The plaintiff in this case owns the copyright to the well-known “Success Kid” meme, a photo of a cute 11-month old boy named Sam. The defendants are former Rep. Steve King and his reelection campaign committee. Wikipedia calls King “far-right,”…
This opinion addresses the aftermath of an Internet lawyer’s nightmare. In Kauders v. Uber Techs., 486 Mass. 557 (Mass. Sup. Ct. Jan. 4, 2021), the Massachusetts Supreme Court struck down Uber’s TOS because it wasn’t properly formed. Maybe I missed…
This opinion came out in March but just showed up in my alerts. Doe claims she was sex-trafficked on Instagram. Section 230 preempts her lawsuit against Facebook: “Ninth Circuit precedent interpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C….
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. [Reminder: per Wikipedia, a tamale “is a traditional Mesoamerican dish made of masa, a dough made from…
Elon Musk “secretly” fathered twins with his subordinate Shivon Zilis. When the news came to light, it triggered a “tabloid feeding frenzy.” US Weekly published two articles on the story and posted to Instagram. Unfortunately, the photo US Weekly used…
This is a lawsuit over scammy ads from Chinese advertisers. The plaintiffs claim Facebook “affirmatively invites” scammy ads by “actively soliciting, encouraging, and assisting scammers it knows, or should know, are using its platform to defraud Facebook users with deceptive…
by guest blogger Kieran McCarthy Companies looking to stop web scraping have suffered a losing streak in the Northern District of California recently. In February, Meta lost on Partial Summary Judgment against Bright Data on its breach of contract claim….
YouTube’s TOS restricts the uploading of content depicting animal abuse, defined as “content that shows the malicious infliction of serious physical or psychological harm that causes an animal to suffer.” The TOS provides additional details about what YouTube considers impermissible…
The court summarizes some of the plaintiff’s concerns: all [] [D]efendants acted with malice against [] [P]laintiff who is a member of a protected class “LGBTQ” as a self-identified gay individual, causing [] [P]laintiff to suffer monetary damages including loss…