Print-on-Demand Services Face More Legal Woes–Canvasfish v. Pixels

In the ongoing legal battles over print-on-demand services, RedBubble and (more recently) Printify have sometimes achieved favorable results by disaggregating all of the functions and acting solely as a marketing agent for the disaggregated vendors. These defense-favorable outcomes may work…

Courts Still Have No Clue How to Determine Who Owns Social Media Accounts--JLM v. Gutman

Courts Still Have No Clue How to Determine Who Owns Social Media Accounts–JLM v. Gutman

This is the latest entry in a long-running legal battle between Hayley Paige Gutman, a bridalwear designer, and JLM Couture, her one-time employer. Gutman created a Pinterest account in 2011 and an Instagram account in 2012, shortly after she began…

2023 Quick Links: IP, Keyword Ads

* For over a decade, I’ve implored people to stop using the term “Soft IP.” Amanda Levendowski now provides another reason: the term has problematic gender implications. * After II Movie, LLC v. Grande Communications Networks, LLC, 2023 WL 1422808…

Domain Name Sniping Covered by Section 230--Scott Rigsby v. GoDaddy

Domain Name Sniping Covered by Section 230–Scott Rigsby v. GoDaddy

It’s refreshing to see a “normal” Section 230 opinion from the Ninth Circuit. They have gotten rarer, and the Gonzalez opinion may make them extinct. Scott Rigsby is the first double-leg amputee to complete an Iron Man Triathlon. He registered…

Section 230 Applies to NY Publicity Rights Claim--Ratermann v. Pierre Fabre

Section 230 Applies to NY Publicity Rights Claim–Ratermann v. Pierre Fabre

Patty Ratermann is a model. She signed a license with QuickFrame to use her likeness only on Instagram. Somehow (the court skips over exactly how), Pierre Fabre used her likeness to promote its Avène skincare products on its website, on…

Got a Selfie With a Celebrity? Think Twice Before Using It In Ads--50 Cent v. Kogan

Got a Selfie With a Celebrity? Think Twice Before Using It In Ads–50 Cent v. Kogan

This is yet another blog post about 50 Cent a/k/a Curtis Jackson. This time, he “happened to be in the proximity” of the defendant’s cosmetic surgery clinic. Doing what, exactly? The opinion doesn’t say. While he was fortuitously in the…

Another Tough People Search Ruling--Spindler v. Seamless

Another Tough People Search Ruling–Spindler v. Seamless

Seamless offers a customer lead tool that displays the prospect’s personal information behind a subscription paywall with try-before-you-buy options. The plaintiff sued Seamless for violations of California’s publicity rights statute and related claims. The court denies Seamless’ motion to dismiss….

Facebook's Website Isn't Governed by the ADA--Lloyd v. Facebook

Facebook’s Website Isn’t Governed by the ADA–Lloyd v. Facebook

This is a standard kitchen-sink pro se lawsuit against Facebook, but it touches a couple of key blog themes that makes it worth covering. Americans With Disabilities Act Lloyd claims that the Facebook website violates the ADA Title III. Citing…

Another Tough Ruling for People Search Databases--Camacho v. Control Group Media

Another Tough Ruling for People Search Databases–Camacho v. Control Group Media

This is another people search case with another rough outcome for defendants. If the defendants in these cases don’t get relief on appeal, I don’t know how the people search and yearbook industries are going to survive. [Note: this opinion…

Publicity Rights Claim Isn't Preempted by Section 230--Albert v. Tinder

Publicity Rights Claim Isn’t Preempted by Section 230–Albert v. Tinder

This is a pro se lawsuit against Match and Tinder for fake dating profiles in the plaintiff’s name. I’m going to focus on the publicity rights claim piece of the lawsuit. Match invoked Section 230. The court says that Match…