Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Developments of Note
Yahoo! Enters Agreement with NY Attorney General on Marketing Practices
Online service provider Yahoo! entered into an Assurance of Discontinuance agreement with the New York State Attorney General, promising to change several marketing practices announced last year as part of a new preferences program. In the Matter of Yahoo! Inc. (Agreement dated Sept. 24, 2003). In March 2002, Yahoo! announced changes to its marketing program that would have included in Yahoo!'s telemarketing and e-mail campaigns consumers who had already opted out when they registered, unless they affirmatively opted out again. Among other things, the agreement forbids Yahoo! from telemarketing to users who had previously opted out, and requires that Yahoo! provide all users additional notice of the marketing changes and an additional opportunity to opt out of receiving e-mail promotions. Additionally, Yahoo! agreed to pay $75,000 to cover the costs of the investigation.
Librarian of Congress Creates Limited DMCA Exemptions
On Oct. 28, the Librarian of Congress announced four classes of works that are exempted from the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The four limited classes are: 1) lists of sites blocked by commercial Internet filtering software; 2) computer programs protected by hardware dongles that are broken or obsolete; 3) computer programs or video games that use obsolete formats or hardware; and 4) e-books that prevent read-aloud or other handicapped access formats from functioning. Many critics of the DMCA had urged further exemptions that would have allowed the circumvention of copyright protections in more situations where the user engages in noninfringing uses of the works.
California Enacts Tough Anti-Spam Law
On Sept. 23, California Governor Gray Davis signed legislation that is perhaps the most far-reaching anti-spam law in the nation. The new law is worded broadly to prohibit any person or entity from sending an unsolicited commercial e-mail advertisement either “from California” or “to a California electronic mail address.” It also prohibits “advertising” in such e-mails. Individual recipients, Internet service providers and the state attorney general are authorized to pursue actions against violators, with liquidated damages of up to $1 million per spamming incident. The new law is set to take effect on Jan. 1, however, court challenges are anticipated.
Julian S. Millstein Edward A. Pisacreta Jeffrey D. Neuburger
Yahoo! Enters Agreement with NY Attorney General on Marketing Practices
Online service provider Yahoo! entered into an Assurance of Discontinuance agreement with the
Librarian of Congress Creates Limited DMCA Exemptions
On Oct. 28, the Librarian of Congress announced four classes of works that are exempted from the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The four limited classes are: 1) lists of sites blocked by commercial Internet filtering software; 2) computer programs protected by hardware dongles that are broken or obsolete; 3) computer programs or video games that use obsolete formats or hardware; and 4) e-books that prevent read-aloud or other handicapped access formats from functioning. Many critics of the DMCA had urged further exemptions that would have allowed the circumvention of copyright protections in more situations where the user engages in noninfringing uses of the works.
California Enacts Tough Anti-Spam Law
On Sept. 23, California Governor Gray Davis signed legislation that is perhaps the most far-reaching anti-spam law in the nation. The new law is worded broadly to prohibit any person or entity from sending an unsolicited commercial e-mail advertisement either “from California” or “to a California electronic mail address.” It also prohibits “advertising” in such e-mails. Individual recipients, Internet service providers and the state attorney general are authorized to pursue actions against violators, with liquidated damages of up to $1 million per spamming incident. The new law is set to take effect on Jan. 1, however, court challenges are anticipated.
Julian S. Millstein Edward A. Pisacreta Jeffrey D. Neuburger
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.