Lulu v. Hulu: What's All of the Hullabaloo?
June 27, 2008
While the rhyming nature of these two Web sites provided entertaining fodder for journalists and bloggers, in <i>Lulu Enterprises, Inc. v. N-F Newsite, LLC, aka Hulu, LLC, et. al</i>, the court focused its denial of Plaintiff Lulu's motion for preliminary injunction not on the rhyming nature of the domain names, but upon the Plaintiff's inability to prove imminent harm from the launch of Defendant's 'hulu.com' Web site. Rather than focusing on a likelihood of confusion analysis, the court's decision instead contains useful commentary on the effects of statements made in federal registration applications, and the likely expansion of the use of the mark, as they relate to the 'imminent harm' standard in trademark and unfair competition cases.
Redefining Prior Art Under Proposed Patent Reform Measures
June 27, 2008
This is the second installment of a two-part series on the proposed move from a patent system granting priority of patent rights based upon invention dates to a system in which priority is based primarily upon filing dates. The first installment discussed the history behind the current first-to-invent system and the basics of the proposed changes to the system. This installment explores the statutory bars under the proposed legislation and other changes affecting prior art.
Did 'Roommates.com' Nix Consumer-Generated Content?
June 26, 2008
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act essentially gives Internet service providers immunity from liability for publishing false or defamatory material as long as that material was provided by another party. In <i>Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com LLC</i>, an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed an earlier ruling that a commercial roommate-matching service may be liable for violations of the Fair Housing Act because of the manner in which the site elicits information from prospective roommates.
Online Pharmacy Ordered to Pay FTC $15.8 Million
June 26, 2008
Saying they 'dispensed deception,' a federal judge in Atlanta has ordered the founders and operators of a now-defunct online pharmacy business to pay the FTC $15.8 million for fraudulent claims associated with the drugs they peddled. In his order, issued June 4, U.S. District Judge Charles A. Pannell also found Dr. Terrill Mark Wright, a physician associated with the online pharmacies, liable for $15.4 million to compensate consumers for false advertising claims.
PROTECT Act Upheld; Questions on Protected Speech Arise
June 26, 2008
The problem of child pornography on the Internet has long bedeviled Congress. But the legislature has floundered between the First Amendment's protection of speech and the self-evident evils involved in child porn's production and consumption, leaving a trail of laws invalidated by the High Court. The most recent legislative iteration ' the PROTECT Act, upheld on May 19 by the Supreme Court in <i>United States v. Williams</i> ' raises new and intriguing questions about the relation of sexual and political speech.
A Production Lawyer's Guide to Obtaining E&O Insurance and Preventing Litigation
June 26, 2008
Errors-and-omissions insurance (also known as 'E&O' or producers liability insurance) is an inevitable part of every film and TV producer's life. It is required for the sale and distribution of virtually all film productions and television shows in North America ' and the requirement is becoming global. The goal of the article is to allow production counsel to spot the issues and to develop a sense of what is risky or not in the course of bringing a film or television production to fruition.
e-Commerce Docket Sheet
June 26, 2008
CDA Immunity Not Applicable To Allegedly Misleading Auction Safety Statements<br>Copying Web Site Page for Consumer Gripe Site Is Deemed Fair Use<br>Famous Trademark Parody on Goods Without Consumer Confusion No Infringement
Unconscionable Terms Prevent Enforceability of e-Commerce Contract Clauses
June 26, 2008
e-Commerce, like traditional commerce, relies on contracts. But unlike traditional commerce, e-commerce typically relies utterly on agreements drafted and presented by one party on a 'take-it-or-leave-it' basis. The validity of such contracts arises from the recipient's 'adherence' to the terms given. These so-called adhesion contracts are enforceable, except to the extent that a court finds a term unconscionable.
I Signed WHAT?!
June 26, 2008
The typical e-commerce 'Terms and Conditions,' the electronic equivalent of the fine-print contract that governs use of a sales Web site, creates such an unfriendly shopping environment that it makes the legendary 'No soup for you!' restaurant of the television situation comedy Seinfeld seem like the Welcome Wagon. Although I have often written about how the law affecting e-commerce firms ordinarily follows traditional law, the common e-commerce contract stands in stark contrast. Consider the following clauses from actual online agreements obtained in April and May ' and whether you have ever seen anything comparable in any real-world store, much less these Web stores' real-world affiliates.
Ensuring Security with VoIP
June 26, 2008
Among U.S. businesses, Voice over Internet Protocol ('VoIP') is growing in popularity and will continue to do so. In-Stat predicts that two-thirds of U.S. businesses will have some form of VoIP service by 2011. When deciding to use this powerful technology, organizations should look for VoIP providers that offer specific security measures within their product to ensure that the technology is used most effectively ' and virtually without any security concerns.
