Published on: | by

In recent years, global positioning system (“GPS”) technology has increased in usage on various GPS-enabled devices (e.g., cars, smartcards, handheld computers, and cell phones).  This technology brings value to its users, however, it has caused a significant decrease in privacy. Private and public organizations are able to collect and use the information for different purposes. For example, private organizations may collect data for marketing. Naturally, there are proponents who argue for governmental or non-governmental collection and use of information for different reasons (e.g., national security, emergencies). There are also proponents who argue that the collection and use of information leads to abuse (e.g., unauthorized access, invasion of privacy). Therefore, we need clear and uniform legal standards to control when anyone can collect and use information about an individual.

At this time, there is no law that restricts the government’s collection or use of GPS tracking information against individuals. However, some states have enacted legislation that restricts the commercial use of GPS. The Fourth Amendment limits the use of GPS technology, but its protection from unreasonable search and seizure is less effective due to recent technology advancements.

The main issue is privacy.  In today’s highly-technological world, most individuals carry their cell phones all the time. So, wireless network providers (a/k/a cell phone carriers) are able to track the individual’s movements. On a side note, GPS technology has been used to save lives in emergencies. The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) mandates wireless network providers to submit the cell phone location for emergency 911 calls (“E911”) that have been made from cell phones. The law on this issue is relatively clear. It permits cell phone carriers to provide information to third parties (e.g., FBI, NSA, or Police) for E911 emergency calls only. However, they need the cell phone owner’s consent in any other situation.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In recent times, e-residencies (a/k/a “electronic residency”) have become a trend in some European societies. For example, the Republic of Estonia implemented this concept into its banking systems in order to permit people to manage their funds in an electronic environment. According to the Information System Authority, in 2001, the first nation-wide ID-card was introduced as the primary identity document for Estonian citizens both in the real and digital world. It is possible to attach a digital signature to the ID-card that constitutes a handwritten signature.

The Republic of Estonia is operating on the cutting-edge of technology. It has created an electronic state (“e-State”) where almost all transactions are completed by using technology. For example, Estonians developed Skype. The government permits its citizens to start a business online, pay taxes online, administer schools online, and pay their car park fees by mobile phone. It seems that their logistics transcend most societies. However, their achievements have not been without problems. In 2007, a cyberattack took place against its government’s websites and data communication networks.

What are the legal ramifications?

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In general, the interested parties in litigation engage in some sort of “alternative dispute resolution,” or ADR, in order to resolve disputes. In fact, ADR may be used to settle cases that are still pending in court. Both the judicial and legislative branches of government have established new programs in order to promote judicial economy. There are both general and specific applications of the alternative dispute resolution. For example, the United States District Court for the Central District of California offers three options. First, a settlement conference with the district judge or magistrate who is assigned to the case. Second, a mediation with a neutral selected from the Court Mediation Panel. Third, a private mediation.

The courts can use various sanctions to urge the interested parties to engage in ADR. For example, sanctions may include imposing court costs, awarding legal fees, contempt, denial of trial de novo (amounting to confirmation of an arbitrator’s award), and dismissal of the pending litigation. However, they can only use these methods in limited circumstances and pursuant to applicable guidelines.

The trial courts have been allowed to use sanctions to force participation in alternative dispute resolution (e.g., arbitration or mediation). The sanctions that were used, included, contempt, denial of trial de novo, striking of pleadings, and dismissal. Yet, sanctions for failure to attend mediation cannot be imposed without notice and hearing. For example, in Rizk v Millard, 810 S.W. 2d 318 (Tex. App. Houston, 14th Dist., 1991), the Court of Appeals held that a trial court judge’s order striking the pleadings of a defendant, after a hearing in which it was determined that defendant violated a compromise agreement, when there was no pending motion to strike, no notice to defendant, and no hearing, violated due process. Although, it is rare, but in some case, the court may consider the argument that opposing counsel should be sanctioned for the failure to attend mediation or arbitration.  The dismissal of a case is rare as the court has the option to impose additional costs and attorney’s fees on the recalcitrant party or his/her attorney for their failure to participate in such proceedings.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In recent years, much of consumer retail consumption has transitioned to the online marketplace. So, many of us engage in e-commerce, especially when shopping for the upcoming holiday season. While e-commerce is convenient and easy, consumers are becoming more aware of the risks posed by hackers that commit online fraud. Merchants who administer websites for online shopping must take measures to assure that their sites are protected from online hackers and fraud. Online merchants may be held liable for online fraud if the proper steps are not taken to prevent it. Are you an online merchant? Are you worried about protecting the sensitive information of your customers? If so, then you must take certain steps to prevent fraud and unauthorized access (i.e., hacking).

How Does Online Fraud Occur?

Online fraud is fraud that is committed using the Internet. This type of fraud typically comes in two forms: (i) financial fraud; and (ii) identity theft. Financial fraud often occurs when a hacker collects a consumer’s financial information to steal money.  Identity theft usually occurs when a hacker collects a consumer’s information, and then uses it to open bank, mortgage, or credit card accounts. Many times the two types of fraud happen concurrently. Hackers often target e-commerce websites because consumers are constantly offering their credit card and personal information through these websites. Online merchants must take precautions to prevent hacking that leads to this kind of fraud.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The best advertising directs a company’s message directly to the customer.  Direct telephone marketing is an effective way to accomplish this kind of advertising.  However, the Telephone Consumer Protect Act (“TCPA”) now restricts how businesses can engage in direct telephone marketing.  But, there are many other ways companies can directly reach consumers—i.e., text messages, emails, and instant messages. These kinds of communications may not violate the law against direct telephone marketing.  Is your company looking for more effective marketing? Are you unsure how you can advertise directly to customers’ devices?  If so, then recent interpretations of the TCPA may allow your business to advertise directly to customer devices.

What Is the TCPA?

The TCPA was enacted in 1991 to restrict telemarketing and the use of automated telephone calls for the purpose of marketing. The law makes it unlawful “to make any call using any automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) . . . to any service for which the party is charged for the call.” An ATDS means equipment, which has the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator, and to dial such numbers.  A recent case has helped limit the definition of an ATDS.  In Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC, a district court in California held that text message marketing may not be an ATDS, and therefore is in compliance with the TCPA.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The purchase of commercial general liability and umbrella insurance policies are ways to protect your business from liability. However, these types of policies have not adapted to protect policyholders from certain types of cyber liability.  This issue was recently exposed in a case against Urban Outfitters, Inc., and its subsidiary, Anthropologie, Inc. (collectively “Urban Outfitters”). Urban Outfitters found itself with no suitable insurance coverage when facing several lawsuits for privacy infringement that resulted from credit card transactions. Many businesses collect customer data and infringements of customer privacy may not be covered by traditional insurance policies. Do you run a business that collects consumer data? Are you unsure how far your insurance coverage extends in protecting against consumer data breaches? If so, then you may contact us to speak to an attorney about whether you should obtain cyber liability insurance.

What Was the Issue in the Urban Outfitters Case?

In OneBeacon America Insurance Company v. Urban Outfitters, et al., Urban Outfitters was sued in three different states for consumer privacy breaches. Urban Outfitters was sued because of its practice of collecting consumer zip code information when processing credit card transactions. This practice violated multiple consumer privacy laws. Urban Outfitters then looked to its insurance company to defend the multiple lawsuits. However, the insurance company claimed that its general liability policy did not cover that kind of privacy breach. The federal court in Pennsylvania agreed, and held that the insurance company was not obligated to defend Urban Outfitters in any of the lawsuits. The general liability policy only covered “oral or written publication of material that violates a person’s right of privacy,” and even though Urban Outfitters violated consumer privacy, it never published that material.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Peer-to-peer networks have provided an invaluable service that allows users to share information and data around the world. These networks became popular for media sharing, culminating in the infamous Napster scandal. Many are aware of the copyright issues that arise with the use of peer-to-peer media sharing. However, there are other cyber-crime issues that users may expose themselves to when using these networks. Peer-to-peer networks may be used in a variety of legal ways, but users must protect themselves from cyber crime prevalent over these networks. Are you developing or using a peer-to-peer network? If so, then you should be aware of the cyber crimes that you may be exposed to or unintentionally committing.

What is a Peer-to-Peer Network?

A peer-to-peer network is created when two or more computers connect and share resources without going through a separate server.  Typically, peer-to-peer networks are accessed through free software that allows the user to find and download files on another user’s computer.  The traditional computer network uses a client and server model, in which the client computers store and access data on a dedicated server. Peer-to-peer networks move away from the dedicated server. So, each computer is a client and a server. This empowers each user to access and share information directly instead of through a central hub. These networks also provide users with more control. Users can decide to which computers to connect, what files to share, and how many system resources to devote to the network.  Users have many controls over a peer-to-peer network.  However, the average user may expose himself to committing and being the victim of cyber crimes if he does not know how to control the network settings.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The writing is on the wall.  The future of television and media consumption is moving away from network channels and physical sales to an “On-Demand Internet” streaming model.  This trend has already begun with millennials.  Millennials, as a group, do not subscribe to cable television or purchase music. Instead, services like Netflix, Hulu, and SoundCloud provide Millennials with On-Demand access to television shows, movies, and music. Television networks and traditional media companies must adjust to this new trend. This issue recently came to a head in the Supreme Court’s decision in ABC v. Aereo. The Court’s decision, while resolving the immediate issue in the case, has caused a problem in the larger scheme of things. The decision has put a new spin on how the Court applies the Transmit Clause of the Copyright Act of 1976. If you provide digital media content through Internet streaming or access content through the cloud, then the Aereo decision could affect you.

What Was the Issue In ABC v. Aereo?

Aereo is a company that provides a small device that a user can connect to a computer for a monthly fee. The device allows the user to pick up network television broadcast signals and stream them directly to the user’s computer.  ABC and other network broadcasters sued Aereo for copyright infringement. The issue in the case was whether Aereo’s device fits under the definitions of performance and public transmission within the Transmit Clause of the Copyright Act of 1976.  The Transmit Clause describes the exclusive right to “transmit or otherwise communicate a performance . . . of the [copyrighted] work . . . to the public by means of a device or process . . .”  The Court held that Aereo did transmit ABC’s performance and that the transmission was to the public.  Therefore, Aereo infringed upon ABC’s copyrights.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In recent times, a significant amount of business is conducted online.  The Internet connects a business to customers anywhere in the world. What happens when a dispute arises between a business in one state and a customer in another? If the customer wants to bring legal action against the business because of a transaction that occurred online, where does the customer file the action? The answer may depend on the type of website. The courts have created the distinction between active and passive websites. When a transaction occurs through an interactive website, the business may be subject to the jurisdiction of the state where the customer accessed it. Is your business developing a website? Did you know that an interactive website may subject you to the jurisdiction of any state? If so, then you must understand the difference between active and passive websites, and how they may affect your legal rights.

What Is the Active and Passive Distinction?

An interactive or active website is one where business transactions can occur through the website or information can be exchanged to solicit business. On the other hand, a passive website is one that is used to post information for potential customers, but it does not allow for interaction. A passive website is similar to an advertisement. The distinction is crucial because courts will confer personal jurisdiction over companies that maintain active websites in the state where the consumer is located. Active websites include sites that foster online sales, sites that take measures to solicit business in a particular forum, and the use of a third-party site to sell an item. Not every website fits neatly into these two categories, and issues arise when the website falls between the two.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Since the 1930s, the act of publicly raising money for a startup business has been outlawed. Now, with the implementation of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (“JOBS Act”), in 2012, public crowdfunding is legal and encouraged. Startup companies are no longer confined in the resources and opportunities available to raise capital. Private companies can now publicly advertise that they are raising capital and collect investment funds through online crowdfunding services. The JOBS Act allows for two different ways in which a company can utilize this new crowdfunding opportunity. Is your startup looking for an infusion of capital? Are you considering crowdfunding as an option? If so, then you must understand how Title II and Title III of the JOBS Act apply to your startup.

What is Title II?

Title II of the JOBS Act now allows a private company to solicit and advertise investment opportunities to the general public. But, Congress left it up to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to regulate the rules. The SEC has changed Rule 506 of the Securities Act of 1933 to allow for this new public advertising provided that, “the issuer takes reasonable steps to verify that the investors are accredited investors.” Rule 501 defines accredited investor in three different ways: (1) an individual whose net worth or joint net worth with a spouse exceeds $1 million; (2) an individual with an annual income more than $200,000; or (3) a joint annual income with a spouse over $300,000. In addition, issuers must previously file with the SEC that they are claiming this new public solicitation exemption. The penalty for not following these requirements is being banned from fundraising for a year.

Continue Reading ›