Internet & Computer Law Archives - Page 13 of 34

Law Firm Sues Over Unauthorized Use of Web Site

Law.com: “Highlights of a Palm Beach Gardens law firm’s Web site were bizarrely copied by someone posing as a British law firm while using the same text, design, logo and even photographs of the Florida attorneys. Gordon & Doner, a personal injury firm, sued GoDaddy.com, the Web host for the copied site, and the unknown copier as John Doe after an attorney at the firm did a Google search for his own name and stumbled on maslinassociates.com, purportedly the site of a firm in Manchester, England. Names were changed on the copy, and minor tweaks were inserted in the text to take out a home page reference to West Palm Beach and change dollars to pounds. But everything — from a list of Gordon & Doner’s courtroom victories to photos of staffers participating in a charity run — were copies of the Gordon & Doner site fortheinjured.com.”

4th Circuit Reaffirms Its Position that the Communications Decency Act Provides Immunity from the Burden of Defending a Lawsuit

The Digital Media Lawyer Blog: “The dominant understanding among U.S. Circuit Courts is that the Communications Decency Act is an immunity statute that protects an ISP from any kind of civil suit for publishing information from a third party. Among the Circuits that have adopted this position are the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 10th. There have been some partial dissenters from this view, including the 7th and the 9th Circuits. . . . In a recent decision, the 4th Circuit has reaffirmed its position that the CDA provides ISPs with immunity from suit for information created and developed by third parties. S ee Nemet Chevrolet v. Consumeraffairs.com, 4th Cir., No. 08-2097 (Dec., 29. 2009).”

How to Authenticate Web Pages as Evidence

Law.com: “Plaintiff sues your client, claiming that his injuries have significantly affected his lifestyle. He is unable to work, travel or bowl. Not surprisingly, his spouse alleges loss of consortium. On the eve of trial, you discover pictures and other details on a social networking website about plaintiff’s recent trip to the International Bowling Museum & Hall of Fame, including a picture of plaintiff proudly holding a fluorescent orange bowling ball and a four-foot tall gilded trophy dated four days earlier. As you approach the witness with printouts of the web pages, you are stopped in your tracks: “Objection, lack of foundation.”

If proper steps are not taken to admit the evidence, the value of this information may be lost.

Website Lauding Defendant’s “Worldwide Expertise” and Facilitating One-Way Contact to the Defendant Too Passive to Confer Jurisdiction

E-Commerce Law: “In Jensen v. Modern Aero, Inc., 2010 WL 88229 (Minn. App. Jan. 12, 2010), the Court of Appeals of Minnesota held that a defendant’s website, which lauded defendant’s ‘worldwide; expertise,’ listed a toll-free telephone number for defendant, and provided an electronic form for customers to contact the defendant, was insufficient to confer general personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the dismissal of negligence claims brought by the estate of a pilot who died in the crash of his small private airplane. In rejecting Jensen’s argument in favor of general jursidiction, the Court applied the reasoning articulated in Lakin v. Prudential Sec., Inc., 348 F.3d 704, 709 (8th Cir. 2003) in which the ‘critical question’ is whether ‘a defendant’s activity in the forum state is continuous and systematic’.”

May a Court Enter an Injunction Requiring an ISP to Take Down an Allegedly Defamatory Third Party Post?

The Digital Media Lawyer Blog: “Communications Decency Act update: A New Jersey Superior Court judge recently evoked controversy among First Amendment and media law experts by ordering GoDaddy, Domains by Proxy, ASP.net and Verisign to ‘shut down and disable’ three websites which published allegedly defamatory posts. See Apex Technology Group, Inc. v. Doe, N.J. Superior Ct., Law Division, Middlesex County, No. MID-L-7878-09, Order (Dec. 23, 2009). The preliminary injunction order was issued based on the plaintiffs’ claim that it had been defamed by postings that appeared on the sites www.endh1b.com, www.itgrunt.com, and www.guestworkerfraud.com. The order also directed the three websites to take down the posts, as well.”