By IT-Lex Intern Shannon Allen (LinkedIn)

Our favorite tech giants continue to battle each other in the courtroom.  The District Court for Northern California issued an order on May 9th in response to a Motion to Compel where Apple sued Samsung and subpoenaed third party, Google, for e-discovery.  During the e-discovery meet and confer between Apple and Google, search terms and custodians were not agreed upon or even discussed.  So, Google produced e-discovery.  During a subsequent meet and confer, Apple requested Google provide search terms and custodians used in producing the e-discovery.  Apple wanted to know “how Google created the universe from which it produced documents.” » Read the rest of this entry «

It’s been a couple of months since last we checked in with Kim Dotcom and the FBI’s attempt to bring him to the U.S. to face charges of criminal copyright violation. As you may recall, a New Zealand court decided on March 1st that the U.S. didn’t have to disclose all its evidence supporting extradition, instead finding that a summary would suffice. This didn’t sit well with Team Dotcom, who earlier this month “launched an aggressive attack against the U.S. government’s attempt to prosecute the 39-year-old German-born, New Zealand-residing Internet entrepreneur.” This ugly case keeps getting uglier. » Read the rest of this entry «

By IT-Lex Intern Nicole Sellers (LinkedIn)

In an continuing battle regarding the use of smartphones to hail cabs in NYC, a judge recently lifted a temporary ban on the e-hail program, giving it a green light, and moving it into test mode gear for the next year. The program seeks to test whether or not it is efficient and feasible for yellow cabs to answer e-hails from customers as opposed to plain old fashioned hails from the street corner. The program was all set to go after the ruling opened the door, but that door was promptly closed again by an appeal made by the livery and black car companies.  A decision on the appeal is now expected on May 20. » Read the rest of this entry «

Popehat last week reported about the saga of Scott Bloch. Mr. Bloch served as a United States Special Counsel during the Bush Administration, and was a senior figure at the Department of Justice. He pleaded guilty to, and is currently awaiting sentencing for, approving a “seven-layer wipe” on federal computers while at the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. That’s right, we’re talking Spoliation! And as if that wasn’t enough, Bloch is also contacting bloggers to have them remove all mentions of his case. Full details after the break… » Read the rest of this entry «

By IT-Lex Intern Joey Chindamo (LinkedIn)

When it comes to copyright infringement lawsuits, Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. is known—like many of the major studios—for being an aggressive plaintiff. Typically, others infringe Warner Bros.’ copyrights and Warner Bros. sues them. But now, the tables have turned. Two plaintiffs are accusing the media company of infringing their copyrights and trademarks in the Scribblenauts series of video games, and now, it is lawsuit o’clock. And what intellectual property do the plaintiffs assert Warner Bros. infringed? Internet Cat memes, of course!

» Read the rest of this entry «

By IT-Lex Intern Nicole Sellers (LinkedIn)

We have blogged about Craigslist copyright issues before, and recent developments indicate that this saga will continue for a while yet. To bring you up to speed: Craigslist suing a few rival websites – including Padmapper and 3taps – which allegedly “borrow” data from Craigslist and layer it with additional content. Craigslist argue that this practice is copyright infringement and a violation of its terms of service. The central issue at the most recent hearing was whether Craigslist can “own” the content published and created by users.  If it can, then it has a valid cause of action, if it cannot, then it has no basis to file a copyright infringement claim. The defendants made the latter argument, and filed a motion to dismiss.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Buying concert tickets online can be a true nightmare. This excellent Buzzfeed article explains why, if you’re not part of an artist fanclub, or an American Express cardholder, or the artist’s cousin, you’re going to have a hard time getting into the big show at your local arena. As point 5 on that article suggests, you’re fighting with so-called scalper bots – “programs designed to flood a particular on-sale with requests for tickets in order to increase the odds of scoring tickets and maximize the number of tickets that can be purchased at once.” Well, to that end, 21 people just found themselves on the receiving end of a lawsuit from Ticketmaster, for allegedly operating bots networks.

» Read the rest of this entry «

By IT-Lex Intern Joey Chindamo (LinkedIn)

It began like the classic Boy-Meets-Girl story—Dentist meets patient. Dentist treats patient. Dentist sues patient when patient complains about dentist via online review websites? Huh?

Today’s case is yet another example of a lawsuit prompted by negative Yelp reviews. We talked about the online directory service earlier this year when courts sided with Yelp when reviewed businesses complained, and again when the Virginia Supreme Court overturned an injunction that sought to erase a negative review. In all the cases we examined then, the law was consistent—like it or not, Yelp reviews were there to stay.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Thanks to the Manti Te’o story, the concept of “catfishing” is probably familiar to most of our readers. If not, here’s the Urban Dictionary definition:

The phenomenon of internet predators that fabricate online identities and entire social circles to trick people into emotional/romantic relationships (over a long period of time).

Possible motivations: revenge, loneliness, curiosity, boredom

The term catfishing was inspired by the 2010 documentary “Catfish.”

Last month, a court in Indiana heard about a case that involved students at Ball State University, and a whole lot of cruelty. Read more after the break.

» Read the rest of this entry «

By IT-Lex Intern Joey Chindamo (LinkedIn)

We recently talked about typosquatting, where someone buys a domain name that is almost identical to that of another popular website, but today, we discuss an Indiana case dealing with traditional cybersquatting. The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, or ACPA, created a cause of action in 1999 against those who register domain names that are identical to, confusingly similar to, or dilutive of, a trademark. Cybersquatters typically have no intention to create websites related to the marks they infringe—instead, they seek to sell the domain names back to the owners of the trademark at substantial profit.

» Read the rest of this entry «