Does California's Anti-Discrimination Law Ban Ad Targeting?--Liapes v. Facebook

Does California’s Anti-Discrimination Law Ban Ad Targeting?–Liapes v. Facebook

This opinion indicates that Facebook–and by implication, every other ad network–could violate California’s Unruh Act (an anti-discrimination law) by targeting third-party ads based on age, gender, or other protected criteria. The court reaches this shocking conclusion by cutting several analytical…

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?--Adler v McNeil

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?–Adler v McNeil

This case involves Jim Adler, a/k/a the “Texas Hammer,” a Texas lawyer who has spent $100M+ on advertising to build his brand. The defendants run a call-center service that attracts prospective legal clients and then makes compensated referrals of the…

Facebook Can Reject Unwanted Ads--Newton v. Meta

Facebook Can Reject Unwanted Ads–Newton v. Meta

This is yet another online content removal lawsuit, and it reaches the obvious and inevitable result that dozens of cases have reached before it. The plaintiffs sought to run Facebook ads for the movie “Beautiful Blue Eyes,” a movie about…

Court Denies Injunction in Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit--Nursing CE Central v. Colibri

Court Denies Injunction in Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit–Nursing CE Central v. Colibri

This is a competitive keyword advertising lawsuit. The plaintiff has a trademark registration for the “Nursing CE Central” mark for providing continuing education for nurses. [Note: if it’s not obvious, “CE” is an abbreviation for “continuing education.” Just like we…

Armslist Defeats Lawsuits Over Illegal Gun Sales (Without Section 230's Help)--Webber v. Armslist

Armslist Defeats Lawsuits Over Illegal Gun Sales (Without Section 230’s Help)–Webber v. Armslist

Armslist publishes users’ classified ads for guns. Two estates sued Armslist for allegedly facilitating illegal gun sales that led to murders. My blog post on the district court rulings. Section 230’s availability in such situations is uncertain, but on appeal,…

Uh-Oh, the Ninth Circuit Is Messing Again With Its Roommates Ruling--Vargas v. Facebook

Uh-Oh, the Ninth Circuit Is Messing Again With Its Roommates Ruling–Vargas v. Facebook

The Roommates.com case plays a critical role in the Ninth Circuit’s Section 230 jurisprudence. The (unnecessarily confusing) majority opinion suggested several exclusions to Section 230’s immunity, including these statements: “If you don’t encourage illegal content, or design your website to…

The 9th Circuit Keeps Trying to Ruin Cybersecurity--Enigma v. Malwarebytes

The 9th Circuit Keeps Trying to Ruin Cybersecurity–Enigma v. Malwarebytes

This case involves two anti-threat software vendors, Enigma and Malwarebytes. In 2016, Malwarebytes classified Enigma’s software as “malicious,” a “threat,” and a “potentially unwanted program” (or PUP), because the programs allegedly were “scareware.” Enigma challenged Malwarebytes’ classifications in court. Initially,…

Google Isn't Liable for Scam Ads--Ynfante v. Google

Google Isn’t Liable for Scam Ads–Ynfante v. Google

Ynfante responded to a scam ad shown when he Google-searched for “ebay customer service number,” and he called a phishing farm instead of eBay. “After Mr. Ynfante divulged his account information to the scam helpline, the scammers made purchases on…

Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit Fails...Despite 236 Potentially Confused Customers--Lerner & Rowe v. Brown Engstrand

Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit Fails…Despite 236 Potentially Confused Customers–Lerner & Rowe v. Brown Engstrand

This case involves two rival personal injury law firms in Arizona, one of which engaged in competitive keyword advertising against the other. The court dismisses the lawsuit on summary judgment. The court focuses on the likelihood of consumer confusion. The…

More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads--Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff

More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff

This is another lawsuit between personal injury law firms over competitive keyword ads. The plaintiff is Nicolet Law, based in Hudson, Wisconsin with 14 offices in Wisconsin and Minnesota. The defendant is the Bye, Goff firm, based in River Falls,…