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
The emergence of social networking sites has presented new difficulties for the government in defending the owners’ copyrights. Every day, there are several ways that someone’s copyright is violated on social networking sites.
The court’s ruling raises interesting, but troubling, questions about any government actor’s ability to enable reader comments on socialmedia. The actual details are opaque to all government actors and out of their control. The Manually Deleted Comment. Implications. This is only a district court opinion.
Today, I’m covering AB 2408, a performative “protect kids online” bill that kick kids off socialmedia entirely and ruin the Internet for adults too. This will be a major shock to millions of Californians who value and enjoy socialmedia. Monday, I covered AB 2273, the Age-Appropriate Design Code.
For the better part of two years, a steady parade of government ministers and MPs insisted that user content regulation was out of the bill even as a plain reading made it clear that it was in. It allows the CRTC to prescribe user-uploaded programs on a socialmedia service in multiple different situations. Subsection 4.1(2)
This is a case focusing on ownership of socialmedia accounts. See “ SocialMedia Ownership Disputes Part II: Bridal Wear Company Takes Back Control of Instagram Account from Ex-Employee ” and “ Another Confused Entry in the SocialMedia Account Ownership Jurisprudence–JLM v. (See The court also found “Ms.
Any pirate site operating at scale risks negative attention from the authorities and once governments get involved, any movement in pressure is likely to be in an upwards direction. Our mainland China social accounts will be logged out within seven days. This is not just a simple farewell, but also a microcosm of an era.
There are two critically important cases over “socialmedia addiction” pending in California state court and as an MDL in the federal Northern District of California. Today’s post focuses on the socialmedia defendants’ efforts to dismiss the parallel lawsuits by the school districts.
Based on the Complaint’s allegations, it appears the named Defendants – a private socialmedia company and its legal department – are not subject to liability under Section 1983. 2020) (internet media websites are not government actors under the First Amendment)… Prior blog posts on Perez’s lawsuit ( 1 , 2 ).
A recent California District Court ruling affirmed that Perfect 10’s ruling applied to the embedding of images from socialmedia onto third party websites. the user name and image, user caption, number of likes, and branding of the socialmedia platform). Amazon.com, Inc., What is Embedding? The post Server Test Showdown?
1: Sony Music Ends Copyright Fight with Gymshark Over SocialMedia Posts. First off today, Blake Brittain at Reuters reports that Sony Music and UK fitness apparel brand Gymshark have settled their lawsuit over Gymshark’s alleged use of Sony’s music in socialmedia posts. However, the U.S.
Note also how governments will weaponize mandatory TOS disclosures, i.e., if you didn’t tell the public them, then they wouldn’t have acted as promises to consumers, but since we compelled you to tell the public, we can now treat them as enforceable promises. No, and it’s not even close. Six4Three v. . * Kallinen v.
Thus, it would compel those platforms to disseminate anything and everything with a “viewpoint,” including pro-Nazi speech, medical misinformation, terrorist propaganda, and foreign government disinformation. This kind of argumentation is how a government actor disingenuously repackages censorship. Amicus Briefs. Text of HB 20.
The last time we blogged this case , the district court had sided with JLM, initially restricting Gutman’s use of the socialmedia accounts and then awarding control over the accounts to JLM. What does a 200+ year old fox have to say about who owns socialmedia accounts?). ” (Cite to Pierson v.
That decision could have significant implications for this case as well as all other First Amendment challenges of states’ efforts to censor socialmedia.] The analogy is an imperfect one—socialmedia operators are arguably less involved in the curation of their websites’ content than these traditional examples.
The trouble began when Albany radio station WGNA asked its socialmedia followers to vote for the regions best fried chicken and tagged a few contenders, including Chicken Joes, which retweeted the stations original post. Chicken Joes delivers a piping hot reality check on the risks of playing copyright roulette. Sydney Nicole LLC v.
In this blog, we will understand how socialmedia is becoming the new territory for cybersquatting and shed light on the steps to reduce the issue on different socialmedia platforms. How Cybersquatters Tarnish a Brand on SocialMedia. While Tony La Russa (the former manager of the St.
Government’s Patent and Trademark Office to help tackle live-streaming piracy. Together with the NBA and UFC, the football league asked the government to make DMCA takedown requests more effective. This includes socialmedia platforms, where pirate streams are often openly advertised.
The opinion holds that the key parts of Florida’s socialmedia censorship law (SB 7072) likely violate the First Amendment and should remain enjoined. ” The opinion also highlights the madness of the Fifth Circuit allowing the Texas socialmedia censorship law to take effect via a 1-line order. “S.B.
PETA objects to these experiments and commented on TAMU’s socialmedia pages. TAMU claims that PETA’s comments were “spam” that violated TAMU’s socialmedia policy. Vigorous government-performed content moderation is a euphemism for “perpetual lawsuit-making machine.”
Among other problems, the law dictates how “socialmedia platforms” can make their editorial decisions. Fortunately, a Florida federal judge blocked Florida’s socialmedia censorship law as unconstitutional. This is not unique to socialmedia.
Earlier this year, the Texas legislature enacted HB 20 , a blatant attempt to censor socialmedia service. The opinion emphatically slices through the FUD that’s been generated by pro-censorial forces questioning whether socialmedia services exercise editorial discretion. The Opinion. ” [cite to USTA v.
This recent decision from the Supreme Court case grapples with the issue of when a public official’s socialmedia activity constitutes state action for purposes of a First Amendment claim under 42 U.S.C. I’ve been following the case as part of my work on internet and media law issues. by Dennis Crouch Lindke v.
Plaintiffs CAN’T WAIT to sue Internet services using the Texas socialmedia censorship law. Nevertheless, the plaintiffs argued that the law “evidences a strong public policy to protect Texans from wrongful censorship on socialmedia platforms.” But surprise! I hope it doesn’t.
The court says: The Court finds that the statements by federal lawmakers Plaintiffs point to are insufficient to plead that the government “commanded a particular result in, or otherwise participated in, [Plaintiffs’] specific case.” Government Nexus. This argument is foreclosed by Prager U. Compulsion. cite to Daniels v.
The government released its long-promised draft policy direction on Bill C-11 to the CRTC yesterday. The policy direction is open for public comment until July 25, 2023, after which the government will release a final version that gives the CRTC guidance on its expectations for how the bill will be interpreted.
With Bill C-11 in the final stretch – Senate approval could come this week – the government finally provided a more detailed explanation for rejecting the Senate’s user content regulation fix. It is sad that as the bill nears passage, the government doesn’t seem to understand or misleads on the impact of its own legislation.
Regardless of your views of either Levant or Guilbeault, the principle that government ministers should not block access to their feeds given the implications for freedom of expression is an important one. Levant says that the government wanted him to sign a confidentiality clause in order to keep the settlement secret.
Introduction What separates long-established print and electronic media from socialmedia is that it comes along with a bunch of techniques for its usage. These are tools that shaped socialmedia to be more significant than the long-established medias. How can Influencers protect their IP?
government passed the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2020 (CASE Act). This includes works originally uploaded to socialmedia. First off today, a release by the U.S. Copyright Office announces that the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) has launched its new website, ccb.gov.
Despite repeated assurances from the government that “users are out, platforms are in”, the reality is that the bill kept the door open to regulating such content. ii) is required to be registered with the Commission but does not provide a socialmedia service. It makes it very clear that socialmedia users are not included.
The “Informed Consent Action Network,” and its founder Del Bigtree , ran afoul of the socialmedia services’ COVID misinformation policies. ICAN claimed that the socialmedia services took these actions due to government pressure and jawboning, especially pointing the finger at Rep.
Barbera filed the lawsuit, alleging that Cyrus posted a photo he took on her various socialmedia presences. This comes at a time when the Russian government has given its approval for the infringement of various foreign copyrights, likely making it more difficult to target the sites.
The Connecticut attorney general's office has reached a settlement with EnergyBillCruncher.com to resolve claims that it ran deceptive socialmedia ads falsely claiming that the "government will cover the cost" of solar panel installation and improperly displaying the state seal.
Though many websites have attempted to prohibit AI data scraping of their content through their terms of use, a federal court clarified this year that the extent to which public data may be scraped from socialmedia platforms should be governed by federal copyright law. By: ArentFox Schiff
They go as far as to call for people to change their mindset about socialmedia before making the jump. The basic idea behind Mastodon is to create a decentralized social networking platform that no one entity control. Some Mastodon Basics. Copyright Office site and one can register an agent easily.
The bill regulates “socialmedia platforms,” defined as an “electronic medium” that allows “users to create, share, and view user?generated As they realize the bill’s implications, I’m hoping Minnesota parents will tell their Senators to scrap this effort. What The Bill Says. generated content.”
Indeed, for all the talk that user generated content is out, the truth is that everything from podcasts to TikTok videos fit neatly into the new exception that gives the CRTC the power to regulate such content as a “program” To be fair, the government has tried to assuage some concerns. was restored, the government has added 4.1
Bill C-11 may have receded into the background of CRTC consultations and government policy directions, but Canadians concerned with user content, video game and algorithmic regulation would do well to pay attention. The group has posted its submission to the government’s consultation on the draft policy direction to the CRTC on Bill C-11.
Other Posts Curing the Rare: Government Issues Tender to Acquire 17 Patented Rare Disease Medicines The threshold for procuring 127 medicines, including drugs for rare diseases, was raised by the Ministry of Finance in its August 9 circular. Government invites comments on the draft Commercial Courts (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
You can’t seem to turn on the TV, listen to the radio, or open a newspaper these days without hearing about the merits and potential risks of AI—and the federal government is paying attention. Here are some recent examples: By: Morrison & Foerster LLP - SocialMedia
For those new to the bill, the government has called it “fundamentally flawed” since it contemplates measures that raise privacy concerns through mandated age verification technologies, website blocking, and extends far beyond pornography sites to include search and socialmedia.
In doing so, it eviscerates the claim that there is a tangible connection between the requirement to pay for the value of news articles on socialmedia and search platforms (called digital news intermediaries or DNI’s in the bill). Millions of Canadians choose to access media through search and socialmedia.
At yesterday’s lengthy four-hour hearing , Conservative MP Garnett Genuis confirmed the filibuster, stating that the party wants the government to release a report involving the prison transfer of Paul Bernardo before it is willing to conduct the study on the bill. The exchange, which came at the very end of the hearing: Ms.
Her latest trash lawsuit claimed that socialmedia, the government, and Procter & Gamble were all doing the RICO against her. With respect to the socialmedia services’ status as publishers, the court says: the plaintiff’s RICO claims depend on Twitter and Facebook’s acting as publishers.
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