Laws of .com

Volume VIII, Issue 2: January 21, 2010

Twitter Sarcastic Airport Bomb Threat Results in Arrest

Kodak Pursues RIM and Apple for Patent Infringement at the ITC

Non-Profits Challenge Food Patent

Possible Resolution of Viacom Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Against YouTube

Amazon in Danger of Sales Tax, Again

Bulletproof Servers in China Serve File-Sharing Services and Spammers

Italian Consumer Group, ADOC seeks class-action suit against Microsoft

Twitter Sarcastic Airport Bomb Threat Results in Arrest

Paul Chambers’ (http://twitter.com/PauljChambers now blocked from view) January 7, 2010 tweet, "Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!", resulted in him being arrested one week later by the British police (Robin Hood Airport is located outside Doncaster, in Yorkshire, England) for the purported bomb hoax under anti-terrorism legislation. He was also reportedly suspended from work and had his smart phone and computer confiscated: so much for his planned flight to Ireland which he feared would be delayed or cancelled for snow. Chambers denies the charge, saying the post was a joke. As a contributor to the Twitter social networking site, in which participants broadcast messages to followers in 140 character increments, Mr. Chambers’ apolitical Twitter bio (“ Film-watching, football-loving, rubbish-talking, hyphen-using idiot.”) seems to make his defence for him. Clearly, however, the damage to Mr. Chambers has been done – but for what public benefit?

This is the first Twitter related arrest in the U.K., but there have been others in the U.S., including the high profile arrests during the Pittsburgh G20 Summit, where two men used Twitter to notify fellow protesters of police locations.

For additional information, visit:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/18/robin-hood-airport-twitter-arrest
http://tinyurl.com/yao42ot

For information on the previous G20 arrests, visit:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/04/man-arrested-twitter-g20-us

For the Terrorism Act 2006 (UK), c. 11, visit:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/pdf/ukpga_20060011_en.pdf

Back to Headlines

Kodak Pursues RIM and Apple for Patent Infringement at the ITC

Eastman Kodak Company (“Kodak”) has sued Research In Motion, Ltd. (“RIM”) and Apple Inc. (“Apple”) for infringing U.S. patent no. 6,292,218 related to digital camera technology. The matter was brought before the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”). The suit relates to the importation and related sale, where the ITC has jurisdiction, of certain mobile phones and wireless communication devices. The suit is directed against RIM’s BLACKBERRY BOLD 9700 and Apple’s iPHONE 3GS, among others, having digital cameras.

Kodak seeks a prohibition order preventing such activities. Kodak has previously pursued other device companies in court and the ITC, including Sony, LG and Samsung, in respect of the same patent. Settlements have been reached or are being negotiated in many of these prior actions. In late 2008, RIM filed a declaratory judgment action with the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Texas against Kodak, seeking a determination of non-infringement and unenforceability of the patent in question. This action remains pending.

For additional information, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/washpostKodakRIM
http://tinyurl.com/KodakNewsRIM

Back to Headlines

Non-Profits Challenge Food Patent

Two non-profit companies in the United States (Breedlove Foods Inc. and the Mama Cares Foundation) have sought to invalidate a U.S. patent relating to a ready-to-use therapeutic food product called “Plumpy’nut”, designed to feed the severely malnourished. These non-profit companies have the assistance of a prominent Chicago patent litigator, and rather than pay royalties to the French owners of the patent, they have filed a claim alleging that the patent is too broad. The patent’s owners claim that the patent is important because it requires licensing of production, maintaining quality of the product, and that royalties are needed to fund further research and development.

For additional information, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/yan2qck

Back to Headlines

Possible Resolution of Viacom Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Against YouTube

A recent report indicates that each of Viacom and Google are preparing to file for summary judgment in respect of the lawsuit by Viacom for copyright infringements occurring on YouTube. Viacom claims that YouTube is liable for encouraging copyright infringement, from which it profits when users upload unauthorized TV and movie clips. Google, however, claims that YouTube is not responsible for any infringing content posted by users by virtue of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which provides immunity to Internet service providers for content supplied by users. The outcome of the case is being watched closely based on its potential to set an important precedent for Web video and music services.

For additional information, visit:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10429617-261.html

Back to Headlines

Amazon in Danger of Sales Tax, Again

As a result of the economic downturn in the United States, several states are revisiting the possibility of imposing a sales tax on Internet retailers, including Amazon.com Inc. (“Amazon”), a Washington-based, multinational electronic commerce company. Currently, U.S. retailers must collect sales taxes only in states where they have a physical presence, allowing e-commerce companies such as Amazon to realize a competitive advantage over traditional, brick-and-mortar businesses. In an attempt to generate additional tax-revenue in 2009, some states argued that the “physical presence” requirement was met by an Internet retailer if an affiliate with a physical presence used ads on its own website that linked to the Internet retailer. Amazon pushed back with a high-profile and partially successful challenge to the proposed bills, calling them unconstitutional and threatening to end affiliate programs. To date, only a handful of states, including North Carolina and Rhode Island, have imposed a sales tax on Internet retailers; and Amazon continues to only collect sales tax in four of the 17 states where it or its subsidiaries have a physical presence. However, with states still facing serious fiscal challenges, and the potential of tens of millions of dollars in extra tax revenue, lawmakers may revive efforts to impose such a tax this year.

For additional information, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/y8h66qe

Back to Headlines

Bulletproof Servers in China Serve File-Sharing Services and Spammers

“Bulletproof” servers provide a service that online criminal groups, spammers, and file-sharing services rely upon to function: servers that are guaranteed to never shut down and allow their owners to avoid legal liability. In order to do this, the bulletproof servers take advantage of legal loopholes in various jurisdictions. Sweden was considered such a safe haven until last year when four men were convicted in a Swedish court for copyright infringement in connection with the running of the popular Pirate Bay file-sharing website. After the convictions, the Pirate Bay moved its servers to the Ukraine and then to the Netherlands in order to avoid further legal action. Finding the right location for a bulletproof server is the key to the server’s successful and continued operation.

According to recent research, most bulletproof servers are now located in China because of both low operating costs and the ability to avoid prosecution. Furthermore, Chinese authorities rarely co-operate with other countries that are trying to expose and prosecute criminal groups, spammers, and file-sharing services. The University of Alabama at Birmingham identified six bulletproof servers in China that hosted more than 22,000 websites responsible for sending pharmaceutical spam. Even despite the possibility of a death sentence for being convicted of hacking, low enforcement rates make China a popular location for hosting bulletproof servers.

For additional information, visit :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jan/05/internet-piracy-bulletproof

Back to Headlines

Italian Consumer Group, ADOC seeks class-action suit against Microsoft

L’associazione nazionale per la difesa e l’orientamento dei consumatori (ADOC), the Italian Consumers’ Defence and Guidance Association created to serve the interests of the public, is seeking to mount a class-action lawsuit against Microsoft. The battle stems from Microsoft’s decision to pre-install the Windows Operating System (“OS”) on personal computers, thereby not allowing individuals who prefer not to use Windows OS to opt-out.

A new law was passed on January 1, 2010 in Italy permitting class-action law suits. ADOC is seeking compensation for the costs of the unwanted Windows OS, as the new Italian law only provides for compensation for costs and not for punitive damages. Although judges have not yet accepted the lawsuit, ADOC is particularly hopeful that the case will commence in the near future, and ADOC has already won a pilot case in a Florence Court. Approximately 2,000 individuals have expressed an interest in participating in the lawsuit. The Windows OS software costs between 150 and 250 Euros.

For additional information, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/ybqk4hf

Back to Headlines