Showing posts with label online; website. Show all posts
Showing posts with label online; website. Show all posts

AdvanFort v. International Registires

AdvanFort v. International Registries (5/12/15)


STATUS: Court grants motion to dismiss relating to section 230 defense.


E.D.Va.: Online Magazine Gets Section 230 Protection for Third Party Article
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
The plaintiffs alleged that the Maritime Executive was a partial information content provider.  The court's response is on the right track until it suggests that if the Maritime Executive pays for the content, then it might be a partial information content provider.
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2015/05/online-magazine-gets-section-230-protection-for-third-party-article-advanfort-v-international-registries.htm


Opinion:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vaedce/1:2015cv00220/314532/45

Yelp v. Hadeed Carpet Cleaning

Yelp v. Hadeed Carpet Cleaning (4/16/15)


STATUS: Virginia Supreme Court rules in favor of Yelp.


Virginia Supreme Court Won't Force Yelp to Reveal Identities of Anonymous Commenters
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
In a victory for Yelp and its anonymous commenters, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that the Circuit Court could not force the California based online review site to reveal the identity of users who had posted negative reviews of the California carper cleaning service.
http://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news/virginia-supreme-court-wont-force-yelp-reveal-identities-anonymous-c


Opinion:
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opnscvwp/1140242.pdf

Sletten v. Continental Casualty

Sletten v. Continental Casualty (March 19, 2015)


STATUS: 8th Circuit finds in favor of insurer.


8th.Cir.: Insurer Doesn't Have to Cover Online Libel Claim
In an interesting non-media decision, the 8th Circuit held that an insurer was not required to defend an insured who allegedly posted false and defamatory reviews of a business competitor.  Although the policy covered defamation in general, it excluded defamation with the intent to injure. 


Order: http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/03/132918P.pdf

Brannies v. Internet ROI

Brannies v. Internet ROI


STATUS:  Federal Court finds website free of wrong doing.


S.D. Ga.: Libel Claim Tossed
Courthouse News
A Massachusetts-based news website that allegedly portrayed a man as a child molester by linking his photo to the alleged sexual assault of a 10 yr old girl does not have to face libel claims in Georgia.


Order: http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/03/23/Internet%20Defamation.pdf

Brown v. Times-Picayune

Brown v. Times-Picayune (11/3/14)


STATUS: Appellate court reverses lower court decision.


La.App.: Appeals Court Reverses Dismissal of Lawyer's Defamation Suit Against Nola.com
Times-Picayune
Claiborne Brown sued the organization and reporter Claire Galofaro for a headline that ran in the newspaper.
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/12/appeals_court_reverses_dismiss.html


Opinion:
http://www.la-fcca.org/opiniongrid/opinionpdf/2014%20CA%200160%20Decision%20Appeal.pdf

Huon v. Breaking Media

Huon v. Breaking Media (12/4/14)


STATUS: District Court will allow defamation claim.


N.D. Ill.:  Legal Blog Faces Defamation Liability For Mischaracterizing Prior Legal Proceedings
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Popular blog Above the Law wrote two stories about plaintiff's brush with the legal system. After the plaintiff was acquitted, ATL added an update to the story reflecting this.  Plaintiff sued ATL in 2011 for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false light.
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2014/12/legal-blog-faces-defamation-liability-for-mischaracterizing-prior-legal-proceedings-huon-v-above-the-law.htm


Opinion:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/12/05/above%20the%20law.pdf

Roca Lab v Does

Roca Labs v Does (11/14/14)


STATUS: Suit filed in Circuit Court.


Fla.Cir.: Roca Labs Sues Anonymous Commenters In Convoluted Plot To Get Negative Comments De-Indexed From Google
TechDirt
Roca Labs is suing 11 anonymous commenters who posted comments to PissedConsumer.com, but it doesn't seem interested in who posted the comments; instead, it just wants to get a court order to pressure Google and others into no longer linking to those reviews.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20141202/15032929299/roca-labs-latest-nutty-strategy-to-delete-negative-reviews-sue-anonymous-commenters-pretend-comments-are-property.shtml


Complaint:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1373944/12-02-03.pdf

Ringgold v. Radar Online

Ringgold v. Radar Online (11/6/14)


STATUS: Complaint filed in Eastern District court.


E.D.N.Y.: Radar Sullied Name of Tom Cruise Bodyguard, He Says
Courthouse News
When Tom Cruise sued Radar Online over careless reporting, the website doubled down by lying about his former bodyguard, a federal complaint alleges.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/11/06/radar-sullied-name-of-tom-cruise-bodygard-he-says.htm


Complaint:
http://www.medialaw.org/images/medialawdaily/ringgold11.07.14.pdf

Concerned Citizens for Judicial Fairness v. Yacucci

Concerned Citizens for Judicial Fairness v. Yacucci (September 3, 2014)


STATUS: Florida appeals court reverses lower court ruling.


Fla.App.Ct.: Ruling: Judge Couldn't Block Website from Publishing Critical Stories
Palm Beach Post
The 4th District Court of Appeals on Wednesday slapped a senior judge in St. Lucie County for shutting down the website of a political committee after a judge running for re-election claimed it contained defamatory information about him.
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2014/aug/120563.pdf

Kinney v. Barnes

Kinney v. Barnes (August 29, 2014)


STATUS: Texas court sets precedent by ruling that court can't stop republishing of defamatory content.


Tex.: New Remedy for Online Defamation
Texas Lawyer
The Texas Supreme Court recently set precedent by ruling that a court can order an author to delete a defamatory posting, but cannot stop him from reposting the same statements elsewhere.
http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202668854527/New-Remedy-for-Online-Defamation?slreturn=20140808102826


Order:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2014/aug/130043.pdf

Cornett v. Gawker Media

Cornett v. Gawker Media (August 28, 2014)


STATUS: Federal judge refused order of early settlement.


D. Nev.: Surfer Loses Bid to Settle Her Spat with Gawker
Courthouse News
Noting a lack of desire on the part of Gawker, a federal judge refused to order an early settlement conference in a celebrity surfer's defamation case.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/09/02/70964.htm


Order:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/09/02/gawkorder.pdf

In re John Doe a.k.a "Trooper"

In re John Doe a.k.a "Trooper" (August 29, 2014)


STATUS: Texas court will not out identity of anonymous blogger.


Texas Supreme Court Voids Order to Identify Blogger
Austin American-Statesman
An Ohio company, seeking to sue a sharply critical blogger who wrote under a pseudonym, cannot use the Texas courts to discover the online author's identity.
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/texas-supreme-court-voids-order-to-identify-blogge/nhB7m/


Opinion:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2014/aug/130073.pdf

John Doe No.1 v. Burke

John Doe No.1 v. Burke (May 29, 2014)


STATUS: Appeals Court upheld Anti-SLAAP motion.


In its first decision to interpret the District of Columbia's Anti-SLAPP law, the D.C. Court of Appeals quashed a subpoena to an anonymous Wikipedia user sued for defamation.  The D.C. statute goes further than other jurisdictions in protecting anonymous speech by affording anonymous defendants the ability to file special motions to quash subpoenas for their identities. The Court first held that it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the trial court's denial of the motion.  On the merits of the motion, the Court held that plaintiff, an attorney, was a public figure who failed to show that edits to her Wikipedia page were made with actual malice.


Opinion:
http://www.dccourts.gov/internet/documents/13-CV-83.pdf

Palmer v. KlearGear.com

Palmer v. KlearGear.com (May 5, 2014)


D.Utah.: Judge: KlearGear Can't Collect $3,500.00 From Couple That Left Negative Online Review
Ars Technica
A federal court judge has ruled in favor of a Utah couple who criticized an online retailer.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/judge-kleargear-cant-collect-3500-from-couple-that-left-negative-online-review/


Default Judgment:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/224430518/Palmer-v-Kleargear-Default-Judgment

Dancing Deer v. Liles

Dancing Deer Mountain v. Liles (March 12, 2014)


STATUS: Appeals court ruled that claim will be heard.


Or.App.:  Trashing Reception Hall Online May Be Libelous
Courthouse News
A man who posted a negative review online about an Oregon wedding venue must face defamation claims, a state appeals court ruled.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/03/18/66254.htm


Complaint:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/03/18/Dancing%20Deer.pdf

Neuman v. Liles

Neuman v. Liles  (March 12, 2014)


STATUS: Court reverses trial court's ruling, allowing defamation claim to be heard.


Ore. App.: Online Commenter Critical of Business Can Be Sued for Defamation
The Oregonian
Thinking about posting a bad review of your latest dining experience, doctor your consulted or contractor you decided to hire?  Better think twice, if you don't want to be sued.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2014/03/online_commenter_critical_of_b.html


Order:
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A149982.pdf

Gillon Music'N Celebrations v Ting

Gillon Music'N Celebrations v Ting (9/24/13)

STATUS: Federal judge rules lawsuit cannot be brought.

D.N.J.: Promoter Can't Sue Client Over Web Site
Courthouse News
A music promoter who has appeared on "The Apprentice" and "Platinum Brides" cannot sue an unhappy client over critical postings on an online consumer complaint board.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/09/30/61592.htm

Opinion:
 http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/09/30/Iris.pdf

Sanders v. Walsh

Sanders v. Walsh  (9/16/13)

STATUS: Appellate panel rules against online posters.

Cal.App.: Courts Crack Down on Web Posters Playing "Fast and Loose" with Facts
The Recorder
For the second time in many months, an appellate panel has ruled against posts on Yelp and similar sites.  The decisions cut against the grain of some previous appellate decisions which have held that readers expect posts on internet message boards to play fast and loose with the truth, setting a higher bar to defamation.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202619508102&Courts_Crack_Down_on_Web_Posters_Playing_Fast_and_Loose_With_Facts&slreturn=20130823122033

Bernath v. Tabitha

Bernath v. Tabitha (August 26, 2013)

STATUS: Yelp gets anti-SLAPP victory.

Ore.Cir.: Yelp Gets Another Victory in Anti-SLAPP Lawsuit
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
This case offers another data point on how 47 USC 230 and anti-SLAPP laws mutually reinforce each other.
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/09/yelp_gets_anoth.htm

Order:
http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1499&context=historical

Budget Van Lines v. Better Business Bureau

Budget Van Lines v. Better Business Bureau (8/20/2013)

STATUS: Court is allowing lawsuit over comments made on online review site.

Cal. App.: C.A. Allows Suit Against Better Business Bureau Over Rating
Metropolitan News Enterprise
A company that brokers household moving services can sue the local Better Business Bureau for disparaging its service on the BBB’s website, the Court of Appeal for this district ruled yesterday.
http://www.metnews.com/articles/2013/bbb082113.htm

Order:  http://www.metnews.com/articles/2013/bbb082113.htm