We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Jeff Neuburger Proskauer Rose LLP

Results 1 to 5 of 232



Assignment of copyright through terms of use: does e-sign make it ok? A tool for B2B sites dealing with unauthorized access to their content? *

USA - December 20 2012
It is a common practice for Web site providers who accept submissions of user-generated content to include a license provision in their “Terms of Use” to obtain rights to use the content.


In clickwrap data pass contract dispute. Second Circuit sacks e-mail notice of post-transaction terms *

USA - September 25 2012
In an important opinion on the enforceability of online contract terms, Senior Circuit Judge Robert D. Sacks walks through the last decade and a half of online contracting law on the way to invalidating an arbitration provision in an agreement involving a so-called Web loyalty program.


This is one of the top ten best blog posts ever written about online defamation *

USA - September 17 2012
Although we have confidence in the quality of our work, the headline above might be viewed by some as mere hyperbole or rhetorical exaggeration.


Michigan court assesses electronic signature authentication under UETA in online insurance transaction *

USA - July 30 2012
The acceptance of electronic signatures in commercial transactions has become so commonplace that disputes about their use are relatively few.


State Appeals Court concludes employer not protected by CDS Section 230 in employee stalking case, and seems to shrink the statute along the way *

USA - June 29 2012
An Illinois state appeals court recently held that although an employer that provided network connectivity to its employees is an “interactive service provider” under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the statute does not protect the employer from negligent supervision claims based upon the employee’s alleged use of the network to communicate threats to a third party.


Next »