ZIPped Back Up: Williams-Sonoma Gains Federal Dismissal Of New Jersey Consumer Privacy Claim in Feder

By Valentina Shenderovich
Sheppard Mullin Fashion & Apparel Law Blog | Article Link

In Feder v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey joined the New Jersey Superior Court in weighing in on the issue of whether a retailer violates consumer privacy state law by requesting a customer's zip code at the point of purchase. Feder was brought by the same plaintiff’s lawyers and with claims similar to those in the state court case Imbert v. Harmon Stores, Inc. (Bed, Bath & Beyond). Imbert was decided last month, but without any written decision, and permitted that case to proceed past the pleading stage. The District Court in Feder, however, issued the first written opinion under the New Jersey statutes, finding that allegations that a zip code was verbally requested could not support a claim under New Jersey law.

Court Case Asks if ‘Big Brother’ Is Spelled GPS

By Adam Liptak
New York Times | Article Link

WASHINGTON — The precedent is novel. More precisely, the precedent is a novel.

In a series of rulings on the use of satellites and cellphones to track criminal suspects, judges around the country have been citing George Orwell’s “1984” to sound an alarm. They say the Fourth Amendment’s promise of protection from government invasion of privacy is in danger of being replaced by the futuristic surveillance state Orwell described.

In April, Judge Diane P. Wood of the federal appeals court in Chicago wrote that surveillance using global positioning system devices would “make the system that George Orwell depicted in his famous novel, ‘1984,’ seem clumsy.” In a similar case last year, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the federal appeals court in San Francisco wrote that “1984 may have come a bit later than predicted, but it’s here at last.”

Anonymous Speech in the Internet Age: The Good, the Bad, and the Uncertainty…

By Elizabeth Morris
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal
IPLJ Article Permalink

Have you ever wanted to post bad reviews of a restaurant, but been afraid the restaurant would find out it was you and spit in your food if you decided to give it a second chance? Exactly how anonymous are anonymous postings? Unfortunately for you, it’s likely that a court might say they are hardly anonymous at all. In In re Anonymous Online Speakers, the Ninth Circuit held that the identity of anonymous posters is only afforded limited protection in the context of commercial speech (as opposed to political or religious speech).[1] While the court acknowledged the right to a “robust exchange of ideas” through anonymous Internet speech, it also acknowledged the need to protect businesses from malicious speech. To protect businesses from such defamatory attacks, the Ninth Circuit limited freedom of speech for cases in which comments are potentially harmful to businesses.

Facebook Posting and its Implications on Job Security

By Raquel Goldstein
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal
IPLJ Article Permalink

When Facebook originated, it was a web site created for college students to interact with one another. However, as Facebook began to grow in popularity and additional applications became available to interface with it, the individuals permitted to create an account were no longer limited by an .edu email address indicative of a college student, and potential privacy issues have evolved and expanded. Making the decision to post a comment or a picture on Facebook in order to share with friends and family may now result in negative ramifications on a user’s career and personal life.

Mobile-App Makers Face U.S. Privacy Investigation

By Amir Efrati, Scott Thurm & Dionne Searcey
Wall Street Journal | Article Link

Federal prosecutors in New Jersey are investigating whether numerous smartphone applications illegally obtained or transmitted information about their users without proper disclosures, according to a person familiar with the matter.



The criminal investigation is examining whether the app makers fully described to users the types of data they collected and why they needed the information—such as a user's location or a unique identifier for the phone—the person familiar with the matter said. Collecting information about a user without proper notice or authorization could violate a federal computer-fraud law. Online music service Pandora Media Inc. said Monday it received a subpoena related to a federal grand-jury investigation of information-sharing practices by smartphone applications.

In Social Media Postings, A Trove for Investigators

By Joseph Goldstein
New York Times | Article Link

First, Facebook helped get Rodney Bradford out of jail; later, it threatened to send him back.

Part of the final online dialogue between a victim and the woman accused in her death. About a day later, they met in person.

In 2009, the social networking site helped exonerate Mr. Bradford after prosecutors charged him with a robbery in Brooklyn. Mr. Bradford countered that he was at his father’s home in Manhattan at the time. He even had posted a joking complaint on Facebook about breakfast. Subpoenaed records from Facebook backed up Mr. Bradford’s alibi, and the charges against him were dropped.