3 Kinds of Intellectual Property

Patents

Trademarks

Copyrights

Intellectual Property

Trademarks

·      Anything that distinguishes a company, makes up part of their identity

·      Ex: coca cola has trademark protection over shape of bottle, MGM has trademark over lion’s roar at beginning of movie

·      People who violate trademarks are people who are trying to fool you. Ex: if you buy a soda that comes in a coca-cola shaped bottle, you think it’s a coke but it’s not, they fooled you.

Intellectual Property/Trademarks

Patriots Point Museum vs. Hunley

o   Submarine in Charleston, friends of hunley brought it up to surface and now it’s a tourist attraction.

o   Dickson was soldier who died, he carried a gold coin because he said it was good luck

o   Patriots Point Museum makes a replica of coloniel dickson’s gold coin

o   Friends of the Hunley said you can’t do that because you don’t own the trademark to the gold coin

o   Friends of the hunley won case because they spent tons of money. Feeling was they had gotten permission to go down and recover submarine so that now had rights to gold coin.

Intellectual Property/Trademarks

Moseley vs. Victoria's Secret

o   Moseley runs store in Elizabethtown Kentucky

  Called “victor’s little secret” where he sells lingerie and sexually explicit materials

o   Victoria’s Secret is angry and sues

o   Goes to Supreme Court, votes for Victor

o   Why?

 Victoria’s Secret needed to prove they suffered some financial loss, it’s not like they were being put out of business because of his shop.

o   Victoria’s secret would have been better off if they had ignored it because the press picked up on it and drew attention to it.

Copyrights/Infringment 

3  burdens of proof

·      Party that feels they have been wronged will file a copyright infringement suit.

·      Company doing suing must prove 3 burdens of proof:

o   1. Originality: AKA idea no one had come up with before

o   2. Access: company who ‘stole’ idea knew about it

  3. Substantial similarity

Intellectual Property/Copyright

Murray vs. NBC

(Burden 1: have to prove originality)

o   Murray suing nbc over rights to Cosby Show

o   Show was huge hit, big money maker

o   Murray used to work for NBC, he once submitted idea for a sitcom with Cosby as the star and basic premise of the show was a married couple as professionals

o   Murray suggests sitcom, Father’s Day, and NBC says no

o   Couple of years later, Cosby Show airs and he’s angry they stole his idea.

o   Court votes for NBC, said nothing in Murray’s proposal suggested genuine originality. He never had any scripts, or written out program.

Intellectual Property/Copyright

Jason vs. Fonda Productions

(Burden 2: Have to prove thieves who stole your idea knew about it)

o   Fonda producing film about Vietnam war, veterans who come home

o   Sonja Jason wrote a book about it, argues Jane Fonda’s movie is her book/idea.

o   Goes to court

§  Part of Jason’s presentation was that her book came before her movie

§  Jane Fonda won because just because the book came first doesn’t mean that it was the basis for the movie, need more specifics

§  Movie wasn’t similar to book

Intellectual Property/Copyright

Fogerty vs. Fantasy Records

(Burden 3: Substantail similarity)

o   Fogerty is well known singer

o   Fantasy is record company

o   They have a falling out, Fogerty goes on tour, Fantasy records says you cannot sing those songs because we own copyright

o   Fogerty says that songs are different

o   Record company says they are still ours, substantially similar.

Jury listens to both

Court Rules in favor of record company, sayings songs were similar enough

Intellectual Property/Copyright

Universal Studios vs. Film Ventures

(Burden 3: substantial similarity)

-2 movie studios going to court

-U.S. wants to protect movie rights on Jaws

-F.V. created movie called Great White

-U.S. says it’s just a remake of Jaws, F.V. says it’s not substantially similar

-Court says it was copyright infringement b/c both movies had same type of plot, characters, tourism concerns, etc.

Intellectual Property

Fair Use:Definition and 4 factors

-Protect people who use copyrighted material

-1976 passes fair use law

-People say they did take it, but it was legal

4 Fair Use Factors:

1. Purpose & Character of useà was it used for education or financial gain?

2. Nature of the work-- if you haven’t sold product for 50 yrs. then who cares?

3. Amount you used & significance-- 1 pg. out of 400 pgs.? Heart & soul of work? Main part?

4. Effect on market value-- how much less is my work worth now?

o   #4 is usually the most important aspect

-Point of fair use is to let great works be disseminated to society

Intellectual Property/Copyright/Fair Use

Basic Books vs. Kinkos

o   Kinkos printed up textbooks for teachers and kinkos would sell it to the bookstore and the students

o   Textbook publishers didn’t like this so they sued kinkos for copyrighting violations

o   Goes to court

-  Kinkos says it was for educational purposes

-  Also that it was only a small part of the book

-  Kinkos loses the case

-  Kinkos was making a profit, not using it for educational purpose even though the teachers are

Intellectual  Property/Copyright/Fair Use

Time vs. Bernard Geiss Associates 

o   Involved assassination of JFK

o   Abraham Zapruder

§  Captured assassination on film

§  Media and police want film

o   Time is magazine publishing company who pay Zapruder 150,000 dollars for the film so Time now owns copyrights to film

o   A few years later a guy wants to write a book called “six seconds in dallas” about moments leading up to assassination

§  Bernard are the publishers

o   Author says he can’t prove any of his theories until Time releases film/pictures .

o   Bernard goes back to look at pictures from magazine that was published right after the assassination, they hire an artist to replicate the pictures.

o   Time sues saying they stole the pictures/violated copyrights

o   Bernard argues educational purposes

o   Need to consider the effect of market value, will it hurt Time magazine if this is published?

  No, probably would make it more valuable

o   Court decides the issue was of such historical importance then they should be allowed to use pictures

Intellectual Property/Copyright/Fair use

Harper and Row vs. Nation

 o   Involves president Ford

o   Writes book called “a time to heal”

o   Publisher is Harper and Row, they have control over copyright

o   Wants book goes on sale, they allow magazines to use exerpts from book

o   Nation, a magazine, prints excerpts from the book without paying for it. Somehow they got advanced copy of it

o   Other magazine, Reader’s Digest, is angry b/c they paid 25, 000 for right to excerpts, but now someone else has it is not as valuable.

o   Nation argues educational purposed

§  Court decides this is copyright infringement

§  Even though Nation only used a little bit, they published the part that people really wanted to know—the pardon of president Nixon—

Intellectual Property/Copyright/Controversies

Books: Suntrust Bank vs. Houghton-Mifflin

  Houghton-Mifflin was publishing book called “wind done gone”

  Written by Randall,she said she wanted to make a funny book about civil war

  Suntrust angry because they protected Margaret Mitchell’s legacy/estate (author of gone with the wind)

 They file an injunction (order to stop publishing), say there are too many similarities

  Goes to court

  Court votes for The Wind Done Gone

  Say it is satirical, and therefore original

  Will have no effect on market value

Intellectual Property/Copyright/Controversies

News

   Cannot copyright a news event

 Ex: I was only journalist in dallas so I am the only person who can write about JFK assassination

   Other journalists can cover same event as long as they gather their own news

Referred to as news piracy

Intellectual Property/Copyrights/Controversies

Pottstown Daily vs. Pottstown Radio

  Radio station would read news out of the paper

 Newspaper sues for news piracy saying they can’t steal their news

  Newspaper was spending money to gather the news

Intellectual Property/Copyright/Controversies

Pacific and Southern vs. Duncan

  Duncan wants to record hometown tv newscast

She would record them and try to sell them

 Pacific Southern doesn’t like it, says it’s piracy

 Duncan loses

  Court says tv station is spending money to do lots of news, she shouldn’t make money off it without incurring any expense

 They could work out an agreement, giving tv station a cut of the profit. But she was doing this without their permission.

Intellectual Property/Copyrights/Controversies/Freelancers

Burrow Giles vs. Sarony

1880s/1890s

  making copies of Sarony’s photographs

 lithographic company says because photography does not meet test for originality because the objects being photographed were already there, he didn’t create the subjects. Basically saying there is nothing creative about being a photography

  Sarony wins

Court thinks it is not a strong argument because there is a lot of originality and creativity in being a photography

Intellectual property/Copyright/Controversies/Freelancers

Natkin vs. Oprah Winfrey

-  She pays Natkin to take photos for her new book

-  Photographer sues her, he says he didn’t know they were going to use photos in the book. He thought they were going to use them to promote her company

  -They settled out of court

-  Winfrey argued that she bought the photographs so she can use them as she pleases.

 - Photographer angry because he probably would have charged her more.

- She decided it wasn’t worth the bad press

-  Should have used a clear contract

Intellectual Property/Copyrights/Controversies/Freelancers

Liebowitz vs.Paramount Movies 

--  Photo of nude pregnant demi moore

-- Very famous photograph

--  Movie studio uses photo a few years later with an actor when promoting a movie

--  Liebowitz says you have stolen my photograph

--  Movie studio wins, they say it is a parody, was not the original photoraph

-   Her originial photograph was not worth any less as a result

Intellectual Property/Copyrights/Controv/Advertising

Consumer Union vs. New Regina co (Vacuum company)

-  Consumers union evaluate and review products

-  Vacuum company uses info and puts it into their add

-  Consumer union is angry because people may not buy the magazine. 

Intellectual Property/Copyrights/Contra/TV

 Sony vs. Universal Studio

  “beta max case”

  Sony produces this thingy that allows consumers to tape movies

 Universal studios don’t like this saying that people won’t go to movies anymore

  Accusing sony of being a contributory infringer

  Assisting infringement

  Court votes for Sony

 Decides this because there is no copyright infringement instead they had TIME SHIFTING

Means people with this device were not seeing something that they couldn’t already see, they were just shifting when they could see it. 

Intellectual Property/Copyright/Contra/Music

Splar Music vs. Gap

-Splar Music controlled copyright to music being played in Gap stores

-Gap lost b/c they were making profits off of ambiance

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music

-ARM sues Campbell b/c their country song “old pretty woman” is stolen by Campbell for a rap song

-Campbell changed the song & made it into a parody

-How will Campbell’s song hurt the original Roy Orbison’s song?

-Different markets

Intellectual Property/copyright/contraversies

Downloads: BMI and ASCAP

-American society of composers, artists, & producers

·      they do copyright paperwork for you

-Sue if you don't get license for playing music

-International problems

·      So many illegal movies & music

Advertising Law 

-Court refers to it as commercial speech

-Less protection than political, but more than it’s had in the past

-Must worry about federal, state, & local laws

1. Can’t advertise illegal product or service

2. Even if product is legal, you cannot advertise anything false or misleading

3. Even if it is legal & true, under some circumstances we can still say you can’t advertise ex: cigarettes to children

Advertising Law

Clothing Workers of America vs.Tribune

-Company advertising not to shop at certain foreign made stores

-Newspaper doesn’t want to accept checks in Chicago b/c they are running ads from those stores using foreigners

-Court said the media should make decisions about content, not gov’t

Advertising Law

Evolution of Advertising Law:

Valetine vs. Chrestenson

-Chrestenson bought a used submarine in 1942 during WWII & was going to use it as tourist attraction

-Chrestenson went to pass out leaflets about his sub

-NY said you can’t pass out pamphlets

-Lawyers for Chrestenson said freedom of press & speech

-Court says they don’t have too much regard for ads in 1942

-Could prob. still pass out political & religious speech

Evolution of Advertising Law

Bigelow vs. Virginia

-Charlottesville, VA-- UVA

-Bigelow posts ad in paper that gets him in trouble & gets him sued by Attorney General of VA

-Women’s Pavillion in NY about abortions

-VA had laws against promoting abortion

-Bigelow won b/c the facility he was advertising for was in NY

-Supreme Court is rethinking approach to advertising

Evolution of Advertising Law

Consumer Council vs. Virginia Board of Pharmacy

-Medicine shouldn’t be sold through advertising

-Could lead to price wars

-Court strikes down law saying advertising has more power

-Senior citizens spend tons of $ on medicine, so advertising helps them find cheapest medicines

-Court won’t do prior restraint

Advertising Law: Controversies

Attorneys: Bates vs. Arizona

o   Bates vs. Arizona

    1977 groundbreaking case

  lawyers were not allowed to advertise prior to this

  argument was the advertising

o   lawyer ads can cause hysteria amongst people

o   lawyers ads promote outcomes in cases they may not be able to back up

Advertising Law: Controversies

Alcohol: McGuire vs. Pabst

  This case was inevitable

  Maguire sues Pabst, he was a big Pabst drinker

  He argues that he has all these medical conditions because he drank too much pabst beer

  His argument is the advertising made it so enticing

  He lost the suit.

Advertising Law: Controversies

Alcohol:44 liquormart vs. Rhode Island

rhode island has a law that says no advertising of alcohol prices

  liquormart advertising prices, they see this law as an attack on legal speech

Why did this law exist?

--  Supreme Court votes for Liquormart, says law is a restriction on freedom of press.  It is a legal product and people deserve to have basic knowledge of legal product. Sandra Day O’connar also struck it down because she argued advertising the price would not necessarily make people drink more.

Advertising Law: Alcohol

Rubin vs. Coors

§  Reuban is head of treasury department vs. Coors beer

§  Treasury department has control over ATF, alcohol, tobacco and firearms

§  Back in 1930s it was treasury department fighting al capone during prohibition

§  Coors is upset because there is a law that says you cannot advertise or promote the strength of your beer.

ú  Theory was, people will look for highest alcohol content as a way to get drunker quicker cheaper which leads to public safety problems

ú  COORs wants to advertise alcohol content

§  Goes to court strikes down law because it is a legal product, part of being an informed consumer

ú  If the point of the law was to keep irresponsible drinker from drinking too much but it would also keep people who only wanted to have a couple drinks from knowing how much they were drinking

Advertising Law

SAFE

-Sensible advertising & family education act

-Wanted senate to pass law saying alcohol ads had to place warning at the end of advertisements

-Bill never got passed

-Liquor industry is too big, they would get mad, advertisers would get mad

·      Companies are too powerful

Advertising Law

Tobacco: joe camel

o   Never see this advertized on public airways, not even much on cable.

o   Mostly because the general public is against smoking

o   Joe Camel

  Camel cartoon advertisement was too successful, forced to drop him from advertising

  They were trying to appeal to kids, but there are strict rules against marketing to young people

  Weren’t trying to get  year olds to smoke, but they were trying to raise awareness of the brand to kids

Advertising Law

Gambling: Posadas vs. tourism council Puerto Rico

o   Problem: South Carolina had video poker for a while

o    Some organizations said “do not let it advertize big pay outs”

§  Posadas wanted to advertize in Puerto Rican newspapers and tv

§  Law said no

§  Law had a twist: you could advertize casinos outside of Puerto rico

 Casinos trying to promote tourism

  Court voted to uphold the law in name of public safety an welfare, if gov’t of Puerto rico thought this was in best interest of citizens then they had right to do it.

Advertising Law

Classifieds: Pittsburgh Press vs. Human Relations Commission

1^st Time

-2 sections: Jobs for men, jobs for women

-Newspaper said it’s none of your business

-Newspaper lost based on gender discrimination

-HRC won and their were legal consequences

2^nd Time

-Ads like “white woman wanting to work for white people”

-PP won this time b/c it is the citizens creating the threads

-Ads for rental propertyà assisted living, college rentals?

-Colonial Village puts ads in Washington Post, but all white people placed in adà are you sending a signal only white people apply?

Advertising Law

Psychics: FTC vs. Psychic Home Network

Miss Cleo’s psychic hotline

-False & misleading ads

-Miss Cleo said her ads say for entertainment purposes only

-If you want to waste your $, it’s not our problem

-What was the expertise of the people answering the calls?

-Miss Cleo had to write off the people who owed her

Advertising Law

Healthcare: DTC Advertising (direct to the consumer)

-How they market prescription meds

-Used to be prohibited, but now the pharmaceutical companies can advertise

·      Before pharm companies used to market directly to doctor

-P.C. said they are helping to inform public

-P.C. said built in protection against abuse b/c you still need to go to doctorà they are the line of defense

-Drs. don’t like it b/c it’s taking the practice of medicine out of their hands

-Contributed to overmedicating America

-Ads increase costs of meds

Organ transplant

-Guy bought billboards asking for liver transplant

-Messed up the waiting list

Advertising Law

Responsibility for Harm: Eimann vs. SOF

Ex-marine, ex-drill instructor looking for high risk assignment in SOF magazine

-Half of the people responded asking for illegal jobsà guy got ex-marine to kill wife for $10,000

-They sue the magazine for the ad

-SOF won b/c they didn’t know this could possibly happen

Advertising Law

Responsibility for Harm: Braun vs. SOF

Gun for hire, discreet, very private, Vietnam vet, all jobs considered

·      Someone contacts him & says kill Mr. Braun

-Killer named “savage” kills man & injures son

-Magazine should now have anticipated that this could happen

-This ad was more specific

Advertising Law: Controversies

Enticements

·      Bait & Switch

o   Ex: Summerville store cheap new washing machine, actually we don’t have anymore for $200, but here is an $800 one

o   Sketch, did they run out or do it on purpose

·      Loss header

o   Ex: CVS sells 20 light bulbs for $1à they will lose $ on it, but it’ll lead people into the store to buy other items

o   Competing stores get upset by this

-Only stores w/ multiple products can do thisà ex: car shop can’t do it

Advertising

Protection Against False and Misleading Ads

1. Caveat Empter- buyer beware, are you exercising your common sense?

·      Keeps you from being fooled

2. News Reporting- show product recalls in paper so combat dishonest companies

3. Non-Governmental Actors- national advertising division (NAD) & BBB (Better Business Bureau) monitor companies & make sure they don't do anything false or misleading

Advertising Law: Protection

Lanham Act: First Response EPT PLus

-Home pregnancy test

-EPT says we have the fastest test, only 10 minutes

-1^st response requests an injunctionà tell competitor to no longer say that & give us $ for damages

-EPT lost b/c you would only find out positive results in 10 min, negative results took 30

Advertising Law: 

Lanham act (competitor suits):Tylenol Vs. Anacin

Anacin ad says your body knows the difference b/w our product & the inferior Tylenolà comparative advertising

-Tylenol won injunction b/c Anacin made too many broad claims w/o scientific proof besides inflammation

Advertising Law

Lanham act: Competitor suits

Tropicana vs. Minute Maid

-Bruce Jenner squeezing orange for Tropicana commercialà pure pasteurized juice

·      Minute Maid wins injunction b/c no orange maker squeezes it right into carton

Advertising Law

Lanham Act: Competitor Suits

Uhaul vs. Jartran

-Movers, Uhaul sues Jartran b/c they said they had newer vehicles

w/ lower pricesà Uhaul says false claims

-Court voted for Uhaul

-Court said they were making a broad claim, only newest & cheapest for 1 product

-Court estimates Uhaul lost $14 million to Jartran

·      Jartran then had to pay the 6 million for Uhaul fees

-Eventually court says Jartran will lose 40 million dollars & gave the money to Uhaul

·      Court hopes this will deter future companies from false ads

-Advertising agencies can now get sued too

-All really fighting over market sharesà always=100

·      Other company taking your market share

Advertising Law

Government Regulations: FTC

·      FTC (created in 1914), big staff, nominated by Pres, approved by Congress

·      Federal, state, & local

·      Businesses concerned w/ who gets appointed by FTC

·      FTC takes too long to approve in advanced

Advertising Law

FTC 3 part test

1. Genuinely false or misleading claims

2. FTC says we’re going to say if it’s false or misleading based on reasonable consumer

3. Part of test for false or misleading based on material misrepresentation

-- Ex for #1: Campbell Soup- low in fat, helps you-- lies

--  False or misleading claims

--  Ex for #2: Target audience

--  Puffery consumer is reasonable enough to decide what is the best opinionà we have the most fashionable clothes

§  Ex for #3: Misleading product smart enough to make people get it

Advertising Law: FTC cases

FTC vs. Colgate Palmalve

  Example of #3.

  Rapid Shave cream. They show mock up of putting rapid shave on sand paper and said it was smooth after shaving with rapid shave

ú  FTC gets involved. Colgate didn’t use sandpaper in commercial, it was actually plexiglass, a smooth surface.

 It did work on sand paper but they had to soak it for 45 minutes.

  It qualifies as a material misrepresentation

  Expressed and Implied falsehoods

 Most companies do not directly lie.

 Problem is they fudge around the corners

Advertising Law

Expressed/implied falshoods:

FTC vs. Firestone

·      Reasonable Basis (where’s the proof)

·      Firestone trying to sell wide oval tires

·      Trying to convince public to buy by saying they stop 20% faster.

·      FTC asks Firestone for proof

·      The tests were not run on normal driving surfaces

·      Firestone lost

Advertising Law: Expressed/implied Falsehoods

In Re Standard Oil

-Demonstration implication

-Standard oil want to sell new F10 gasoline that doesn’t pollute as much

-Put bad over gasoline exhaust

-Just b/c bag is clear, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have bad implications

·      Ex: carbon monoxide

Advertising Law:

P. Lorillard vs. FTC

Significance implications for ol’ gold cigarettes

-Said they are healthiest w/ lowest tars & resins

-Still so high it’ll kill you so who cares if it is a bit healthier

Advertising Law

In Re Cooper

-Expertise Implication

-Astronaut Cooper goes on advertising to tell you to buy car product

-Cooper did not have the expertise to make these claims

·      Wrong kind of engineer

-FTC doesn't take the word of the company’s scientists

Advertising Law

FTC Actions

  Preventive

--Opinion letters

--  Advisory opinions

  Guides

--  Free

-- Biodegradable

  TRR

--  Trade rules and regulations

--More severe than guides

-- Often industry specific

 Voluntary compliance

--  FTC will interact with the company and ask the company to stop saying it.

Advertising Law

FTC Corrective Actions

1. Consent agreementà Sign it so don’t violate ità agreement to stop

2. Litigated Orderà Cease & desist, can get fined

3. Corrective Advertisingà your ad was false & misleading so now you must do ads to correct it & pay for those ads

Internet Law

LIBEL: Bluementhal vs. AOL

·      Blumenthal sues AOL. Blumenthal was presidential advisor

·      Matt druge on druge report said Blumenthal beats his wife

·      Blumenthal says that is libel, damaged his reputation

·      Blumenthal loses because AOL can’t control what people say on the internet, they weren’t saying it, someone on the internet was it.

Internet Law

Libel: Banks vs. Milum

·      Milum accuses Banks of doing drugs

·      Court rules for Banks, said it was libel,

·       Milum fined 50,000 dollars

Internet  Law

Obscenity: U.S. vs. Thomas

Violated federal law for posting images of rape, incest, sexual abuse, etc.

-Someone in Memphis purchased their stuff from CA

-The Thomas couple goes to prison for 3 years (laws?)

Internet Law

Privacy: FTC vs. Geocities

-1^st internet case involving FTC

-Geocities lets people or companies use their cite for free, but they can advertise on it

-Geocities then tells companies to research their customers & used the info to sell it & makes $ à lied b/c it wasn't for statistics

Internet Law

Privacy: McVeigh vs. AOL

Timothy McVeigh was in the Navy & was a closet gay

·      had a boy search website, somebody tells Navy

-Navy tells AOL to tell them who it is & then they discharge him

-McVeigh sues AOL b/c they have a policy not to reveal names

-AOL settles outside of court & says they will better train their employees

Internet Law

Privacy: Smith vs. Pillsbury

Pillsbury employee writing bad e-mails about bossesà turns out to be Mr. Smith

·      Smith said to kill his bosses

-He lost b/c he made threats, so shouldn’t be anonymous

Internet Law

Privacy: FTC vs. Xanga

-Xanga wanted info from young kids so they could let companies market to them

-Question that got then in trouble was “what is your bday” & some kids were under 13à you can’t market to kids under 13 w/o parental consent

Internet Law

Sexual Harassment: Strauss vs. Microsoft

Karen Strauss applies for promotion & doesn't get it

·      She says gender discrimination & they got sick of her complaints & fires her

-She said the climate was through the e-mails

-Microsoft said it was private e-mails, settled out of court

Internet Law

Intellectual property: Playboy vs. San Fillipo

-S.F. had 7,500 playboy photos on website, they sue for copyright infringement

-Playboy lawyers write “demand law” to cease & desist, but he said no

-Playboy won b.c they had the brand & paid for everything

Internet Law

Intellectual Property: People Magazine vs. Gossip Websites

-Brandjolie said they had photos to give to P.M. & Hello magazine

-Gossip websites got leaks of photos & posted them

-Internet version of Harper Row v. Nation

Internet Law

Cybersquatting:E.B. vs. Zuccarwi

-Zuccarwi had websites 1 letter off electronic maker’s website

-He would mousetrap the consumer

-Zuccarwi shows he got a hit for the advertiser

-He was trying to fool people into wasting their time

-He registers similar domain names

-1999 Anti-cybersquatting law

-Some of these laws are unparallel to any other laws when it's internet

Internet Law

Nat'l Internet Law

Mark Noble lived in France (Jewish)à trying to combat Nazi internet sites

-Yahoo had Nazi memorabilia on site, they said your French laws don't apply

-Message still received in France says French judge

-Yahoo says they can’t fix website to meet everybody’s laws

·      yes they can

-Google & Yahoo want to go into China, but China won’t allow it

-15 yr. old says 52 reasons why prostitutes are better than gov’t

-Google told Chine the name & boy got arrested