Free for a Fee

Powered by WPeMatico

Proskauer

By Jeffrey Neuburger on February 9, 2018

A California district court issued an important opinion in a dispute between a ticket sales platform and a ticket broker that employed automated bots to purchase tickets in bulk. (Ticketmaster L.L.C. v. Prestige Entertainment, Inc., No. 17-07232 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2018)). For those of us who have been following the evolution of the law around the use of automation to scrape websites, this case is interesting. The decision interprets some of the major Ninth Circuit decisions of recent memory on liability for web scraping.  Indeed, two weeks ago, we wrote about a case in which the Ninth Circuit interpreted certain automated downloading practices under the CFAA and CDAFA. Also, we wrote about and are awaiting the decision in the hiQ v. LinkedIn appeal before the Ninth Circuit. Also prior posts on the topic include a discussion of a noteworthy appeals court opinion that examined scraping activity under copyright law and the scope of liability under the DMCA anticircumvention provisions.  These seminal decisions and the issues they raise were expressly or implicitly addressed in the instant case. While we will briefly review some of the highlights of this decision below, the case is a must-read for website operators and entities that engage in web scraping activities.

more

The content in this post was found at https://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2018/02/09/cfaa-unauthorized-access-web-scraping-claim-against-ticket-broker-dismissed-because-revocation-of-access-not-expressed-in-cease-and-desist-letter/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

Proskauer

1-24-18

Jeffrey Neuburger

Earlier this month, the Ninth Circuit issued a noteworthy ruling in a dispute between an enterprise software licensor and a third-party support provider.  The case is particularly important as it addresses the common practice of using automated means to download information (in this case, software) from websites in contravention of website terms and conditions.  Also, the case examines and interprets fairly “standard” software licensing language in light of evolving business practices in the software industry. (Oracle USA, Inc. v. Rimini Street, Inc., No. 16-16832 (9th Cir. Jan. 8, 2018)).

more

The content in this post was found at https://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2018/01/24/ninth-circuit-issues-important-decision-on-software-licensing-practices-and-web-scraping/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

Patent filings relating to 3D printing have increased 23-fold over the last five years, and trademark filings for businesses involved in 3D printing have increased 300 percent over the same time. Obviously, there is great excitement over the promise of 3D printing, but there is also concern about how 3D printing could make it too easy to copy a patented product with a push of a button… Traditionally, it is more important to have patent claims that protect products, components of products, arrangements of products, etc. Future IP will weigh more heavily on ideas and designs, rather than methods, which will be increasingly become difficult to police. These files will serve as proof of an owners’ pre-established rights, and could prove to be a major profit-making source in the future. And while copyrights are susceptible to fair use claims in a way patents are not, copyrights last for an extremely long time (e.g., 70 years beyond the death of the author).

more

The content in this post was found at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/04/25/3d-printing-consumers-future-ip/id=82533/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

Plaintiff sued CNN under the Video Privacy Protection Act, alleging that CNN wrongly disclosed plaintiff’s viewing records without plaintiff’s consent. The allegation is that plaintiff used the CNN app, which records viewing history, and CNN sent this information to Bango, a third party data analytics company. CNN allegedly disclosed to Bango the viewing activity along with the MAC address (a unique string of numbers associated with plaintiff’s device). Bango then allegedly used the information to link the user’s MAC address to other information and built a profile of plaintiff that includes the name, location, phone number, email address, and payment information, combined with the viewing history that CNN disclosed.

more

The content in this post was found at http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/05/vppa-still-doesnt-protect-app-downloaders-perry-v-cnn.htm and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

Icon Health and Fitness manufactures exercise equipment, such as the well-known NordicTrack. ConsumerAffairs is a review website. Like many other review websites, its business model is predicated on payments from reviewed businesses. However, ConsumerAffairs’ specific practices raise some extra questions. The complaint made the following allegations:

more

Case citation: Icon Health and Fitness v. ConsumerAffairs.com, 2017 WL 2728413 (D. Utah June 23, 2017).

The content in this post was found at http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/07/when-do-review-websites-commit-extortion-icon-health-v-consumeraffairs.htm and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

A couple more online contract formation cases to enliven your Saturday:

McGhee v. NAB

This case involves mobile credit card processing services. The plaintiffs are merchants who think they were overcharged for card readers. The vendor invoked the arbitration clause in its terms. The vendor alleges that “when McGhee signed up for NAB’s credit card processing services, McGhee was required to accept the ‘Terms and Conditions’ by clicking on a button next to the words ‘I have read and agree to the Terms and Conditions.’” Sounds like an easy case, right?

Case citation: McGhee v. North American Bancard, 2017 WL 3118799 (S.D. Cal. July 21, 2017)

Applebaum v. Lyft:

Case citation: Applebaum v. Lyft, Inc., 2017 WL 2774153 (SDNY June 26, 2017)

more

The content in this post was found at http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/07/courts-keep-shredding-online-contract-formation-processes-mcghee-v-nab-applebaum-v-lyft.htm and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

For years, craigslist has aggressively used technological and legal methods to prevent unauthorized parties from violating its terms of use by scraping, linking to or accessing user postings for their own commercial purposes.  In its latest judicial victory, on April 13, 2017, craigslist obtained a $60.5 million judgment against Radpad on various claims relating to harvesting content from craigslist’s site and sending unsolicited commercial emails to craigslist users. (Craigslist, Inc. v. RadPad, Inc., No. 16-01856 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2017)).

more

The content in this post was found at https://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2017/04/17/craigslist-garners-60-million-judgment-against-radpad-in-scraping-dispute/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

We just blogged about online contract formation yesterday, but it’s worth revisiting the topic so quickly because this case demonstrates another crash-and-burn failure of the browsewrap-clickwrap dichotomy. How many times must the “wrap” categorization fail before judges recognize that it’s a complete waste of time?

The plaintiff alleges that Ticketmaster violates the ADA for admission ticket and parking sales for Levi’s Stadium. Ticketmaster seeks to send the case to arbitration. To buy tickets, purchasers needed a Ticketmaster account, which included the following screen (helpfully included in the opinion):

more

Case citation: Nevarez v. Forty Niners Football Company, LLC, 2017 WL 3492110 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2017)

The content in this post was found at http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/08/browsewrapclickwrap-distinction-vexes-another-court-nevarez-v-ticketmaster.htm and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

A Green Light for Screen Scraping? Proceed With Caution…

While the law relating to screen scraping  is unclear, a recent landmark decision from the Northern District of California, hiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn, Corp., 2017 WL 3473663 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2017), appears to limit the applicability of the CFAA as a tool against scraping. Indeed, in granting injunctive relief against LinkedIn’s blocking of hiQ’s scraping activities, the hiQ court noted that, by invoking the CFAA, “[c]ompanies could prevent competitors or consumer groups from visiting their websites to learn about their products or analyze pricing.” While the hiQ decision suggests that, at least in some circumstances, scraping of publicly available websites does not give rise to a cause of action under the CFAA, scrapers beware – the road may still have some rough patches ahead.

more

The content in this post was found at https://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2017/08/24/court-issues-injunction-barring-blocking-of-scraping-and-holds-cfaa-likely-doesnt-apply/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.