTBF is applied to my blog, it’s probably a wrongful application of…
Section 230 Protects Emailing an Article–Monge v. University of Pennsylvania
This case involves an article that allegedly defamed Dr. Janet Monge. Dr. Deborah Thomas, a Penn professor, forwarded the article to an email list run by the American Black Anthropologists. Dr. Monge sued Dr. Thomas (and many other defendants). For…
Government Submissions to a Trusted Flagger Program Aren’t Unconstitutional Jawboning–O’Handley v. Weber
I previously described the plaintiff in this case, Rogan O’Handley, as: a California lawyer with elite credentials (UChicago Law, practice experience as a corporate finance and entertainment attorney) who nevertheless jumped onto the anti-“elites” Trump train and embraced Trump’s Big…
Section 230 Protects BBB from Liability for Consumer Complaints–Amuze v. BBB
Amuze is an online clothing retailer. Consumers left negative reviews of Amuze at the Better Business Bureau of Greater Maryland (BBB-GM) website. (This page?) Amuze sued BBB and BBB-GM for defamation and IIED. The BBB entities successfully invoked NY’s anti-SLAPP…
YouTuber Owes Money to YouTube for Ill-Conceived Deplatforming Lawsuit–Daniels v. Alphabet
Daniels goes by the name “Young Pharaoh.” [An aside: how do you feel about the “pharaoh” invocation? Their empires relied upon slavery, so it seems troubling to me.] He claims YouTube shadowbanned and demonetized him because of MAGA-ish content. Represented…