Myspace conviction overturned: ToS violation too broad for prosecution

A conviction of a woman who allegedly 'cyber-bullied' a 13 year to girl, who subsequently committed suicide, has been overturned. The conviction was based on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which is aimed at computer hackers, and the judge found that it could not be stretched to include mere violations of a terms of service.

However, judge Wu did not rule out the possibility of a ToS violation resulting in conviction, just that the ToS violation here was not a circumstance in which conviction under the Act was appropriate.

Evony is trying to sue UK blogger in NSW: Can a plaintiff successfully sue a foreign defendant?

Almost everyone has come across the Evony adverts, most of them showing scantily clad women and promising that you can 'play discretely'. One gaming blogger, Bruce Everiss has taken a stand against Evony, mostly for allegedly spamming his forum and using unethical business practices.

The question is whether a NSW plaintiff can sue a UK defendant. The Supreme court in NSW can have jurisdiction to hear a matter concerning a defendant from a foreign jurisdiction. Gutnick v Dow Jones is on point here. Basically the High Court held that Gutnick (an Australian citizen) could sue Dow Jones (based in NY I believe) in Victoria, Australia as the damage to Gutnick’s reputation occurred in Victoria when subscribers in Victoria to the online magazine published by Dow Jones read a defamatory article about Gutnick. Here, the court had jurisdiction to hear the matter as the tort occurred in Victoria.

In NSW, the court have a 'submit and see what happens' approach to service on an overseas defendant. If the defendant fails to appear, the plaintiff then needs to seek the leave of the court to proceed with the litigation, where the court will decide if they are a 'clearly inappropriate forum' to hear the matter and that the claim has some success. There is also a lot of doubt surrounding the enforceability of the judgement (which the court does not take into account here). Without the defendant having assets in the jurisdiction, it may be difficult to enforce any judgement against them.

It will be interesting to see if this progresses, or whether this is simply a scare tactic.

Cyber bully jailed over Facebook death threats

While bullying and harassment has always been traditionally recognised offline, it is interesting to see how bullying online is being dealt with by the law. It appears that in the UK, death threats made using the social networking site Facebook are serious enough to impose imprisonment.

Although it is questionable as to whether the defendants offline actions against the plaintiff were the main contributory factor in the courts decision, along with prior convictions against the defendant, it could be showing that the court is beginning the recognise that traditionally personal, offline offences can also occur online.

It will be interesting to see what the outcome would be should the threats occur entirely online.

Investing in Litigation: Commercial interests vs Justice

Big money is to be made by investing in lawsuits, or so it is claimed by Richard Fields, chief executive of Juridica Capital Management. Many large investment companies are doing it, with investors rolling money into litigation between corporations, where the lawyers fees are enormous and the winnings are potentially even bigger.

But isn't the legal system about finding justice for parties who find themselves in a dispute? It seems to me that making litigation a speculative investment like crude oil will corrode the already fragile justice system. Plus the pressure placed on the lawyers to win the case at any cost may further corrupt legal practitioners who are already encouraged by their firm to win at any cost. I also think the scope for corruption in these matters has been overlooked. From the point of view of an almost legal practitioner, I cannot see how any move to invest in litigation is a good one.

Could Social Networking lead to Mistrials: Juror twittering causes appeal

Two civil cases could be thrown out of court due to juror's using social networking sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, to allegedly discuss the case which they were deliberating upon before a verdict was given. It is alleged that while the juror's did not disclose confidential facts about the case, they were influenced by the replies they received.

With many people owning smart phones which can access the internet almost anywhere, the possibility of this happening in almost any jury trial (whether civil or criminal) is most probable.

Additionally, many trials, even those of low notoriety can be looked up using Google, therefore providing juror's with the opportunity to research the case they are deliberating upon with ease. I found this out when writing a University assignment which involved attending a jury trial which was relatively unknown. Before a verdict had even been reached, I could access key information about the trial (which was perfect for my assignment).

Patents: May be hurting the economy and preventing innovation says economists

Here is an interesting article which says what many people, particularly in the IT world where software patents appear to be given out in cornflake packets, have been thinking for a while now.

Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine believe the current patent/copyright system discourages and prevents inventions from entering the marketplace. The two professors have published their views in a new book, Against Intellectual Monopoly, from Cambridge University Press. In particular, they point to the fact that patents are being used to prevent AIDS sufferers in Africa from receiving life saving drugs, or students being prosecuted for pirating music off the Internet.

Levine states "There's plenty of protection for inventors and plenty of protection and opportunities to make money for creators. It's not that we see this as some sort of charitable act that people are going to invent and create things without earning money. Evidence shows very strongly there are lots of ways to make money without patents and copyright."

In terms of technology, many software companies use patent portfolios to use as defence should they be found in violation of a patent, such as Novell announcing that it would use it's portfolio of patents to defend against claims against some of its open source programs.

It appears that people are starting to see that patents are not being used for their original intent and purpose, which is to protect innovation from being blatantly copied without credit, rather than wipe it out all together. Another example is the patent over One click check out.

Copyrighting a Fact: How Railcorp claims copyright in a train timetable

Alvin Singh has received a cease and desist notice from RailCorp Sydney, demanding that he remove his popular iPhone application Transit Sydney from the itunes applications store.

They are likely to be relying on the previous decision of Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation Ltd (2002), where it was found that Telstra owned copyright in the Telstra White Pages, a telephone directory. However, the 2007 case of Ice TV went against this decision, with a finding that there was no copyright infringement when Ice TV distributed an electronic, subscription based reproduction of Nine Networks programing schedule. The judge in Ice TV distinguished Desktop Marketing Systems as there is only one logical way of organising a telephone directory, but many ways of presenting broadcasting schedules. I am of the opinion that this will fall into the latter category, however every case turns on its facts in this situation (there appears to be no settled law on this point).