SEATTLE — In a May 11 trademark infringement complaint filed in Washington federal court, Amazon.com Inc. sued a group of John Doe defendants that it claims are responsible for text message schemes that fraudulently use the online retailer’s trademarks to entice recipients to visit the Does’ webpages for the purpose of creating web traffic that can be sold to advertisers.
PHILADELPHIA — A group of Facebook users who champion the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to combat COVID-19 are bound by the forum-selection clause within Facebook Inc.’s terms of service (TOS), a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled May 3, granting the social network’s motion to transfer their suit alleging constitutional and antitrust violations to California federal court.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling regarding a Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn., (Metro) former employee’s alleged free speech rights for a Facebook post concerning the 2016 presidential election that contained a racial slur does not require Supreme Court review as the appellate panel properly “held that the offensive nature of speech is relevant” when balancing the factors outlined in Pickering v. Bd. of Educ. of Twp. High Sch. Dist., Metro argues in its May 7 brief opposing the former employee’s petition for a writ of certiorari.
LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge in an April 26 minute order declined a joint request to continue discovery and other deadlines filed by the parties in a software company’s lawsuit against a health care provider for alleged violations of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other claims, writing that the fact that settlement talks are pending among the parties is “insufficient” to continue preexisting deadlines.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an April 27 notice of supplemental authority in District of Columbia federal court, Facebook Inc. argues that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in AMG Capital Management LLC v. FTC supports its motion to dismiss an antitrust lawsuit filed against it by the Federal Trade Commission, because it confirms that the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act) does not give the commission authority to maintain the present suit.
NEW YORK — Amazon.com Inc. was hit with a copyright infringement lawsuit in New York federal court on April 28 by a California woman who claims that the online retailer sold goods bearing a design that is almost identical to her “Whatever Forever” design that she has featured on various items for years.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In oral arguments held April 28 before the U.S. Supreme Court, a school district and a student who was disciplined for a social media post debated whether the substantial disruption standard established in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District permits a school to discipline students for off-campus behavior without violating their rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
SAN JOSE, Calif. — In a lawsuit over YouTube LLC’s refusal to let a songwriter use a copyright infringement tool, the video platform operator on April 21 filed a brief objecting to the plaintiff’s discovery requests that it says seek vast amounts of irrelevant information about millions of other users’ acts of infringement that are not germane to the claims in the present case.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — With oral arguments less than two weeks away, a school district filed its reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on April 16, arguing that the substantial disruption standard established in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District to guide schools’ discipline of students’ on-campus behavior in the context of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution should also apply to discipline for off-campus behavior, especially in regard to online speech.
CONCORD, N.H. — In an April 12 motion filed in New Hampshire federal court, Apple Inc. argues that an antitrust lawsuit based on its decision to not offer a coronavirus tracking app in its App Store merits dismissal because the app developer did not identify the necessary markets, harm to competition or concerted actions to restrain trade.
SAN FRANCISCO — In an April 12 status report, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), on behalf of President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo, tells the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) is in the midst of “a comprehensive review” of prohibitions placed on the WeChat mobile app in the wake of an August executive order in which former President Donald J. Trump largely banned the app in the United States.
MIAMI — A blockchain technology firm saw its Sherman Act claims against several parties in the bitcoin cash industry dismissed for a second time March 31, when a Florida federal magistrate judge found that the plaintiff failed to establish such necessary items as conspiracy, market or harm, leading her to grant the defendants’ renewed dismissal motion.
PASADENA, Calif.—The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 9 affirmed a lower federal court’s ruling in favor of an insurer in Alorica Inc.’s lawsuit seeking coverage for its alleged “security failure” that was caused by a phishing attack by an unknown perpetrator, rejecting the insured’s contention that a letter demanding monetary relief from client Express Scripts constituted a “claim” under its “security & privacy risk response” policy.
DENVER — An internet service provider (ISP) that has been accused of secondary copyright infringement over its subscribers’ file-sharing activities filed a motion in Colorado federal court on April 9, seeking to compel the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) to produce communications with an investigations firm it hired on behalf of the plaintiff record labels to uncover evidence of infringement.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Muslim civil rights organization sued Facebook Inc. in District of Columbia court on April 8, calling the social network a “cesspool for hate” and claiming that Facebook misrepresented its commitment to removing hateful or violent speech posted by its users.
SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge on April 7 denied a motion to dismiss two consumers’ allegations that a software and marketing company and its owner are indirectly liable for false advertising and California unfair competition law (UCL) claims that have also been brought against an online merchant who allegedly overcharged for “keto” diet supplements.
ATLANTA — In a win for Winn-Dixie Stores Inc., a divided 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 7 ruled that a website does not constitute a place of public accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and, therefore, that the supermarket chain did not run afoul of the statute by operating a site that was not equally accessible to visually impaired patrons.
OAKLAND, Calif. — A discovery dispute in one of three App Store antitrust lawsuits against Apple Inc. was resolved on April 6 by a California federal magistrate judge, who found that Apple’s motion to compel responses from nonparty Facebook Inc. related to one of its executives that was named as a trial witness by plaintiff Epic Games Inc. was untimely.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) on April 1 issued an order centralizing the litigation of 39 pending investor lawsuits stemming from online broker-dealer Robinhood Securities LLC and other online trading platform’s halting of retail investor trading in a number of companies in late January.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — When the U.S. Supreme Court on April 5 granted certiorari in a free speech lawsuit over former President Donald J. Trump’s blocking of certain users from his Twitter account for the purpose of vacating and remanding as moot, Justice Clarence Thomas took the opportunity to author a concurring opinion expressing his concerns over how “dominant digital platforms,” such as Twitter Inc., possess and wield great ability “to cut off speech.”