This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In 2016, the defendant licensed the plaintiff’s Equine Boarding Forms Package, consisting of form releases for adults and minors. The license permitted the defendant to “copy, email and otherwise distribute the” forms but not post them to the web. The plaintiff is an Oregon law firm practicing equine law.
by guest blogger Kieran McCarthy The intersection of the Federal Arbitration Act and the law of online contracts has become utterly corrosive to our legal system. The problem with the FAA and online contracts, of course, is that no one is agreeing to arbitrate anything. Consumer Contracts (Tent. Many people think this is true.
If the issue lies in loopholes within the ToS, the solution seems straightforward: draft tighter contracts and perhaps incorporate a browsewrap on your platforms to catch those who don’t hold accounts. X’s breach of contract cases against CCDH for violating its ToS by scraping also didn’t fare well. In 2022, in ML Genius v.
Intellectual property rights may be established, protected, or granted to another party by contracts or agreements. Considering that the subject matter is so complex, the law regarding contracts is usually handled by lawyers who specialize in it.
sued Bright Data for trespass to chattels, breach of contract, tortious interference with a contract, violation of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200, and misappropriation. Here, the court agreed, and dismissed Twitter’s breach-of-contract claims on that basis. In November 2023, X corp. on all counts.
2K Games rejected similar infringement claims on the basis of de minimis use, implied license, and fair use. Equally importantly, the court failed to provide the jury with instructions on two other defenses—waiver and implied license. The implied license argument is particularly important here. An appeal in Alexander v.
With respect to the Jordan video, I assume the video was infringing when uploaded to Twitter, which is why a license argument wouldn’t work. Those licenses were explicitly and unambiguously laid out in YouTube’s Terms of Service, and the sublicense clearly extends to embedding the video.
This post is part of MoFos 2025 Intersection of AI and Life Sciences blog series. In this blog series, we explore how artificial intelligence is revolutionizing research, innovation, and patient care in the life sciences.
The court confirms that to ensure enforceability, consumers should (1) check the box and (2) be advised that checking the box will indicate assent to contract terms. These basic principles “apply with equal force to contracts formed online.” See blog posts on those rulings here and here.). Freedom Financial Network, LLC.
Also, ignoring copyright licenses is at least arguably copyright infringement, and your fair use claim probably won’t get you out of the lawsuit at the motion to dismiss stage. But I think this might have more to do with the way the lawyers pleaded this issue rather than the quality of the potential breach of contract claim here.
Similarly, this blog post is protected as a literary work under copyright law, but also contains personal data about us as its authors, including for example our names and where we work. For example, a vocal recording in a musical performance is likely to be protected under copyright law and constitute personal data.
It has already entered into licensing agreements with several content creators, including other news media organizations.” Instead, they point to how much they have produced or licensed with the assumption that it is all scraped by OpenAI. The claims that are alleged will face some significant headwinds.
The jury needed only 90 minutes to determine that the defendants had proven their implied license defense, ending the case. Due to the fact-specific nature of doctrines like implied licenses and fair use, it’s possible the Hayden and Orton jury verdicts are consistent with each other. Case citation : Hayden v. 2K Games, Inc. ,
In February, Meta lost on Partial Summary Judgment against Bright Data on its breach of contract claim. had its breach of contract and CFAA claims against the Center for Countering Digital Hate (“CCDH”) dismissed at the motion to dismiss stage. Here, the court muddles the various contract formation standards. No, it does not.
Reminder: courts sometimes demand that consumers click twice to form a contract. The post 1H 2021 Quick Links, Part 4 (Advertising, Contracts, & More) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. . * Lona’s Lil Eats, LLC v. DoorDash, Inc., 2021 WL 151978 (N.D. New Yorker : Dude, Where’s My Couch?
The court also created a new definition of browsewrap that further plunges online contract formation law into anarchy. * * *. If the buyers went to Walmart.com after they made the purchase, then the terms seek to amend an existing contract formed at the time of purchase. (I’ve This case involves Walmart gift cards.
Contracts are a state-law issue. And online contracts, even though they exist in the friction-less, boundary-less world of the internet, are also generally governed by state-law principles. There are relatively few state-court cases with outsized influence in the law of online contracts. By guest blogger Kieran McCarthy.
In 2022, I’ve blogged just one other 512(c) case ( Davis v. The case involves ShutterStock, a photo licensing service. (We We used ShutterStock as the blog’s image provider for several years). Only 2 visitors saw the subject image in ShutterStock’s database and neither licensed it. Pinterest ).
Any form of Intellectual Property (IP) , be it a trademark, patent, or copyright, can be licensed to third parties. Through IP licensing, IP rights holders grant third parties the exclusive right to use their IP while retaining their ownership. Understanding the IP License. Creating the IP Licensing Agreement.
Misinterpreting Licenses: Incorrectly assuming permission to use copyrighted material. Even in situations where a business owner contracts a third-party web designer to build their website, both the business and the web designer can be held liable for copyrights violated if they are used on your website.
Much digital ink has been spilled on online contract formation; much less on online contract termination. Guest Blog Post) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Based on a quick review of Facebook’s and Instagram’s Terms of Use, those agreements do not provide for a clear path for a user to terminate.
And while their terms of use provide the social media companies a license to use that user-generated content, it is their users who typically have a copyright interest in their content. Now, the primary vehicle to stop web scraping is with breach of contract claims. It’s user-generated content. In the end, it was a pyrrhic victory.
by guest blogger Kieran McCarthy Many characterize the law of copyright preemption of contracts as a circuit split. It’s not that half of federal judges have adopted one clear stance on copyright preemption of contracts and the other half have adopted another clear stance. But fair use isn’t a defense to a breach of contract claim.
Moritz College of Law The copyright – contract tension Stewart Brand famously said that information wants to be free. The flexibility of contracts makes them a prime candidate for restricting uses that copyright law leaves unprohibited. That still leaves a rather broad space for contract law to effectively limit the use of information.
But before they get there, these courts must first decide whether AA’s terms and conditions constitutes a valid and enforceable contract, and whether TPG assented to its terms. Breach of Contract 2. Tortious Interference with a Contract 3. The Points Guy (Guest Blog Post) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog.
Many of my clients have contractors or vendors or virtual assistants who assist them with writing blog posts, creating newsletters, doing social media posting and work. First, contracts. Make sure you have proper contracts. There are sites that have free licenses for a certain type of content.
Even if Google’s conduct could be interpreted as a technical violation of many websites’ notoriously overbroad terms of service, their conduct doesn’t meet the criteria for most online breach of contract disputes. Trademark, copyright, trespass to chattels, the law of online contracts—none of this stuff is novel.
Still, it seems troublesome because it ignores that some contract was formed at point of purchase, and those terms should be relevant to governing the device and possibly whether or not the service TOS is an amendment, a conflicting contract, or something else. BONUS: Additional contracts links from the past six months.
After all, many kinds of published literature, including news, blogs, books, journals, and standards — including the organizations’ own materials — are protected by copyright laws that place limits on how content can be used by others without the rightsholder’s permission. How Do Different Departments Use the Annual Copyright License?
In so doing, they reversed the district court that had previously held that cellular device users’ data allowances under their contracts with cellular service providers did not constitute “property” subject to conversion. As such, to the extent that there is a grievance here, it should be based in contract, not in property.
Because for the first time, a company with knowledge of an online agreement–acting in purported violation of that agreement by scraping–succeeded in defeating a breach of contract claim. The post Facebook Drops Anti-Scraping Lawsuit Against Bright Data (Guest Blog Post) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog.
Then he reversed course on remand and ruled in favor of LinkedIn on its breach of contract claims. On January 23rd, Judge Chen once again dropped a bombshell for the web-scraping world (and those looking to stop it) by ruling in favor of Bright Data and against Meta on its breach of contract claims at summary judgment. Bright Data Ltd.
Another 3k+ word post about the jurisprudential chaos in online contract formation law. Ticketmaster, a 9th Circuit memo opinion from 2020 that I did not blog. But ultimately, the onus is on Disney to create a contract formation process so conspicuous that a court can’t reach decisions like this. Facebook, Inc.,
In a previous blog post , I criticized the Second Circuit’s ruling as inherently self-contradictory. My previous blog post contains detailed information about the Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations [ 17 U.S.C. § If it’s still unclear, go back and read my previous blog post on Sohm for a more detailed explanation.).
Blog post coverage of that ruling here. “all his claims relate to the suspension of his account and the alleged failure to suspend the third-party user’s account, whether they are styled as breach of contract, tort, or fraud claims…All of Plaintiff’s claims seek to treat Twitter as a publisher.”
In spring 2021, hiQ Labs had its motion to dismiss denied on LinkedIn’s misappropriation, breach of contract, and trespass to chattels claims. Breach of Contract. Additionally, hiQ raised four affirmative defenses to the breach of contract claim: 1) unclean hands, 2) waiver, 3) estoppel, and 4) unconscionability. The opinion.
Also in 2018, FDN filed the original complaint, targeting both Amazon and CCA, alleging that they both breached contracts and committed copyright infringement. There wasn’t even a system for registering blog content, like this site, until June 2020. But this is where FDN introduces a new wrinkle.
Prior blog post. “Alexander testified that she had never licensed her tattoos for video games or any other medium. Defense expert James Malackowski also provided unrebutted testimony that a market for licensing tattoos in videogames does not exist and was unlikely to be developed.” ” Really? .”
However, usually, if plaintiffs could provide some evidence of notice that was consistent with how the original contract said it would update the terms, courts would give them the benefit of the doubt, at least at the early stages of litigation. In 2022, plaintiff sued defendant for breach of contract, among other things. 3d at 10861.
For one, it’s a significant case that deals with many of the issues that have arisen in some of the other cases I’ve blogged about on this site, but it’s in Delaware, not in the Northern District of California. Sometimes, when we blog these technology cases, we act as if the law in California is the law everywhere. The post Ryanair v.
” The court doesn’t address the potential licensing market for the tattoo design. 18, 2023) Prior Tattoo Copyright Blog Posts Jury Awards Damages to Tattoo Artist for Video-Game Depiction–Alexander v. Netflix appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Case Citation : Cramer v. Netflix, Inc.
Breach of Contract As is common with scraping cases in 2023, just because the scraper prevails on the CFAA claim doesn’t mean the scraper is going to prevail. Doe (Guest Blog Post) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Also, this is dicta. Defendant created an account to access Chegg’s data.
As I blogged last time: The plaintiff can replead the contract breach claim for failure-to-pay, but the case has lost all of its ideological implications about must-carry obligations and instead has devolved into a routine collections case (that will likely fail anyways). The suit was easily rejected by the court. Alphabet Inc.
Blog post on the prior ruling here.). The “Platform Policy” appears to grant a broad license to users of the API. The current terms make clear that platform API users are not automatically granted a license and must independently secure rights in any content they embed. For example. Case citation : McGucken v. 21, 2022).
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content