Remove companies linkedin-corp
article thumbnail

Court Dissolves hiQ’s Injunction Against LinkedIn–hiQ v. LinkedIn

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Specifically, it was “a ‘people analytics’ company that provided information to businesses about their workforces based on statistical analysis of LinkedIn members’ wholly public profiles.” ” In May 2017, LinkedIn sent hiQ a C&D and blocked its IP addresses. LinkedIn Corp. ,

article thumbnail

Web Scraping for Me, But Not for Thee (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Some of the biggest companies on earth—including Meta and Microsoft—take aggressive, litigious approaches to prohibiting web scraping on their own properties, while taking liberal approaches to scraping data on other companies’ properties. The social media companies have no cognizable property right to assert in this content/data.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Once Again, LinkedIn Can’t Use CFAA To Stop Unwanted Scraping–hiQ v. LinkedIn

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

LinkedIn lawsuit started in 2017. On remand, the Ninth Circuit again says that hiQ is entitled to injunctive relief, because LinkedIn’s claims under the CFAA don’t neutralize hiQ’s colorable tortious interference claims against LinkedIn. Can LinkedIn enjoin hiQ’s scraping on non-CFAA grounds?

article thumbnail

LinkedIn dodges UCL claims because big businesses aren't covered plaintiffs

43(B)log

LinkedIn Corp., 3, 2021) Plaintiffs, on behalf of a putative class of advertisers, alleged that LinkedIn overstates the level of actual user engagement with ads on its platform in order to charge premium rates to advertisers. A couple of months later, LinkedIn notified the affected advertisers and provided them with makegoods.

article thumbnail

Two More Courts Tell Litigants That Social Media Services Aren’t State Actors

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Based on the Complaint’s allegations, it appears the named Defendants – a private social media company and its legal department – are not subject to liability under Section 1983. LinkedIn Corp. LinkedIn Isn’t a State Actor–Perez v. YouTube Isn’t a Company Town (Duh)–Prager University v. Prager Univ.

article thumbnail

As Everyone Expected Years Ago, hiQ’s CFAA Wins Don’t Mean It Can Freely Scrape–hiQ v. LinkedIn (Guest Blog Post, Part 1 of 2)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

LinkedIn case. LinkedIn Corp. On the breach of contract claim, LinkedIn moved for summary judgment on the basis that 1) hiQ’s scraping of its site violated the terms of its User Agreement, and 2) hiQ’s use of “turkers” to make fake accounts breached the terms of its User Agreement. hiQ Labs, Inc. The opinion.

article thumbnail

TTAB Notice of Opposition Filings for Week of August 9, 2021

LexBlog IP

Herkules Equipment Corp. AOVM Companies. LinkedIn Corporation. SERIOUSLY SIMPLE. Unilever Global IP. Engcon Holding AB. North American Marketing, Inc. POLYPHENOL-C. Gallo Winery. RL Brands, LLC. Bloomberg L.P. El Cinco, Inc. Radix IoT, LLC. Radix DLT Limited. Washington Wine Group. BILLIONAIRE U. Majestas Sarl. Momentive, Inc.