Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Posts tagged as:
Andrew Moshirnia at Citizen Media Law sounds the alarm about a provision of the proposed Investor Protection Act of 2009 that could punch an exception in Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act, which now generally protects ISPs from liability for actions of third-party users. An investment-fraud exception could serve (he warns) as an entering wedge for other groups to pursue similar exceptions for other types of online content.
{ 0 comments }
Paul Levy, Consumer Law and Policy:
The Freehold School Board has subpoenaed New Jersey Online to identify several citizens who chimed in to discuss stories published in the Newark Star Ledger and New Jersey Online about several high administrators who got fake degrees from an online diploma mill, and hence received higher pay. After New Jersey Online notified its subscribers of the subpoena, the ACLU of New Jersey and Freehold attorney Stuart J. Moskovitz stepped in to represent various anonymous posters, and NJ.com has refused to furnish identifying information about the posters.
Howell representative William Bruno on the school board said he was in favor of the Aug. 31 subpoena.
“If they have nothing to hide, what’s the problem?” Bruno said.
{ 4 comments }
Ben Sheffner at Copyrights & Campaigns, Michael Krauss at Point of Law and Karen Sloan at the NLJ have details on a pro se suit filed by University of Miami lawprof Donald Marvin Jones.
{ 13 comments }
Salvatore (”Toto”) Cuffaro, a senator from Sicily, doesn’t seem to take well to criticism. [BoingBoing]
{ 0 comments }
Above the Law and Ann Althouse cover the end of a much-watched lawsuit filed by Yale students over nasty personal comments on a well-known message board.
Via David Post at Volokh, a nastygram sent by the American Federation of Teachers to the critical site AFTExposed.com. More: Ron Coleman, Likelihood of Confusion.
{ 6 comments }
{ 2 comments }
A purveyor of face-lifts unsuccessfully sued a consumer website that took a critical view of its offerings, and also had its “staffers post glowing reviews, comments and testimonials that appeared to come from clients”. Why is this combination of behaviors so unsurprising? [AP/Seattle Post-Intelligencer via BoingBoing]
{ 3 comments }
Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press have submitted an amicus brief in the case, urging the New Hampshire Supreme Court to uphold the website’s position on First Amendment grounds. The popular site Mortgage Lender Implode-O-Meter had published a New Hampshire Banking Department document containing information about a private company; that company proceeded to sue the site demanding that the document be taken down, and also demanded discovery of how the document had come into the site’s possession. Earlier here.
Heads are still shaking over what would appear to be a non-satirical proposal from Judge Richard Posner:
…Expanding copyright law to bar online access to copyrighted materials without the copyright holder’s consent, or to bar linking to or paraphrasing copyrighted materials without the copyright holder’s consent, might be necessary to keep free riding on content financed by online newspapers from so impairing the incentive to create costly news-gathering operations that news services like Reuters and the Associated Press would become the only professional, nongovernmental sources of news and opinion.
More: Jeff Jarvis notices other dubious ideas on enforceable “exclusivity” floating about. And more thoughts from Carolyn Elefant at Legal Blog Watch and David Post @ Volokh.
{ 3 comments }
Even linking to one of them can get you A$11,000 a day in fines [BoingBoing]
{ 1 comment }
I think the more correct word would be safer with an r. [Electronic Frontier Foundation via BoingBoing]
{ 1 comment }
Point of Law Volokh