Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Reading the news, one might think the encroaching patchwork of state anti-spyware laws and the proliferation of high-profile cases against surreptitious spyware distributors could finally prompt Congress to take action on spyware in 2006.
But a closer look reveals that states, Congress and the Federal Trade Commission have not yet reached a consensus on what spyware is and how best to address enforcement. State anti-spyware laws, such as those in California and Texas, protect different groups of computer users, define spyware violations differently, and impose dissimilar remedies and enforcement mechanisms. As of this writing, competing U.S. House and Senate spyware bills are crafted differently than state laws and do not agree with one another on activities included as spyware violations, provisions for notice to computer owners, and penalties. Further, House and Senate versions do not uniformly provide for express pre-emption. Moreover, the shortened term of an election year makes it less certain that Congress will tackle spyware legislation. At the same time, the FTC has successfully brought several spyware cases, without specific federal legislation, and recent statements make it clear that the FTC is seeking, at most, the authority from Congress to pursue civil penalties in spyware cases.
These factors strongly suggest that even if Congress does act on spyware this year, the legislation is likely to offer an incomplete solution to computer users and, for legitimate online behavioral advertisers, to leave substantial litigation questions unaddressed.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?