Published on: | by

The content of an online search result for an individual generates a profile of the individual. Such content paints a picture for potential employers and colleagues, and the information may not be ideal. Therefore, in order to protect your online reputation and your overall image, it is important to take certain steps to monitor your online content.

First, signing up for social networks like Facebook and LinkedIn allows you to control the content that a web search will produce. Personalized Facebook and LinkedIn pages show up as the first results of a Google online search. This controls the content that attaches to your online reputation.

Andy Beal, who co-authored Radically Transparent: Monitoring and Managing Reputations Online, suggests that people should monitor their online reputation the same way they monitor their credit. This helps catch defamatory online postings in time to prevent a damaging reputation from solidifying. Beal suggests setting up a news feed that notifies individuals when their name is mentioned in an online posting. Google provides this option through Google Alerts, which will accomplish this for full name searches.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In January 2013, the California Homeowner Bill of Rights will take effect, providing unparalleled protection for homeowners across the state. This Bill, which is the first of its kind, will reform the foreclosure process and provide unique protection for homeowners. The Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris pioneered the Bill in an effort to find a solution to the state’s foreclosure crisis. Under this legislation, homeowners in this state will have the best protection against foreclosures and lender abuses in the nation.

The foreclosure rates in California are one of the highest in America. This law comes at a time when homeowners struggle with banks to keep their homes, a battle that banks win more often than not. Indeed, a recent audit of the foreclosures in San Francisco revealed that 99% of the underlying loans had some legal issues. In addition, 84% of those loans exhibited “clear violations of the law.” However, after California passed the Bill, homeowners should be able to take on lenders more effectively in an effort to keep their homes.

A key provision in the Bill restricts “dual-track foreclosures.” As a result, lenders will be barred from continuing foreclosure proceedings while they are in loan modification discussions with homeowners. The Bill also imposes civil liability against lenders for utilizing “robo-signing” to file foreclosure documents. Through robo-signing lenders’ employees approve foreclosures without first reviewing the underlying mortgage documents. In order to help improve communications between lenders and homeowners, the Bill will also require that lenders present a single contact person for each customer. This will ensure that homeowners are able to facilitate sufficient communications with their lenders in order to efficiently reach a solution regarding their mortgages.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The technological advancements and the ever-expansive world of cyberspace are in a perpetual state of conflict with individual privacy concerns. For example, a recent research project by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology demonstrates that independent component analysis allows companies to track changes in pulse by the subsequent change in skin color that is readily visible through a video signal. In addition, employers, credit agencies, and health insurance providers can now purchase indexes that contain consumer profiles based on individual consumer’s browsing history, site membership, and online purchases.

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a report that proposes the steps companies can take to ensure optimal protection of consumer privacy. The report, “Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: Recommendations for Businesses and Policymakers,” urges companies to incorporate privacy protection in every stage of their products, provide a mechanism against online activity tracking, and fully disclose what user information it shares with other entities.

The California legislature has proposed a new bill that would impose new restrictions on social networking sites, which would limit the information available about users. The proposed legislation would allow users to select privacy settings before ever using the site, which limits the sites accessibility. Social Networking sites, such as Facebook, have responded that such legislation would inappropriately burden the sites, in turn devastating cyber-business in California.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) may be preparing to file an antitrust suit against Google for abusing its dominance as an Internet search engine to stifle competition from other search engines and arbitrarily increase advertisement costs.

The Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7, which governs American antitrust law, makes direct and indirect “restraint of trade or commerce” illegal, both in interstate and foreign markets. The Clayton Antitrust Act, under 15 U.S.C. §§ 12-27, amended the Sherman Act in 1914 to include specific prohibited acts, such as price discrimination and mergers and acquisitions that substantially reduce competition. The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act, 15 U.S.C. § 6a, also limited the Sherman Act’s application to foreign trade only where “such conduct has a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect” on “trade or commerce” within the United States.

The FTC investigation is rooted in accusations that Google engages in “preferencing,” which means that Google engineers searches to produce results that profit its own secondary services, while limiting search access to competing services. In addition, the investigation concerns whether Google favors advertisements from its own services against competing services.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Through globalization, outsourcing, and growing industry abroad international commerce has come to the forefront of business practices. Especially in the realm of electronic commerce, or e-commerce, where entire transactions take place online, international commerce is a major factor. Accordingly, legal considerations arise out of international business conduct, which includes questions of applicable law, jurisdictional concerns, and appropriate service of process in the case of a legal dispute.

One such applicable body of law is the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”). The CISG was enacted in 1980 when international business and international e-commerce were a much less prominent mode of commerce. However, a growing international business community has placed the CISG in the forefront of fundamental business legislation in the international community. The CISG is intended to establish a “uniform and fair regime” for international contracts in order to provide for certainty in international commerce.

Additionally, the Hague Conference on Private International Law is an international organization that combines different legal traditions and practices to form a comprehensive legal framework to govern international legal transactions. The various Hague Conference Conventions have established frameworks for the practice of law across international borders. For example, the 1965 Hague Convention on Service Abroad has installed a system of service for legal documents that is not only more reliable, but certainly much more efficient and simple. The United States Department of State provides the applicable guidelines for various methods of service of legal documents abroad. By offering a more streamlined process, international legislation allows parties to conduct business more efficiently and regulates international legal disputes, which in turn minimizes costs and saves time for clients.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

As online consumerism expands alongside ever-growing government deficits, legislatures look towards online transactions as a potential source of taxation revenue. Currently, there is no universal taxation on the Internet. Based on Quill Corporation v. North Dakota, a 1992 Supreme Court decision, online merchants that do not have a physical presence in a state are not required to collect sales tax from consumers for online transactions.

However, there is a rising movement towards imposing sales taxes on online transactions. For instance, the House Judiciary Committee is considering the Marketplace Equity Act of 2011, which would serve this exact purpose. Internet sales taxes could raise $20 billion for states. The National Retail Federation supports this law, explaining that the Act will help put an end to “showrooming” where customers review products in physical stores, but complete purchases online in order to save money by avoiding sales taxes.

Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, has commented that although an Internet sales tax may be due, online merchants face an undue hardship because collecting taxes from different states and jurisdictions is highly complicated and involves complex calculations to abide by the various tax rates. The National Retail Federation agrees that taxation on the Internet is largely “a collection issue.”

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Since the Internet allows companies to conduct gambling online, albeit illegally, the legal implications of the sport have come into consideration. Federal and State level gambling laws strictly restrict and regulate gambling throughout the country. The opportunity to conduct gambling online allowed site operators to register sites offline, in districts that allowed online gambling, and begin taking bets while circumventing United States law.

However, according to the Wire Act, under 18 U.S.C. § 1084, an operator that utilizes the American telecommunication network to transmit information to place and manage wagers online is subject to prosecution, fines, and possibly imprisonment. In a 2003 civil case involving an Internet financial services company, the United States government prosecuted and settled with the company for $10 million regarding the company’s involvement in online gambling related transactions. Transmitting information in relation to wagers may be exempt from the Wire Act, under 18 U.S.C. § 1084(b), if the information is transmitted from and to a state or country that permits such betting.

The U.S. Department of Justice maintained that all gambling within America was illegal under the Wire Act. However, in a 2002 case, the Fifth Circuit held in In re Mastercard International, Inc. that Congress intended the Wire Act to apply exclusively to sport-related online wagers. In 2006, Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which made it illegal to accept payments in relation to online gambling. Interestingly, this Act does not make it illegal to conduct online gambling.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The legal implications of electronic signatures have drawn public and legal attention as more parties contract over the Internet, agreeing to terms with the single click of a mouse.

In 2000 Congress passed the Electronic Signatures in Global and International Commerce Act (ESGICA), under Title 15 U.S.C. Chapter 96 (sections 7001-7031), which made electronic signatures as binding as traditional signatures. By making “e-signatures” legally equivalent to paper signatures, ESGICA introduced a new mode of conducting business – the “e-contract.” California, along with 46 other states, has adopted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, under California Civil Code §§ 1633.11-1633.17, which governs state law surrounding electronic contracts.

An electronic contract, often called an “e-contract,” exists entirely in electronic form. Parties create and sign the agreement online, without the need to produce hard copies. For example, two parties may correspond over email to create the terms of an agreement and sign the contract after finalization.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The expansion of the Internet is leading towards an increase in suits for defamation, as more people are able to freely publish their opinions on the Internet and reach a worldwide audience.

A claim for defamation involves an untrue statement that damages a person’s reputation. Defamation in written or printed form is categorized as libel, while defamation involving oral statements is categorized as slander.

The elements required for a defamation claim come under question in light of the expansion of the Internet because the Internet gives the average consumer broad freedom to post opinions regarding, among others, people, corporations, events, and politics. Furthermore, the nature of the Internet allows worldwide exposure of a common consumer’s opinion, and such a posting may remain on the Internet almost endlessly. Furthermore, since most controversial cyber-postings are anonymous, parties wishing to pursue an Internet defamation claim face the unique obstacle of identifying the party that caused the harm.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

According to California Civil Code § 3426, the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, a “trade secret” is information that maintains independent economic value from non-disclosure and is a result of efforts that justify non-disclosure under the circumstances. The knowingly wrongful taking or disclosure of trade secrets is defined as “misappropriation” within the Code, and is considered unfair competition, a civil offense.

In order to initiate a claim for the misappropriation of a trade secret, the following elements must be met:

– The subject of the claim must fall within the protection of the Code,

Continue Reading ›