Does the CFAA Help Airlines Control Their Distribution Channels?–RyanAir v. Booking (Guest Blog Post)
by Kieran McCarthy When the Supreme Court decided Van Buren v. United States last summer, many Computer Fraud and Abuse Act experts felt that the decision avoided the worst interpretations of the CFAA, while consciously leaving most of its practical…
A Million-Dollar Thumbs-Up Emoji?–Lightstone v. Zinntex
This is a pandemic case. The buyer ordered $2.1M of personal protective equipment (PPE) from the seller in April 2020 and wired the money. The seller subsequently didn’t deliver, and the buyer cancelled the order. That left the issue of…
First Amendment Protects Videogame’s Depiction of Tractor’s Trade Dress–Saber v. Oovee
This case involves the Polish tractor manufacturer Kirovets’ K-700 tractor: Saber makes the videogame MudRunner. It exclusively licensed the right to depict the K-700 in its videogames, including the right to enforce the exclusive license in court. Oovee make the…
Court Says “You May NOT Amend Your TOS by Posting New Terms to Your Site”–International Markets v. Thayer
by guest blogger Kieran McCarthy Most online terms-of-use agreements claim to give their drafters broad discretion to modify the terms at the host’s discretion. Some terms-of-use agreements purport to allow host websites to modify the terms by sending an email…
Another Example of How “Notice and Explanations” Requirements are a Liability Trap–Shared v. Facebook
Shared.com is a content producer. It ran Facebook self-service ads and participated in Facebook’s “instant articles” program that let Facebook embed ads in its content in exchange for a revenue cut. Starting in 2018, Shared “lost access” to the instant…
Photo Licensing Service Qualifies for DMCA Online Safe Harbor–Steinmetz v. ShutterStock
This is a 512(c) online copyright safe harbor case. We rarely see opinions like this any more. In 2022, I’ve blogged just one other 512(c) case (Davis v. Pinterest). (Business Casual v. YouTube should have been a 512(c) case, but…
Amending Your TOS? Better Use a Clickthrough Process, Not Email Notice–Alkutkar v. Bumble
Alkutkar used the dating app Bumble. He paid money to get extra visibility for his dating profile and claims he got poor results, so he sued Bumble for false advertising. Bumble successfully redirects the case to arbitration based on its…
Section 230 Protect Apple’s App Store from Claims Over Cryptocurrency Theft–Diep v. Apple
This lawsuit relates to the “Toast Plus” app that was available in Apple’s app store. The plaintiffs claim it was a spoof app designed to steal cryptocurrency worth $5k in Diep’s case and $500k in Nagao’s case (ouch). The plaintiffs’…
Snap’s TOS Fails (Uh Oh)–Doffing v. Facebook
This is one of the dozens of lawsuits alleging that social media services addict kids. Those cases cover the same ground as CA AB 2408, which recently died in the California legislature. The plaintiffs’ lawyers are proceeding in court anyway….
Lawyer’s Agreement to Online Terms if Investigating a Claim May Bind a Client
Knapke sued PeopleConnect for alleged violations of her publicity rights under Ohio law. PeopleConnect moved to compel arbitration on the basis that Knapke’s counsel Reilly assented to the terms of service in the course of his pre-filing investigative efforts. The…