New York’s highest court upheld the constitutionality of the state’s “Amazon tax,” by which, if New York-based Amazon affiliates in aggregate refer more than $10,000 a year in sales to the online outfit, then Amazon is presumed, subject to rebuttal, to have a sales presence in New York and is obliged to collect sales tax., Inc. v. NYS Dep’t of Taxation and Finance, 2013 WL 1234823 (March 28, 2013). The decision affirmed the result of the intermediate appellate court [InFashion Summer, 2012]. A week earlier, the U.S. Senate approved a non-binding resolution in connection with its version of a federal budget for 2014 which called for creation of a uniform national system to allow states to tax online sales [see InFashion Summer, 2012, Fall 2008]. Neither result should come as a surprise: in the five years since the tax has been law, New York State and its localities have collected more than  $500 million in tax on $6 billion in sales as a result. So much candy is likely to prove irresistible to cash-strapped state governments. . . . . Maybe that red is some kind of irritation? The U.S. Court of Appeals seemed a little irritated when Christian Louboutin tried to get it to take another look at the Case of the Red Outer Sole. You’ll recall the Second Circuit had ordered the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trim back Louboutin’s trademark to limit it to shoes where the red outer heel contrasted with other parts of the shoe [InFashion Fall, 2012]. That’s what the agency did. Louboutin went back to court, asking the court to tell USPTO it had gotten it wrong. The Court upheld the USPTO. . . . . . ICANN’s Clearinghouse for new gTLDs If that’s alphabet soup to you, go back and read our article on the new generic top-level domains the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers has been developing [InFashion Winter, 2011-12]. The first of as many as 2,000 could start coming online, in addition to the 22 existing ones, in the near future. On March 26, ICANN’s Trademark Clearinghouse opened shop to allow trademark owners to register marks. This will do two things: (1) protect the marks as second-level domain names (“schiffhardin” in by giving the mark owners advance notice if someone tries to register an identical name in one of the new gTLDs; and (2) let owners take advantage of a “sunrise period” to register their marks on new gTLDs 30 days before everyone else. There is, of course, a fee, and it must be paid for each mark registered. Moreover, the registration only protects identical names. So registering “Ford” wouldn’t protect “Fords,” nor would it protect against typosquatting (“Furd”). Massachusetts follows California on zip codes as personal information The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court aligned itself with California’s top court [InFashion, Spring, 2011] in concluding that zip codes collected by merchants are personal identification information, Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc., 464 Mass. 492 (2013). The court concluded G.L. c. 93 §105(a) was intended primarily to protect privacy and that a plaintiff need not aver her identity was stolen to have a claim. On the latter issue, sufficient injury might exist under the state’s unfair and deceptive practices statute if the consumer received unwanted mailings as a result of providing the zip code or if her information had been resold to a third party. . . . . NYC expands antidiscrimination law to include Unemployment Effective June 11, 2013, it will be a violation of New York City’s Human Rights Law to discriminate on the basis of a job  applicant’s unemployment status.