<ul class=”aktt_tweet_digest”>
<li>Admissibility of Social Media Evidence: A Case Study <a href=”http://t.co/vEuvdRmT” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/vEuvdRmT</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241129821537714176″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>New post: Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-30 <a href=”http://t.co/67rRJuZB” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/67rRJuZB</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241153566046310402″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Publishers to pay $69 million over e-book price-fixing allegations <a href=”http://t.co/m3VsqrZ5″ rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/m3VsqrZ5</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241336722531704832″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Amazon inks deal to sell e-books through other retailers <a href=”http://t.co/fBf6kGKj” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/fBf6kGKj</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241337178330918912″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Twitter advertisers can now target users by their interests – pipeda compliant? <a href=”http://t.co/CQNozIAs” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/CQNozIAs</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241338563109736448″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Apple and Google are in talks to settle patent issues <a href=”http://t.co/fj5iZeDJ” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/fj5iZeDJ</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241338949954588672″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Germany backs law that would charge Google for linking to news <a href=”http://t.co/7idDgQQB” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/7idDgQQB</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241340625545478144″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Malaysia retains controversial Internet law after activists unsuccessful blackout to stop it <a href=”http://t.co/1H9aQSfU” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/1H9aQSfU</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241342051206176769″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>You Wein some, you lose some as another copyright case heads for the CJEU <a href=”http://t.co/gumUntn2″ rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/gumUntn2</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241342769870819328″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>The Big Online Rip-Off: can authors and copyright owners fight back? <a href=”http://t.co/kAv2Khlx” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/kAv2Khlx</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241343395648389120″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>The big online rip off <a href=”http://t.co/RUmiuCAn” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/RUmiuCAn</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241344341140975616″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>The Pirates And Trolls Of Porn Valley <a href=”http://t.co/3ovGHBq3″ rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/3ovGHBq3</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241344678480465921″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
<li>Are Craigslist Ads Copyrightable? <a href=”http://t.co/Eg1CIhuA” rel=”nofollow”>http://t.co/Eg1CIhuA</a> <a href=”http://twitter.com/bsookman/statuses/241345295458373632″ class=”aktt_tweet_time”>#</a></li>
</ul>
Archive for August, 2012
Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-31
August 31st, 2012Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-30
August 30th, 2012- Here are the 6 Apple patents Samsung violated http://t.co/i0ATYER5 #
- Bollywood fights law that inserts anti-smoking warnings into movies http://t.co/kWHC2nt5 #
- Off piste? ECJ decides Austrian Supreme Court's ‘Adwords’ jurisdiction question in Wintersteiger http://t.co/Z21wyNy8 #
- Cambridge University investigates hacking claim http://t.co/ERghkeNt #
- Op-Ed: Australia’s proposed Internet tracking laws won’t work http://t.co/1eNzOJAz #
- Problems With Defining Jurisdiction on the Internet http://t.co/bF257gS5 #
- The next step in Apple vs. Samsung: injunction hearing on September 20th http://t.co/9SYY2EME #
- Gogo Inflight Wi-Fi licensed to begin service over Canada http://t.co/TPmLAnD1 #
Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-29
August 29th, 2012- Link to US TRE MILANO v. Amazon. com case finding Amazon not likely liable for counterfeit goods sold on its site
http://t.co/eeD17yM0 # - US court refuses injunction to protect trade secret on 1st Amendment grounds in CII CARBON, LLC v. Kurczy
http://t.co/x3yrRgyP # - BC court rules that changing content of emails can be conversion, Insurance Corporation of British Columbia v. COPEU
http://t.co/U9f7sLph # - Retrospective entitlement to exploitation rights of joint owners in cinematographic works unconstitutional http://t.co/onuMdhSD #
- Canada's "First to File" Change to Patent Law Harmed Small Inventors http://t.co/Zq6EXQT4 #
ivi copyright injunction in the public interest says US Appeals Court
August 28th, 2012The Second Circuit Court of Appeals released its decision in the WPIX, INC., v ivi INC. 2012 WL 3645304, (2nd.Cir.Aug. 27, 2012) case yesterday. It dismissed ivi’s appeal from a preliminary injunction prohibiting Ivi from continuing to stream television programming over the Internet.
ivi’s defense was that it was a cable system entitled to a compulsory license under § 111 of the US Copyright Act. The US Second Circuit reviewed the statute’s legislative history, development, and purpose which indicated that Congress did not intend for § 111 licenses to extend to Internet retransmissions. This was consistent with the view of US Copyright Office’s interpretation of § 111 that Internet retransmission services do not constitute cable systems under § 111. The Court accordingly concluded that “the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of the case.”
Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-28
August 28th, 2012- Apple's patent victory may reshape smartphone market http://t.co/aYfekBr5 #
- It's complicated: copyright law and chaos theory http://t.co/XCqbh07m #
- Republicans embrace Internet freedom, but what does that mean? http://t.co/al0eHyJT #
- Saudi Oil Producer’s Computers Restored After Cyberattack http://t.co/hi554PPn #
- Microsoft rejects Windows 8 SmartScreen privacy concerns http://t.co/jy8XfHn2 #
- The ‘new cold war’ is an information war http://t.co/52N8T5oR #
- Google says Apple’s legal victory doesn’t relate to Android http://t.co/LudJSiq7 #
- Random House of Canada Unveils New Digital Publishing Strategy http://t.co/fjC7IV7Y #
- A Rose by Any Other Name? Moral Rights, Plagiarism, Lehrer and Zakaria and the CBA C-11 submission? http://t.co/2uyTalZp #
Computer and Internet Law Weekly Updates for 2012-08-26
August 26th, 2012- New post: Computer and Internet Law Weekly Updates for 2012-08-19 http://t.co/0YtDR8g8 #
- Court finds passing off by registration of confusing domain name: Dentec v. Degil Safety 2012 ONSC 4721 http://t.co/ooeCMomE #
- Counterfeit shoes seized in U.S. could have fetched $18M http://t.co/n7ivEGF9 #
- RIM’s social communities VP T.A. McCann on BB10′s future http://t.co/hX543RBT #
- Judge Delays Google Proceedings, Citing Plaintiff’s “Health Issue” http://t.co/4ffyxLb5 #
- Google Says It Didn’t Pay Bloggers to Cover Oracle Lawsuit http://t.co/35cDu4RR #
- CBS drops copyright lawsuit against rival 'Glass House' http://t.co/DYgvLUda #
- Apple and Google's Motorola Mobility disagree on implications of Wisconsin FRAND ruling http://t.co/dVlxXhyH #
Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-26
August 26th, 2012- New post: Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-25 http://t.co/rOvyb61L #
Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-25
August 25th, 2012- South Korea Court Rejects Law Banning False IDs on Internet http://t.co/b95FrFW5 #
- India Widens Internet Clampdown http://t.co/bGDyGDOR #
- Apple and Samsung both hit with injunctionsagainst each other in South Korea for patent infringement http://t.co/qwd1Lgcb #
- How Nietzsche rescued Kanye West from infringement claim http://t.co/Jx1QVmxX #
- US Federal Courts Cracking Down on Social Media Use by Jurors http://t.co/FhxNsjW7 #
- No Fruit for You: EU Trademark Board finds Fruit of the Loom’s use of the mark “fruit” to be invalid http://t.co/Ip98lU2y #
- Amazon doesn't have to replicate eBay policies to avoid TM liability http://t.co/fB0Ka38j #
Was the $675,000 damage award against Joel Tenenbaum for file sharing excessive?
August 24th, 2012Was the statutory damages award of $675,000 against Joel Tenebaum for downloading and distributing 30 music files over peer-to-peer networks excessive? Did it violate US due process? According to a decision released by a U.S. District Court yesterday in the Sony BMG Music Entertainment v Tenebaum 2012 WL 3639053, (D.Mass., Aug. 23, 2012) case, the answer to both questions is no.
After a five-day jury trial, the jury found that Tenenbaum’s infringement was willful as to each of the thirty sound recordings in issue, and returned a verdict within the US statutory range of $22,500 per infringement, for a total damages award of $675,000. After an appeal of the jury verdict, the Court was charged with the duty of determining whether the award was excessive under the common law remittitur doctrine and whether it violated due process.
Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2012-08-24
August 24th, 2012- Ontario court enforces California copyright injunction in Blizzard v. Simpson, 2012 ONSC 4312
http://t.co/XFCWGfoC # - Net censorship: Is India too soft on Facebook, Twitter? http://t.co/Ccw4FNP7 #
- New Australian law to control cyber data http://t.co/4fL0WPmC #
- AT&T's App-Blocking Defense Is Weak and Anti-Consumer? http://t.co/bdMWamVL #
- Google fights proposed charge on news snippets and headlines http://t.co/2IGGAspj #
- Ontario's Bill 96 proposes amendments to the Electronic Commerce Act http://t.co/X9UrSimH #
- There is no magic bullet http://t.co/rgjkJb4N #
- Date confirmed for further copyright talks in Australia between ISPs and rights holders http://t.co/Igkb54v2 #
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio 