LJN Newsletters

The Internet has radically altered the nature of communication in the United States. Its effects on the American political campaigns are dramatic, as demonstrated during the most recent political campaign season where it played a decisive factor in several election victories. The Internet offers candidates the opportunity to contact a million votes for about $100 when using unsolicited bulk e-mails, often called spam. Under the First Amendment, political spam is generally lawful; however its use as a fundraising and other specific types of communication may cause legal difficulties.
By sending out unsolicited bulk e-mails, candidates sent information to millions of voters with the click of a button. Some see political spam as another nuisance, no different than commercial spam or junk mail. Others find political spam to be a form of speech. In particular, they find political spam to be protected speech.

As franchise lawyers, we see hundreds of cases a year that impact our practice. Many are very important "bread and butter" cases, such as state court opinions dealing with parol evidence and integration clauses and federal cases involving trademark infringement. These are important cases that every franchise lawyer should know because they help in the day-to-day battles. Far more interesting to us, and we would imagine to most franchise attorneys, are the big cases that have happened maybe once or twice a year over the past 10 years that have made everyone wonder, "What in the world is going on?" We have selected 10 such cases that were decided in the past 10 years, made a substantial impact on franchise law, and have made most of the franchisor and franchisee legal community take a good, hard look at how to do business in the future. These are 10 cases that, at least at the time they were decided, changed the landscape for franchise attorneys and their clients.

Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.

Armstrong Business Services, Inc., et al., Appellants v. H & R Block, et al., Bus. Franchise Guide (CCH) '12,485, 96 S.W.3d 867 (Mo. App. 2002). The Armstrong case involved H&R Block franchisees who sued their franchisor for, among other things, encroaching upon the franchisees' territories through the franchisor's Internet business. H&R Block then filed a counterclaim, alleging that all of the franchisees' franchise agreements were terminable at will by Block.

Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.

Recent cases in e-commerce law and in the e-commerce industry.

Law firms use Internet technology to communicate in ways that were not possible 10 years ago.
This boon in client-to-counsel and internal firm communications has allowed lawyers to share information as never before. But, more important, the technology associated with the Internet allows law firms direct control over Net communications because they own the individual networks that allow information to be shared, a situation that brings increased liability for copyright infringement, unless firms comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The good news for practitioners is that compliance requires little investment of time or money. Similarly, e-mail protection is readily available at little or no additional cost.

Consider this tempting business scenario: Your e-commerce marketing manager has a new, and effective, method to drive traffic to the company Web site ' purchase your competitors' trademarks as keywords to match Internet users' searches to a "sponsor" listing for your company. The sweet spot of the proposal is that as a sponsor, your listing will appear before all other relevant search results. That will give your company an advantage over competitors.
So, do you tell your manager to purchase third-party trademarks as keywords? And how have the courts dealt with this situation in this country and abroad? Most important in advising e-commerce clients, though, is this consideration: How can you reduce risks associated with buying third-party trademarks as keywords?