Issue-spotting the Live Web, attorney Denise Howell muses about cutting edge technology-related legal issues.
Denise Howell is an appellate, intellectual property and technology lawyer who enjoys broad industry recognition for her expertise on the intersection of emerging technologies and law.
On March 12, law professor Mike Madison and I will discuss the legal implications of engaging outsiders in business communities at the Community 2.0 conference. Join us for a recorded conference call to hone in on related considerations of ownership, governance, and liability at 1:00 PST on March 7.
Proposed addition to Google's business and personal productivity hubs: provide users with a Web-enabled way to orchestrate and manage simple legal transactions.
Courts thus far have given far reach to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but are the peculiarities of the Live Web poised to change this, and what about those who might just be adding Web distribution as a means of triggering the statute?
On March 12, lawyer Denise Howell and law professor Mike Madison will discuss the legal implications of engaging outsiders in business communities at the Community 2.0 conference. Join them for a recorded conference call to hone in on related considerations of ownership, governance, and liability at 1:00 PST on February 26.
Evan Brown has a good summary of last week's Doe v. MySpace decision, wherein a federal district court in Texas threw out claims against MySpace due to the protections provided by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
As a new means for social interaction, Twitter is both harnessing and receiving a wealth of attention. But must it be all play and no work?
In his February 6 DRM essay, Steve Jobs took a bold stand on the future (or non-future) or DRM. But Apple itself has never offered a DRM-free iTunes option for artists who agree wholeheartedly with Jobs. Whether it will do so remains to be seen.
The Lactivist/National Pork Board dispute illustrates how the Live Web continues to enable trials in the court of public opinion long before, and much more cheaply, than they could occur in a court of law.
Does the link between iTunes and the iPod, coupled with Apple's strong position in the music download market, make it a monopolist? And is the case a likely candidate for class certification? As interesting as the antitrust issues may be, whether the case persists is likely to turn on whether the court agrees it may proceed as a class action.