Remove topics third-party-liability
article thumbnail

Section 230 Protects Services That Permit Anonymous Third-Party Posts–Bride v. Snap

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Imposing such a duty would “necessarily require [Defendants] to monitor third-party content,” e.g., in the form of requiring Defendants to ensure that each user’s post on their applications is traceable to a specifically identifiable person. Third-Party Content. ” To get around this, the plaintiffs cited Lemmon v.

article thumbnail

Section 230 Preempts Game User’s Lawsuit Over Game Moderators’ Behavior–Quinteros v. Forge of Empires

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity for claims based on third-party content. In addition, “Plaintiff has not cited any duty of Defendants to protect Plaintiff from alleged harassment by third parties in a video game.” Plus, Section 230 applies to any statements made by third parties. Section 230.

Contracts 112
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Reddit Asks Court to Protect Users’ Anonymity in Third-Party Piracy Lawsuit

TorrentFreak

The “repeat infringer” issue remains a hot topic in U.S. The stakes are high in these liability lawsuits. If a party wants to unmask users through the court, it has to meet a stringent standard, which isn’t the case here. courts, with ongoing lawsuits against several ISPs.

Privacy 126
article thumbnail

ChatUSG: What Companies Doing Business with the Government Need to Know About Artificial Intelligence

Intellectual Property Law Blog

This Guidance covers some important topics. Can the developer’s terms of service (TOS) effectively shift liability to the user as some try to do? One issue that companies need to consider is that the terms of service for many of these tools try to shift liability to users.

article thumbnail

Ninth Circuit Pulls Back Rogers Test in Light of Jack Daniels Decision

The IP Law Blog

Under the Rogers test, the use of a third-party mark in an expressive work does not violate the Lanham Act unless the use has no artistic relevance and explicitly misleads as to the source or the content of the work. The district court and the Second Circuit on appeal both said no, and the Rogers test was created. Punchbowl Inc.

article thumbnail

Who is liable when an artificial intelligence system infringes copyright – a missed opportunity by the PRC Court

LexBlog IP

This time, the Guangzhou Internet court had to tackle a different intellectual property issue relating to generative AI – liability for infringing work output from an AI program. The defendant argued that the AI system is provided by a third party, and the defendant only provided a platform for the public to access the AI system.

article thumbnail

AG Szpunar advises CJEU not to extend direct liability for trade mark infringement to operators of online marketplaces

The IPKat

Preliminary remarks The AG began his Opinion noting how the topic of intermediary liability has always raised novel questions over time. This said, the interests of rightholders cannot be considered in isolation and cannot, on their own, justify a finding of liability of platform operators due to third-party infringements.