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

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 62

Commercial distribution of news content on the Internet by media monitoring service not a fair use

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2013

On March 20, 2013, the Honorable Denise L. Cote of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a sweeping decision in favor

The Aereo and ReDigi decisions: courts continue to wrestle with the application of copyright law to the redistribution of digital content

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 9 2013

A series of recent decisions in the Second and Ninth Circuitsincluding Viacom v. YouTube and UMG v. Veoh (both dealing with the distribution

When journalists tweet: social media guidelines for news organizations

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2012

Social media websites such as Twitter, Facebook, and Tumblr provide opportunities for media companies and their employees to engage and communicate with their audiences and to gather news

Federal court enjoins enforcement of Washington state law targeting adult-oriented advertisements

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2012

A federal court in Washington last month preliminarily enjoined enforcement of a new state law targeted at adult-oriented advertisements (but encompassing much more) because, the court found, the law likely is preempted by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution

Hulu privacy litigation marks first application of Video Privacy Protection Act to solely streamed video

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 15 2012

Internet video streaming site Hulu.com is subject to the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 U.S.C. 2710, according to a recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, marking the first time a court has subjected a provider of exclusively online streaming video services to the VPPA

Second Federal Court tackles absence of closed captions in Netflix web-streaming

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 27 2012

California’s Northern District decides websites are not “places of public accommodation” under the ADA, the opposite of a recent District of Massachusetts ruling

FCC to stream demo of online public file database; denies NAB request for stay

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 14 2012

As we noted a few days ago, TV stations must begin posting their public inspection files online at an FCC hosted database beginning August 2, 2012

How employers can write social media policies to their advantage and avoid legal challenges

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 10 2012

Legal issues continue to arise for employers regarding their employees’ use of social media

Extension of time for comments on whether an internet delivered video service is an MVPD under the Communications Act

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 25 2012

As we wrote last month, the Commission has asked for public comment on whether an Internet delivered video programming service can qualify under the FCC rules and the Communications Act to be treated as a multichannel video programming distributor (an "MVPD"

FCC: Google's collection of unencrypted data does not violate Communications Act

  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 17 2012

In a Notice of Apparent Liability (NAL) released Monday by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) against Google, the FCC found that Google’s collection of unencrypted data obtained from Wi-Fi networks in its Street View project did not violate the Communications Act provision that prohibits the unauthorized interception and either use or publication of radio communications