A student-run resource for reliable reports on the latest law and technology news

Archive for the ‘Jurisdiction’ Category

Google to Supreme Court: Snagging Data from Unsecured Wi-Fi is Perfectly Legal
By Michael Shammas – Edited by Mary Schnoor

Google has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the Supreme Court to label its Street View cars’ collection of unencrypted Wi-Fi traffic legal, appealing the Ninth Circuit’s decision that Google may have violated the federal Wiretap Act. Google believes unencrypted Wi-Fi traffic should be classed as “radio communications” accessible to the public.

Read More...

Posted On Apr - 14 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Flash Digest: News In Brief
By Emma Winer

Third Circuit Vacates Hacker Conviction for Improper Venue

French Unions and Employers Agree to Curb After-Hours Work Email

Limited Sale of Google Glass Slated For April 15

Read More...

Posted On Apr - 13 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Flash Digest: News In Brief
By Corey Omer

Apple v. Samsung — Round 2

Block v. eBay — Misinterpreting Terms of Service

GrubHub Goes Public

Tweet Away, Turkey

Read More...

Posted On Apr - 7 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Jury Orders MP3tunes to Pay $41 Million to EMI Following 2013 Court Order Vacating Grant of Summary Judgment
By Michelle Goldring – Edited by Sheri Pan

EMI was awarded $41 million last week, following a jury trial that found the chief executive of M3Ptunes guilty of copyright infringement. The verdict followed a 2013 order issued by the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York that altered several previous rulings in an earlier order following Viacom International, Inc. v. YouTube, Inc., 676 F.3d 19 (2d. Cir. 2012).

Read More...

Posted On Apr - 5 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Distinguishing “Intellectual Property” from Trade Secrets in the Federal Circuit
By Paul Klein – Edited by Geng Chen

The Federal Circuit reversed and vacated a district court ruling holding Hauge in contempt of a court order enforcing a settlement agreement, which required Hauge to assign his former employer “all other intellectual property and other rights relating to pressure exchanger technology . . . .” The Federal Circuit found that Hauge had not violated the order by manufacturing and selling a similar exchanger, even if he used a proprietary manufacturing process in a manner that potentially violated patent or trade secret laws.

Read More...

Posted On Apr - 3 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST
  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • GooglePlay
Icon-news

Federal Circuit Flas

By Steven Wilfong Multimedia car system patents ruled as unenforceable based ...

Icon-news

Flash Digest: News i

By Marcela Martinez Converse attempts to protect iconic Chuck Taylor All ...

silkroad_fbi_110813

Silk Road Founder Lo

By Travis West — Edited by Mengyi Wang Order, United States ...

free-speech

Trademark Infringeme

By Yunnan Jiang – Edited by Paulius Jurcys Brief for the ...

Twitter.png?t=20130219104123

Twitter goes to cour

By Jens Frankenreiter – Edited by Michael Shammas Twitter, Inc. vs. ...