Articles Posted in E-commerce

Published on: | by

Identity theft and personal privacy are major issues, as more information is available over the Internet and linked together through social media networks.  However, even as early as the 1970s, legislatures were taking steps to protect personal information from public exposure and marketing schemes.  For example, California’s legislature has passed the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act.   In essence, this law prohibits retailers from collecting personal identification information during a credit card transaction from consumers for marketing purposes.  As the market for consumer goods spreads to the Internet, courts must decide how far protection of personal information will extend.

What Are the Provisions of the Song-Beverly Act?

The Song-Beverly Act is intended to protect consumers from unwanted marketing efforts.  This protects privacy and personal information.  More specifically, retailers are not allowed to request and record customers’ email addresses to complete a credit card transaction.  Furthermore, these retailers cannot later use these addresses for marketing purposes.  However, according to recent case law, this law only applies to “brick and mortar retailers,” or retailers that maintain a physical presence.  As such, the statute only applies to in-store transactions and not web transactions.  This is an important distinction in light of the fact that an increasing number of purchases take place online.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In recent years, there has been an increase in cyber-attacks directed towards usernames and passwords for online banking accounts.  Through these attacks, outside parties have been able to misuse banking information for fraudulent wire transfers.  Hackers have starting using foreign accounts because it is more difficult to recover funds when dealing with some foreign banks.  Online banking fraud has led to over $40 million in stolen funds from small and mid-size companies.  Recently, the nature of these attacks have become more complex as regulatory agencies, e.g., FDIC, and enforcing agencies, e.g., FBI, scramble to keep up with changing technologies.

How Have Online Cyber-Attacks Changed In Recent Years?

In recent years, online banking fraud has become dramatically more sophisticated.  Now, hackers have the capacity to infect not only small, local sites, but also high-volume webpages all across web.  These hackers infect popular websites with Trojan viruses, which latch onto users’ computers when they visit the website.  The virus then directs to online banking information, such as account numbers and login information, allowing the hackers to access these accounts and conduct fraudulent transactions.  The virus may even have the capacity to record and hold this information itself.  To carry through the cyber-attack, criminals only need to setup funds transfers without the respective bank noticing.  Banks learned to watch for transfer activity from unknown computers, so now hackers steal victims’ IP addresses to avoid detection.  With this information, the transfer looks like a typical transaction from the user’s computer.  The hackers may obtain the ability to take control of a computer and use it to conduct fraudulent transfers.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In a recent case, Petronas v. Godaddy.com, the Ninth Circuit held that “contributory cybersquatting” was not a valid theory for relief. This case addressed the issue of whether the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (“ACPA”) allows for secondary liability.

What Are the Facts?

Plaintiff, Petroliam Nasional Berhad (aka “Petronas”) is a Malaysian government-owned entity. Petronas holds the American trademark “PETRONAS.” The entity also owns the Petronas Towers in Malaysia. Defendant, Godaddy.com, is the world’s largest domain name registrar. The case revolves around a third party who registered the domain names petronastower.net and petronastowers.net in 2003. In 2007, the party began using Godaddy’s domain forwarding services to direct the domain names to an adult website. Petronas sued Godaddy for cybersquatting and contributory cybersquatting. In general, cybersquatting is the act of holding a trademark hostage in the form of a domain name and forcing the trademark owner to negotiate an unreasonable price for the domain. Although Godaddy did investigate the alleged cybersquatting, ultimately, they did not take any action.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In September 2013, California’s legislature enacted a new “Do Not Track” law–Assembly Bill 370 (“AB-370”)–that requires websites to disclose their practice of tracking consumers’ personal identification information. The new law may be the first step towards universal anti-tracking standards, which will provide greater protection over the Internet for online users and their personal information. According to the executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, Jeff Chester, at the very least the new law is a signal to websites that political bodies are mobilizing to protect online consumer privacy.

What Are the Provisions of California’s “Do Not Track” Law?

Under AB-370, any website that collects personal information from online users will have a duty to disclose the specifics of their tracking behavior to consumers. The “Do Not Track” legislation requires that websites inform consumers their protocol for responding to do not track signals (“DNT signals”). For instance, consumers who use Mozilla Firefox have the option to request that the browser not track the users’ personal information. However, Mozilla is still under no legal obligation to follow this request. AB-370 also addresses any practices that allow third parties and sites to access and use consumers’ personal information. Specifically, the new law requires websites to disclose whether they grant third-party access to personal information the website has gathered from online users. This law does not prohibit websites from continuing to track personal information, or grant access to this information to third parties. Instead, the law aims to improve disclosure standards, so that consumers are better informed of how their online activities can affect access to their personal information.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Online sales markets are in a state of expansion as more consumers continue to conduct their purchases online. Indeed, the topic of an Internet sales tax has been in debate in the California Legislature for some time. And now, with the possibility that the federal government may pass the Marketplace Fairness Act of 2013, online sales taxes could change across the country. If you are a consumer who makes purchase online, or a business that conducts sales online, the California Internet sales tax provisions apply to you. Please contact us today to speak with an attorney who can help explain how changing tax requirements could affect your online transactions.

What Is California’s Online Sales Tax Now?

Currently, the standard tax rule in California, and across America, is that online retailers must collect sales tax from customers who are located in states where the online retailer maintains a “physical presence.” Online retailers maintain a physical presence in states where they have a warehouse, a store, a corporate office, or a sales representative. In states where online retailers do not collect an online sales tax, customers nonetheless have a duty to report and pay a sales tax on online purchases. In this case, the tax is a “use tax,” not a “sales tax.” However, these standards differ between each state and for federal taxes. The federal government has also been considering the Marketplace Fairness Act of 2013, which would allow businesses to collect taxes on sales in individual states, regardless of where the seller is located. However, any businesses that are not physically located in a state and make less than $1 million a year would not be required to follow this tax schedule. This law would also require states to reform their current sales tax laws to make online sales tax collection simpler. For California, this new law will not make a substantial difference because the largest online sellers, such as Amazon, already maintain a physical presence in California. Therefore, California online shoppers already pay an online sales tax for most of their online purchases.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The Internet has become an expansive worldwide network and users have the freedom to access this network from multiple devices and locations. In light of this growing network, many forms of commerce have also moved to the Internet. E-commerce or commercial transactions that take place over the Internet, have become a growing part of international markets and businesses. However, this growing market has also led to the proliferation of online fraud. In addition, by gaining access to this worldwide network, also referred to as the Internet, online fraud is able to harm users and markets on a larger scale.

What Factors Indicate Online Fraud?

In order to begin to prevent online fraud with e-commerce, it is important to be able to recognize online fraud. There are certain indicators that can help online consumers recognize fraudulent activity. First, multiple orders within the same day, hour, or minute from the same user, address, or credit card will generally point to fraudulent activity. Also, shipping addresses to suspicious locations, such as abandoned buildings or P.O. boxes, may be indicators of fraudulent activity. Anonymous email accounts associated with online users placing purchases indicate a higher likelihood of online fraud. These indicators do not necessarily suggest that the online activity is absolutely fraud. Instead, these indicators help protect online consumers by arming them with early signs that can help prevent future harm.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

As cyberspace becomes a larger part of everyday life, the threat of cybercrimes becomes more prevalent. Consumers conduct all sorts of business over the Internet, which involves storing and transferring personal information on various online sites. Accordingly, the wealth of personal information available over the Internet has drawn in a new type of crime–phishing and spoofing. Cybercriminals disguise as other people, or legitimate business entities, and they entice consumers to give out personal information, such as bank account numbers. These tactics also help cybercriminals steal people’s identities.

What is the Difference Between Phishing and Spoofing?

Phishing is the practice of posing as a legitimate business entity to trick consumers into turning over personal information, such as passwords and bank account numbers. The cybercriminals then use this information to break into accounts and transfer money. They may also use this personal information to apply for credit cards, spend extravagant amounts of money, and ruin people’s credit. This is how cyber criminals perpetuate identify theft through phishing. With the right personal or financial information, cybercriminals disguise as other people, building up exorbitant debt against the victim.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Copyright protection is commonly known to apply to inventions and artwork to protect original work from copyright infringement. However, copyright protections also extend to websites. Today, the Internet, and especially personal websites extend to all avenues of the marketplace. Individuals have blogs, businesses have websites to advertise and inform about their services, and professionals maintain websites with personal information and updates in their field of work. All of this content is subject to copyright protection and copyright infringement.

Why is it Appropriate to Copyright a Website?

Anytime a website contains unique and original content, it is subject to copyright infringement. Therefore, anytime a website owner is looking to protect the text, sound, or design contained on a website, it is appropriate to copyright the website. Website owners may also have the option to copyright portions of a website, specifically the portions of the website that are original rather than a template. Often several different parties will contribute to a website by working on different aspects. Therefore, to ease the copyright process, it is often helpful to determine authorship and ownership before creating the website. For instance, a developer may own the code for the site, a designer may own the graphical and creative aspects of the site, and the owner of the site may own the content or material. Establishing ownership will make it easier to copyright the different portions of the website.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The central provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “AIA”) went into effect in March 2013, revolutionizing the United States patent system. Traditionally, the United States had maintained a “first-to-invent” patent system, which awarded patent rights to the first inventor who created a unique invention. However, as the AIA went into effect, not only did the statute change the effects of U.S. patent law, but it also affected how inventors will make the decision of whether to file patents.

How Does the AIA Change the U.S. Patent System?

Before this new provision, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) awarded patents to the individual or entity that invented first, rather than the individual or entity that filed an application for a patent first. Now, an inventor could lose patent rights to another inventor who potentially created the same invention later in time, but managed to file a patent application for the same invention sooner. Essentially, regardless of who conceptualized an invention first, the first to submit a good-faith patent application secures patent rights.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Cybersquatting has been a highly litigated issue since Congress passed the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (the “ACPA”) in 1999, codified under Title 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d). The ACPA establishes a cause of action for the bad faith registration of a domain name that is substantially similar to a trademark or personal name.

Under What Circumstances Will Courts Hold Domain Name Registrants Liable Under the ACPA?

In Xereas v. Heiss, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia found that the ACPA extends to include all registrations of a domain name, not just the initial registration. This federal law’s intent to diminish cybersquatting suggests that the ACPA meant to protect property interests in domain names throughout subsequent registrations.

Continue Reading ›