Courts Keep Shredding Online Contract Formation Processes–McGhee v. NAB; Applebaum v. Lyft
A couple more online contract formation cases to enliven your Saturday: McGhee v. NAB This case involves mobile credit card processing services. The plaintiffs are merchants who think they were overcharged for card readers. The vendor invoked the arbitration clause…
1H 2017 Quick Links, Part 2 (Privacy, Security)
Privacy * Vigil v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc., 2017 WL 398404 (SDNY Jan. 30, 2017): The plaintiffs allege that they agreed to the MyPlayer terms and conditions, that NBA 2K15 scanned their faces to create personalized basketball avatars, and that…
Facebook Persistent Tracking Lawsuit Crashes Again
This is a lawsuit based on Facebook’s tracking of users while they are logged out. The code for a “like” button implemented by third parties apparently causes the browser of a consumer visiting the third party page to send a…
Another Collision of Housing Regulations and Online Innovation–SF Housing Rights Committee v. HomeAway
This is another lawsuit over short-term housing rentals in San Francisco. You’ve been watching the litigation over the San Francisco regulation (Section 41A.5(g)) requiring “hosts” (short-term landlords) to register with the city, limiting the number of days that a unit…
DMCA Safe Harbor Doesn’t Protect Zazzle’s Printing of Physical Items–Greg Young Publishing v. Zazzle
The court summarizes the key facts: “GYPI alleges that Zazzle has publicly displayed 41 paintings by Westmoreland or Erickson on its website, and that Zazzle has created consumer products bearing these images.” GYPI lacked standing to enforce the Westmoreland paintings,…
Amazon Doesn’t “Sell” Its Marketplace Goods–Milo & Gabby v. Amazon
Milo & Gabby is a small family business that designs and sells “animal-shaped” pillowcases. It discovered that knockoffs were listed for sale on Amazon’s website. The products were actually offered for sale by third party sellers, and all but one…
1-800 Contacts Charges Higher Prices Than Its Online Competitors, But They Are OK With That–FTC v. 1-800 Contacts
As you recall, the FTC has taken the position that 1-800 Contacts’ agreement with competitors, via settlement agreements, not to bid on each other trademarks as keywords violates antitrust laws. Prior blog posts: * FTC Sues 1-800 Contacts For Restricting…
VPPA Still Doesn’t Protect App Downloaders–Perry v. CNN
Plaintiff sued CNN under the Video Privacy Protection Act, alleging that CNN wrongly disclosed plaintiff’s viewing records without plaintiff’s consent. The allegation is that plaintiff used the CNN app, which records viewing history, and CNN sent this information to Bango, a…
Faulty Mobile Device User Interface Jeopardizes Uber’s Contract Formation–Metter v. Uber
This is a lawsuit against Uber alleging that it improperly assessed a cancellation fee without advising the rider in advance. Uber sought to compel arbitration. The court declines. The arbitration clause is contained in Uber’s terms of service, and the…
FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v. 1-800 Contacts
As you may recall, the FTC is pursuing 1-800 Contacts for antitrust violations based on 1-800 Contacts having sued and then settled with competitors who bought keyword ads on 1-800 Contacts’ trademarks. Recently, the FTC filed its “Complaint Counsel’s Corrected…