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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 159

Computer file extension functional, therefore not protectable as trademark
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • April 14 2010

A computer file extension is inherently functional, therefore a software company that utilizes a particular file extension to designate files that are accessed by its proprietary software may not protect the letters comprising the file extension as a trademark, a district court ruled


No dismissal under CDA Section 230 for ISP where good faith is challenged
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

An Internet service provider is not entitled to dismissal of a complaint alleging various theories of liability for blocking e-mails alleged to be spam, where the plaintiff's complaint called into question whether the ISP acted in good faith pursuant to Section 230 (c)(2) of the Communications Decency Act, a district court ruled


Internet subscriber lacks privacy interest in isp account information sought by plaintiff in copyright infringement action
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

An Internet service subscriber lacks a privacy interest in account information sought in a subpoena served upon the subscriber's Internet service provider, a district court ruled


Web site that created and delivered unverified checks at direction of users violated FTC act
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

A company that operated a Web site that created and delivered unverified checks at the direction of users violated the unfair practices provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled


License language in contract may render search ad provider liable under ACPA for providing ads to parked domain names
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

A provider of search ads to registrants of parked domain names alleged to infringe trademarks may be liable under the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act as an "authorized licensee" of the registrants, a district court ruled


Arbitration clause referenced in contract with ISP binding on subscriber
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

An arbitration clause referenced in a business services agreement signed by an Internet services subscriber is enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, a district court ruled


Under New York law, vendor’s specific representations of software functionality support claim for fraudulent inducement
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

Specific representations made by a salesman concerning the functionality of a software system which the purchaser alleges was inadequate for its purposes support the purchaser's claim for fraudulent inducement, a district court ruled


Electronic signatures on Utah nomination petitions ruled valid
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

Under Utah law, electronic signatures used to execute petitions to nominate independent political candidates are valid, the Utah Supreme Court ruled


Software user does not acquire knowledge of trade secrets embodied in source code
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

A user of software containing source code misappropriated by the software developer from a competitor does not thereby acquire the requisite knowledge of the trade secrets embodied in the source code so as to violate the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act, a California appeals court ruled


No Fourth Amendment violation in government administrative subpoena to ISP for subscriber information
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

An administrative subpoena served upon a defendant's Internet service provider to obtain his subscriber information did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled, because the defendant had no reasonable expection of privacy in his subscriber information