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: 11-20 of 114

Under Arkansas law, insurance law writing requirement satisfied by online transaction
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

A requirement in the Arkansas law that a rejection of medical benefits in an automobile insurance policy be in writing is satisfied by an electronic form completed online, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled


Federal CAN-SPAM Act preempts claim under Illinois anti-spam law that e-mail utilizing tracking technology was misleading
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

A claim under the Illinois anti-spam law that the heading on a promotional e-mail was misleading because it failed to warn the recipient that the e-mail sender utilized tracking technology is preempted by the federal CAN-SPAM Act, a district court ruled


CAN-SPAM Act may be applicable to Facebook messages
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

The CAN-SPAM Act may apply to communications intended to drive users of the Facebook social network to "pages" that redirect the users to an advertiser's external Web site and also encourage them to send additional messages to other users, a district court ruled


No CDA 230 protection for online booksellers for internet sale of book
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

While online booksellers are immune under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act for defamation claims arising out of promotional material supplied by third parties and posted on the booksellers' sites, Section 230 does not extend to defamation claims arising out of the books themselves, a district court ruled


CDA Section 230 protects online business review site from liability for refusing to remove negative reviews
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects the provider of an online business review site from liability for refusing to remove negative reviews, a district court ruled


Under New York long-arm statute, copyright owner's location is situs of copyright harm from online infringement
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

Under N.Y.C.P.L.R. 302(a)(3)(ii), which provides for long-arm jurisdiction in cases involving out-of-state tortious acts that cause harm within the State, where unauthorized copies of copyrighted works are posted on Web sites outside New York, the situs of the resulting injury is the location of the copyright owner


Stored Communications Act bars civil discovery subpoena to e-mail service provider, absent consent of account holder
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • January 11 2011

The federal Stored Communications Act bars the enforcement of a subpoena directed to an e-mail service provider to obtain the contents of an account-holder's e-mails, absent the consent of the account holder, a district court ruled


CDA Section 230 no bar to city enforcement of ticket tax remittance requirement on online vendor
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • January 11 2011

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is not a bar to a municipality's requirement that an online ticket auction site collect and remit applicable local amusement taxes from ticket sales on its site, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled


First Amendment bars North Carolina taxing authority’s demand for online bookseller records
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • January 11 2011

A state taxing authority's request for information on transactions by an online bookseller with state residents, in connection with a dispute over the bookseller's liability for state sales and use taxes, is barred by the First Amendment, a district court ruled


E-mails sent to transferred domain name and read by new domain owner not intercepted under ECPA
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • January 11 2011

E-mails that were sent to e-mail accounts connected to a domain name that was transferred pursuant to a settlement agreement, and that were read by the new domain name owner, were not "intercepted" within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, a district court ruled