Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Spyware Remains Elusive
Even 007 wasn't shadowed this much. These days, spyware operations are the most popular cybermarketing tool around ' and the most unpopular. Software designers and advertisers have joined forces to run a clandestine operation on millions of consumers across the country. The tracking, data mining, and browser hijacking files that these companies surreptitiously plant on a person's computer extract personal information for advertising purposes, often without the user's knowledge or consent, and they have become a growing concern to companies, individual consumers, and the government. Most importantly, as frustration and fear of spyware grow and cause more people to turn away from the Internet, e-commerce is threatened. How did we get to this point, and what are the chances of successful regulation?
So Simple, So Hated
The basic business model is clear enough. Collect information about a user's Web browsing, and report the information to a server that will send pop-up ads to the user's computer. Because this process adds to pop-up misery and slows the user's Internet connection, the most successful spyware programs have to stick to the hard drive like a cockleburr. Spyware often sneaks into the computer without notice, because that's the only way it can get in, and then it often hides in many places, hoping to regenerate after a partially successful effort to uninstall it. A severely infected computer may be so difficult to cleanse that it is easier to reformat the drive and start over.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.