Articles Posted in Internet Law

Published on: | by

Class action lawsuits are a staple in the American court system. The notion that there is strength in numbers is shown in the extraordinarily large settlements that come from these cases. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in class action suits involving internet-based companies (e.g., Facebook, Google, Tumblr, Instagram, or MySpace).

As consumers spend more time on the Internet, sharing their work, preferences, and private information, there is a growing potential for internet law violations. Since numerous consumers engage in same or similar activities, e.g., use email to send/receive information, a single violation implicates the rights of a large group of consumers. In turn, this sparks a class action suit.

How Are Class Action Lawsuits Different From Other Suits?

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

On December 19, 2013, Target issued a statement confirming a major security breach. According to the statement, approximately 40 million customers were at risk for identity theft because of the breach. Hackers had gained access to customer information, including their names, credit card numbers, debit card numbers, card expiration dates, and security codes. This incident brought light to the ongoing threat of identify theft for customers who use credit or debit cards to make purchases, either in stores or online. With this growing threat, consumers need to take care to protect themselves against potential attacks.

What Is the Extent of the Target Security Breach?

According to Target’s investigations, the hackers began accessing customer information from before Thanksgiving until mid-December. With the information they stole, which is stored on a card’s magnetic strip, the hackers could have made purchases all around the world. Indeed, hackers can also use this information to create new credit or debit cards. Although, there is no evidence the hackers also stole pin numbers, but if they had, they could have withdrawn money from customers’ bank accounts. The United States Secret Service is looking into this massive security breach. In the past, federal and state authorities have held companies liable, even issuing fines, if investigations reveal that a company did not take adequate steps to protect customer information. Analysts predict that here Target may have to spend over $100 million in legal costs to fix the security breach. Costs will increase even more if it’s forced to reimburse credit card companies for fraudulent purchases. However, in the meantime, Target’s first priority has been to act quickly to secure and protect customer information. Although, they have not reached any conclusions, initial investigations suggest the breach could have come entirely from outside hackers, or it could have been achieved with help from its employees. Either way, this level of a security breach suggests that it reached deep within the corporation.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

As an unfortunate consequence of the Internet’s expansion and usage of social media networks, online users are vulnerable to attacks in the form of cyberstalking, cyberharassment, and cyberbullying. In an effort to restore online safety, the California Legislature has imposed certain laws to provide protection to the victims.

What Remedies are Available in Cyberstalking Cases?

Cyberstalking is a form of online harassment, with the unique requirement of repeated and ongoing behavior. The remedies available to victims of cyberstalking first depend on whether the defendant’s conduct was civil or criminal in nature. Under California Civil Code section 1708.7, civil “cyberstalking” consists of a pattern of behavior that intends to “follow, alarm, or harass” the plaintiff, causing a reasonable fear for safety. A plaintiff may also be able to seek remedies if the reasonable fear for safety was for his or her immediate family members (e.g. parent, child, or spouse). To constitute cyberstalking, the pattern of behavior must take place over electronic equipment, such as telephones, computers, fax machines, or pagers. In these cases, the victims may collect financial damages, including punitive damages (e.g. a financial “punishment” to deter similar behavior in the future). Additionally, a victim of cyberstalking may ask the court to issue an injunction or temporary restraining order, which includes a court order preventing the defendant from contacting the victim in the future.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

According to changes to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), which went into effect on October 16, 2013, telemarketers must now obtain prior express consent before contacting a consumer’s wireless or landline telephone numbers using automated telephone dialing systems. Do you list your wireless telephone number for your contact information with credit card companies, banks, or utility providers? Do you receive unsolicited phone calls on your wireless telephone number regarding promotions or billing information? Are you concerned with protecting your identity and privacy? Are you a company that uses telemarketing calls to solicit customers and increase your business? If you answered “yes” to any of these questions, the latest changes to the TCPA may affect you. Please contact us today to speak with an attorney who can explain how these new amendments will alter your telephone communication privacy settings and responsibilities.

What are the New Requirements Under the Amendments to the TCPA?

Pursuant to the provisions of the new amendments, to obtain prior express consent, telemarketers must have consent in writing. Under the federal Electronic Signatures In Global and National Commerce Act (“ESIGN”), digital signatures that comply with the standards of the act will count as sufficient consent in writing. Next, the consent must specifically refer to the telephone number that the consumer authorizes as a point of contact for future telemarketing calls. Additionally, the written consent must clearly state that the consumer authorizes telemarketers to use prerecorded messages and automated telephone dialing systems in future communications. Finally, if a consumer is required to provide this consent in order to purchase any goods or services, then the consent is not valid. All four factors must be satisfied in order to have valid consent under the TCPA.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Cyber criminals are very skilled in singling out vulnerable targets for online schemes. For instance, senior citizens are ideal candidates for cyber fraud or Internet fraud because they are more likely to have large amounts of money saved up, and they tend to have better credit, making schemes more profitable for criminals. If you are a senior citizen, or you know of an elder consumer who was a victim of Internet fraud, please contact us today to discuss available legal remedies and protections.

Why Are Senior Citizens Ideal Targets for Internet Fraud?

Older American citizens are often not familiar with the methods available to report fraud. Also, they are hesitant to report fraud because they are worried their relatives will decide they are no longer able to handle their own finances. Unfortunately, failure to report cyber crime immediately leads to a loss of evidence, and makes it very easy for cyber criminals to disappear without a trace. Furthermore, the more time that passes between the crime and prosecution, the more details and evidence are lost to memory. Cyber criminals depend on elder citizens’ weakened memory because the loss of evidence also prevents effective prosecution, and cyber criminals are able to walk away without punishment.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The spread of social media networks and social profiles has, unfortunately, made the potential for cyber harassment more common today. For instance, the phenomenon of revenge porn has sparked controversy in society, prompting California’s Legislature to enact a new law to help deter future acts of involuntary pornography. If you, or someone you know, has been a victim of cyber harassment, including revenge porn, please contact us today to speak to an attorney who can help explain the legal remedies.

What Laws Apply to Acts of Revenge Porn or Cyberharassment?

In October 2013, California’s governor, Jerry Brown, signed Senate Bill 255 (“SB 255”) a law into effect, which made revenge porn a criminal offense, allowing victims to seek legal remedies from perpetrators. Revenge porn, also known as involuntary pornography or “cyber revenge,” is the act of posting pictures and videos that contain sexually-explicit content of a former significant other without their knowledge or consent. Typically, former significant others will post this kind of content to harass or embarrass previous partners. However, in some cases, hackers can get a hold of this type of content and post the pictures on adult websites. And, often times, the party distributing the images will include personal information about the victim (e.g., name, address, and social media accounts). Posting this type of personal information increases traffic through Google and draws more online visitors. However, this information also poses a serious threat to the victims, some of whom have reported the unwanted attention that comes from strangers.

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

The answer to many questions is an online search away. However, online searches are not free of all consequences. Indeed, search engines can track and store a user’s search history and even sell this personal information to third parties for profit. What someone types into a search bar then becomes part of a permanent link tied to that Internet Protocol (“IP”) address. This certainly raises several concerns regarding online and individual privacy. In a highly digitized era, this affects anyone with Internet access, a computer, and even a cellphone.

What are the Main Concerns of Search Engine Privacy?

Search engines track personal information using users’ search history, including a user’s IP address, search terms, name, and location. Websites, such as Google and Yahoo, can then use this information for their marketing, or they can sell users’ search history to marketing firms. Online search history generates an impression of the user, which the public can then use to its advantage–e.g., for criminal investigations, employment opportunities, and to fuel personal disputes. Public opinion in this area strongly disfavors this level of surveillance. As a result, websites have begun to compete in terms of which search engine provides the greater privacy protection. Efforts to improve search engine privacy consider, among other standards, how long a search engine stores user information, how a search engine deletes such information, whether the search engine engages in behavioral targeting (i.e. whether a site uses search history to provide targeted advertisements), and whether the search engine uses profile information to manipulate advertisements. Based on a recent survey by CNet, only Ask.com does not record search terms. Outside the circle of the large search engines, sites such as ixquick.com allege that they do not record IP addresses when users conduct searches through their website. According to the survey, Google also does not engage in behavioral targeting.

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

A celebrity’s image is the most vital marketable quality in the business of entertainment. Indeed, this image, like other forms of intellectual property, is very much the product that a famous personality offers into the economy for a profit. However, while other forms of intellectual property enjoy protection under copyright and trademark laws, an image is vulnerable to all sorts of cyber attacks that can cause severe and irreparable damage. Nonetheless, a celebrity can prepare and prevent cyberspace threats by speaking with an attorney to establish a plan to monitor online activity and prevent harm. Furthermore, acting immediately at the first sign of an attack can prevent on-going and permanent harm to reputation.

What is the Threat to Celebrities In Cyberspace?

Since a famous personality’s name, image, and reputation make up the underlying fame and fortune, any attack can harm the ability to work successfully. However, taking steps to secure a reputation is especially difficult in the case of public figures. For example, First Amendment free speech protections allow for public discussions involving public figures. Accordingly, it can be even more difficult to bring defamation claims where the victim of offensive remarks is in the public eye. Unfortunately, this harmful publicity can limit a celebrity’s capacity to secure future employment. Musicians face the added threat of the unauthorized use of their work product, especially over the Internet. While some use, even though it is unauthorized, provides free publicity over the Internet, this use can prove to be harmful to economic viability. Also, leaking new music allows users to learn about an artist’s new work, but it takes away from the artist’s ability to make a profit.

Continue Reading ›