A lawsuit against consumer review site Yelp! has yielded an opinion that demonstrates the breadth of the protection afforded interactive service providers under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In Levitt v. Yelp! Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124082 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2011), a group of putative
secondary liability
New York High Court Splits on Applicability of Communications Decency Act Section 230 to Online Forum Operator
By Jeffrey Neuburger on
A divided New York Court of Appeals ruled on June 14, 2011, that an online forum administrator’s additions to an allegedly defamatory post by a user are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Shiamili v. The Real Estate Group of New York, Inc., No. 105, (N.Y.
Jury Returns Contributory Trademark Infringement Verdict against Web Site Hosting and SEO Services Provider for a Client’s Sales of Counterfeit Golf Clubs
By Jeffrey Neuburger on
A recent jury verdict of $770,750, in statutory damages for secondary trademark infringement against Bright Builders, a Web hosting and SEO service provider, will serve as a reminder to service providers that there is no statutory safe harbor for contributory online trademark infringement. Unlike the copyright infringement safe harbor provisions…
Credit Card Services Firms with Knowledge of Sales of Infringing Merchandise May Be Liable for Trademark Infringement
By Jeffrey Neuburger on
In Gucci America, Inc. v. Laurette Co. No. 1:2008cv05065 (S.D.N.Y.), the luxury goods manufacturer succeeded in shutting down a Web site called "TheBagAddiction.com" through which the defendants sold counterfeit Gucci handbags. In fact, the defendants consented to the entry of judgment and admitted liability for trademark infringement. In a subsequently filed action, Gucci America, Inc. v. Frontline Processing Corp., 1:2009cv06925 (S.D.N.Y.) the manufacturer sought to hold firms that provided credit card processing services to the operators of TheBagAddiction.com site liable for trademark infringement as well. On June 23, the court in Gucci v. Frontline refused to dismiss Gucci’s complaint, finding that the two firms that processed credit card payments for transactions consummated on the site, as well as the company that brought the Web site operator and the processing firms together, may be liable for contributory trademark infringement.