Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A magistrate for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted an audio equipment manufacturer's motion to enforce a subpoena requiring case non-party Twitter to reveal the names of account users who allegedly defamed the manufacturer. Music Group Macao Commercial Offshore Ltd. v. John Does I-IX, 14-mc-80328. Twitter had asked the court to consider whether the First Amendment right of account users to anonymous protected speech was being properly considered.'
Magistrate Laurel Beeler found 'that, at this stage of the case and on this record, Music Group's interest in the requested information does outweigh any infraction of the Doe defendants' right to speak anonymously. First, the information sought is narrowly tailored to Music Group's need to serve process. ' Music Group asks for only the 'name, address, email address and any proxy address' of the accounts' owners. That is the basic information that will allow Music Group to identify the defendants and serve the complaint.' The magistrate concluded: 'The identity of the Doe defendants is more than basically relevant to that need; it is effectively indispensable.'
A magistrate for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted an audio equipment manufacturer's motion to enforce a subpoena requiring case non-party Twitter to reveal the names of account users who allegedly defamed the manufacturer. Music Group Macao Commercial Offshore Ltd. v. John Does I-IX, 14-mc-80328. Twitter had asked the court to consider whether the First Amendment right of account users to anonymous protected speech was being properly considered.'
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.