Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In an opinion that has defined a section of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), a law that has been clouded by decades of amendments, a federal judge in Philadelphia has ruled in favor of an Internet startup company and against retail giant QVC. QVC v. Resultly, 2:14-cv-06714 (E.D. Pa March 13, 2015).
U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who joined the bench at the end of 2014, rejected QVC's motion for a preliminary injunction that would have barred the startup called Resultly from selling its intellectual property before the case is over. Resultly is a four-year-old company that uses open source code to crawl retail websites in order to help users find and purchase merchandise, according to Beetlestone's opinion.
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.