A student-run resource for reliable reports on the latest law and technology news
http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

By Ellora Israni – Edited by Filippo Raso

IMDb is challenging the constitutionality of Assembly Bill 1687 (“AB 1687”), a California law requiring IMDb to remove ages from its website upon request from paid subscribers, claiming that the law violates the First Amendment’s free speech protections.

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Facebook Blocks British Insurance Company from Basing Premiums on Posts and Likes

By Javier Careaga– Edited by Mila Owen

Admiral Insurance has created an initiative called firstcarquote, which analyzes Facebook activity of first-time car owners. The firstcarquote algorithm determines risk based on personality traits and habits that are linked to safe driving. Firstcarquote was recalled two hours before its official launch and then was launched with reduced functionality after Facebook denied authorization, stating that the initiative breaches Facebook’s platform policy.

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Airbnb challenges New York law regulating short-term rentals

By Daisy Joo – Edited by Nehaa Chaudhari

Airbnb filed a complaint in the Federal District Court of the Southern District of New York seeking to “enjoin and declare unlawful the enforcement against Airbnb” of the recent law that prohibits  the advertising of short-term rentals on Airbnb and other similar websites.  Airbnb argued that the new law violated its rights to free speech and due process, and that it was inconsistent with Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online intermediaries that host or republish speech from a range of liabilities.

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Medtronic v. Bosch post-Cuozzo: PTAB continues to have the final say on inter partes review

By Nehaa Chaudhari – Edited by Grace Truong

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the Federal Circuit”) reaffirmed its earlier order, dismissing Medtronic’s appeal against a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). The PTAB had dismissed Medtronic’s petition for inter partes review of Bosch’s patents, since Medtronic had failed to disclose all real parties in interest, as required by 35 U.S.C. §312(a)(2).

 

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

California DMV Discuss Rules on Autonomous Vehicles

DOJ Release Guidelines on CFAA Prosecutions

Illinois Supreme Court Rule in Favor of State Provisions Requiring Disclosure of Online Identities of Sex Offenders

Research Shows Concerns for Crucial Infrastructure Information Leaks

Read More...

By Mark Verstraete – Edited by Andrew Spore

Garcia v. Google, Inc.,  No. 12-57302 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2014)
Slip opinion

Photo By: RojerCC BY 2.0

On February 26, 2014, the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court decision denying Cindy Lee Garcia’s request for a preliminary injunction forcing YouTube to remove the anti-Islamic film “Innocence of Muslims.” Garcia, slip op. at 19. Writing for the majority, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski found that Garcia was entitled to a preliminary injunction because she had shown a likelihood of success on her copyright claim and that irreparable harm would likely result absent injunctive relief.

Techdirt offers a lengthy criticism of the ruling. Electronic Frontier Foundation worries that the opinion’s specious reasoning could set unfavorable copyright precedent. UCLA School of Law Professor Eugene Volokh, writing for the Washington Post, notes that the injunction applies only versions of the film containing Garcia’s performance. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 12 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Insue Kim – Edited by Elise Young

Elcommerce.com, Inc. v. SAP AG, No. 2011-1369 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 24, 2014)
Slip opinion

In re Barnes & Noble, Inc., No. 13-162 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 27, 2014)
Slip opinion

In re Apple Inc., No. 13-156 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 27, 2014)
Slip opinion

Federal CircuitThe United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the transfer of venue of Elcommerce, Inc. v. SAP AG, from the Eastern District of Texas to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In response to Elcommerce’s claim that the declaratory counterclaims could not be transferred to the Pennsylvania court without voluntary or personal jurisdiction, the court emphasized that there is “‘no requirement under § 1404(a) that a transferee court have jurisdiction over the plaintiff . . . [as long as] the transferee court ha[s] jurisdiction over the defendants in the transferred complaint.’” Elcommerce.com, slip op. at 10 (quoting In re Genentech, 566 F.3d 1338, 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2009)). As plaintiff, Elcommerce was subject to the declaratory counterclaims filed by SAP in Texas, and “jurisdiction was preserved when the entire action was transferred to Pennsylvania . . . .” Id. at 9.

The case was one of many “patent troll” cases regularly filed in the District Court of the Eastern District of Texas. Because of the treatment plaintiffs receive in the Eastern District of Texas, many defendants attempt to transfer their cases to another district. This has made procedural decisions from the Federal Circuit increasingly significant. ArsTechnica discusses why the Eastern District of Texas is such a popular venue for patent trolls. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 11 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Gizem Orbey – Edited by David Curtis

DSC_4000“Internet access feels like clean water and energy, but it is treated like a luxury, and the whole country is forced towards a giant buffet,” explained Susan Crawford, the John A. Reilly Visiting Professor in Intellectual Property at Harvard Law School, at a JOLT talk on March 4, 2014.

Professor Crawford, who is also a Co-Director of the Berkman Center and a former White House Special Assistant, spoke about the significance of Comcast’s recent bid to buy Time Warner Cable (“Time Warner”) for $45 billion. The proposed merger would consolidate a third of the nation’s cable marketplace into Comcast’s hands. Lawmakers, consumer advocates, and academics worry that the merger would create monopoly conditions, giving Comcast enormous bargaining power with edge providers and electronic, mobile and broadcast device companies. Comcast and Time Warner currently do not complete directly. Through the proposed merger, Comcast seeks access to New York City, Texas, and other markets currently dominated by Time Warner. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 11 - 2014 1 Comment READ FULL POST

By Zoe Bedell – Edited by Corey Omer

Commonwealth v. Shabazz Augustine, SJC-11482 (Sup. Jud. Ct. Suffolk Feb. 18, 2014).
Slip opinion hosted by Universal Hub

Photo By: Jeff RuaneCC BY 2.0

On February 18, 2014, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) agreed with a Superior Court ruling that the Commonwealth must seek a warrant in most cases before obtaining cell phone records that track an individual’s location. The SJC nevertheless vacated the lower court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress the records and remanded the case for a hearing on whether the Commonwealth had met the higher ‘probable cause’ standard required for the issuance of a warrant. Slip op. at 1–2, 13.

In a 5-2 decision, the SJC held that the Commonwealth obtaining this tracking information — called historical cell site location information (“CSLI”) — from a cellular service provider constitutes a search within the meaning of art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and therefore requires a search warrant supported by probable cause. The Commonwealth had previously obtained such information by applying for an order under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) of the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”), which requires only proof of reasonable suspicion. So, this case joins an earlier SJC decision, Commonwealth v. Rousseau, 465 Mass. 372 (2013), opinion hosted by Justia.com, in increasing privacy protections under the Massachusetts Constitution. Jacob Gershman of the Wall Street Journal summarizes the opinion. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 10 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Gea Kang

Icon-newsFacebook looks to provide Internet access viadrones

In the wake of last month’s WhatsApp acquisition, Facebook may be adding Titan Aerospace to its arsenal for another $60 million.  Titan, a privately held company based in New Mexico, produces unmanned “atmospheric satellites.”  These satellites are solar-powered and can stay airborne for five years without refueling.  Titan unveiled the prototypes last year.

Facebook’s interest in this area stems from its work with Internet.org, which aims to provide Internet connectivity to those who currently lack access around the world.  Facebook is reportedly looking at 11,000 Titan satellites to help bridge this digital divide.  Google has been working toward the same goal with its balloon-powered wireless network, Project Loon.

Although the Titan satellites are ultimately slated to fly above the Federal Aviation Administration’s jurisdiction, regulatory constraints on the climb up to that altitude must still be addressed. TechCrunch first released news of the potential acquisition on Monday.

Michael Jordan emerges victorious in commercial speech case

Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit sided with Michael Jordan in a dispute that could have important implications for commercial speech allowances under the First Amendment.  Michael Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. and SuperValu Inc., No.12-1992 (7th Cir. Feb. 19, 2014).  In its opinion reversing and remanding the case, the court held that grocery chain Jewel Food Stores, Inc.’s unendorsed use of Jordan’s trademark in an advertisement constituted commercial speech.  A federal district court had previously accepted Jewel’s argument that the advertisement was not commercial in nature and was thereby protected by the First Amendment.

The case centers on a one-page advertisement published in an October 2009 commemorative issue of Sports Illustrated. The advertisement congratulated Jordan for his induction into the Basketball Hall of Fame and included Jewel’s logo and motto along with Jordan’s name, number, and shoes. However, the ad did not name any specific Jewel products or depict Jordan himself.  Jordan sued, emphasizing the alleged misappropriation of his identity.  The Seventh Circuit agreed with Jordan, finding that “Jewel’s ad had an unmistakable commercial function: enhancing the Jewel-Osco brand in the minds of consumers.” Jordan, slip op. at 16.

ESPN provides details of the case and its precedential implications.

Apple wins patent for transparent wraparound phone screen

Apple won 36 patent grants last Tuesday. Of these, U.S. Patent No. 8,665,236 has generated particular interest. The patent, originally filed in September 2011, discloses a transparent wraparound screen made of flexible glass—essentially, a reversible phone with no permanent front or back. Multiple cameras and facial recognition would facilitate the user interface, and the phone would be completely touchscreen. Despite the suggestion that a double-sided screen would accommodate more icons for users’ convenience, some commentators are concerned that consumers will not welcome the lack of physical buttons, such as for volume control. Patently Apple provides further details and graphics.

Posted On Mar - 9 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST
  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
California Flag

IMDb Challenges Cali

By Ellora Israni – Edited by Filippo Raso IMDb.com, Inc. v. ...

Facebook International

Facebook Blocks Brit

By Javier Careaga – Edited by Mila Owen Many insurance companies ...

computer-typing1

Airbnb challenges Ne

By Daisy Joo – Edited by Nehaa Chaudhari Complaint to Declare ...

Unknown

Medtronic v. Bosch p

By Nehaa Chaudhari – Edited by Grace Truong Medtronic, Inc. v. Robert ...

Unknown

Flash Digest: News i

By Li Wang – Edited by Henry Thomas California DMV Discuss ...