Houston plaintiffs' lawyer W. Mark Lanier has been on an eBay binge lately, buying industrial manuals, magazine advertisements, ashtrays, floor tiles, roof shingles, a sealed pack of Kent cigarettes from the 1950s, fire-protection cloth and even spray-on artificial snow for making a humdrum Christmas tree more festive.
U.S. states lost $2.8 billion last year in uncollected Internet sales taxes, much lower than previous estimates, according to a study released by the Direct Marketing Association (DMA).
This column will tell you everything you need to know to do business online and use computers in your business. An impossibility? You're right. But humor me as I cram in as much as I can.
The advertiser behind those pesky pop-up ads that appear while visiting the NYTimes.com and other major news sites has settled a dispute over the unauthorized and parasitic practice.
The wild wild Web is getting tamed. Cyber-squatters no longer freely roam its highways looking for easy marks. And trademark owners who once went after anyone who crossed their path are now choosing their battles much more carefully.
With the ever-increasing frequency of business being conducted over the Internet, the events giving rise to the potential extraterritorial application of law also have increased, drawing attention to an area of law that is anything but clearly delineated. The increased likelihood of law being applied extraterritorially means that businesses should now seriously consider where their Internet business is directed, who it is likely to be reaching and be prepared with at least some minimal knowledge regarding the laws of such jurisdictions.
Whenever you have buyers and sellers, you will inevitably have disputes, and the online world is no different. What the online world lacks but needs is an inexpensive, quick, efficient and impartial method of dispute resolution. What we have now is a patchwork system for dealing with these issues and I'm not optimistic that major improvements are coming anytime soon.
Even if a Web site is both commercial and interactive, a court cannot exercise jurisdiction over its operator unless there is also proof that the company has 'purposefully availed' itself of doing business in that state, a federal appeals court has ruled.
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.
Until recently, state medical malpractice claims against HMOs were almost universally subject to federal preemption in light of the Supreme Court's expansive interpretation of the preemption provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 [ERISA], 29 USC ' 1144[a], which states in sweeping language that ERISA supersedes 'any and all State laws [that] ... relate' to benefits plans governed by ERISA. The effects of such preemption include federal subject matter jurisdiction and avoidance of state tort law and tort law damages.
