Ad Law Tool Kit Show – Episode 10 – Website Accessibility
Podcast - Navigating the TikTok Ban: Implications for Government Contractors
[Podcast] TikTok off the Clock: Navigating the TikTok Ban on Devices for Government Contractors
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 10
From an Artistic Eye to AI, Building Bristles into a Buzzworthy Company with Tina Tang
AI: Impact and Use in the Financial Services Industry – Crossover Episode with Regulatory Oversight Podcast - The Consumer Finance Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Advertising: ADA Compliance related to Websites and Mobile Applications
CF on Cyber: An Update on the Florida Security of Communications Act (FSCA)
Cheryl Curbeam on Creating a Compliance App
The Federal Gift Rules Assistant: What You Need to Know and Why
Nota Bene Episode 98: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Mark on U.S. Antitrust Law for 2020 with Thomas Dillickrath and Bevin Newman
#WorkforceWednesday: Mobile Tracking Technologies, Added PPP Flexibility, Return-to-Work Plans - Employment Law This Week®
Relaxed HIPAA Restrictions For Providers Using Telehealth
The Next Frontier: Legal and Practical Issues That Surround Mobile Gaming
Life Sciences Quarterly (Q4 2017): The Use of Social Media and Mobile Applications
Health Tech Podcast - Episode 2: Best Practices for Health App Development
BakerHostetler Partner Alan Friel Talks Big Data and Data Collection
Legal Considerations for Web-Based Start-Ups
Stealth Lawyer: Chieh Huang, Social Games Developer
Four Apps in Four Minutes: Shannon Warren On Useful and Fun Apps for Lawyers
In a recent legal dispute, Mahram v. The Kroger Co., a California Court of Appeal delivered a decision that may have implications for employment arbitration agreements. Although the case at hand involved a consumer...more
The Ninth Circuit recently issued an opinion that could shape how companies draft and revise two oft-encountered types of contracts: terms of service agreements (“TOS”) and arbitration clauses. In Jackson v. Amazon.com,...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
In Maynard v. Snapchat Inc., No. S21G0555, 2022 Ga. LEXIS 68, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed and remanded an appellate court decision that dismissed the popular mobile app Snapchat from suit. Plaintiffs Wentworth and...more
On March 15, 2022, the Georgia Supreme Court revived a negligent design claim that had been brought against Snapchat, Inc. (n/k/a Snap, Inc.) involving Snap’s “Speed Filter.” As one of the few decisions across the country...more
On December 17, 2021, the new Whistleblowing Act (2021:890) entered into force, implementing the EU Whistleblowing Directive (2019/1937). The new act provides protection of persons who, in a work-related context, have...more
On September 10, 2021, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that Fortnite developer Epic Games (Epic) failed to adequately prove its antitrust allegations relating to...more
Consumers increasingly conduct business on their phones. They create accounts and make purchases through apps on their phone. But when does a consumer create a binding contract when he conducts business on his phone? The...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit looked at a patent directed to a data privacy system that described users operating mobile device apps to "socialize, bank, shop, and navigate." As users operate such apps,...more
The United States Supreme Court infrequently hears antitrust cases but when it decides to hear a case, the Court has the power to shape the framework of American antitrust laws. In this episode, we’re examining the...more
The use of third-party trademarks in video games is not a new phenomenon. In fact, conflicts between game developers and trademark owners have existed for almost as long as the medium itself.1 Now, however, as games continue...more
The Ninth Circuit recently denied a motion to compel arbitration after concluding that an arbitration agreement “buried” in difficult to access terms for a smartphone app did not put users on constructive notice that they...more
T-Mobile chief and fan-of-magenta John Legere has announced that he’ll be stepping down in April at the end of his current contract. Legere will be succeeded by Mike Sievert, the carrier’s current president and COO....more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit earlier this year in Robles v. Domino’s Pizza LLC, became the first circuit to expressly extend Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act to mobile applications. ...more
On October 7, 2019, United States Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a decision by the Ninth Circuit presenting a question of significant importance to business owners engaged in ecommerce: Does Title III of the ADA...more
Businesses should expect that lawsuits and demand letters alleging that their websites violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) will continue to increase in the wake of the United States Supreme Court’s October 7,...more
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court issued a 5–4 decision holding that iPhone owners who purchased applications through Apple’s App Store were “direct purchasers” who could sue Apple for monopolization....more
In May 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5–4 decision in Apple v. Pepper, one of the Court's most significant antitrust rulings of the last several years. In a majority opinion authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Court...more
In a 5–4 decision, in Apple, Inc. v. Pepper, the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Court”) followed the its 1977 precedent in Illinois Brick v. Illinois, which limits the assertion of antitrust damage claims to the first purchaser...more
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its most recent decision relating to antitrust class action litigation. The case, Apple Inc. v. Pepper, No. 17-204, could represent a significant shift in antitrust class action...more
In a 5-4 split decision, the U.S. Supreme Court appears to have reworked a longstanding precedent that has been a foundation of antitrust litigation for more than 40 years—the “direct purchaser” rule of Illinois Brick, which...more
In a recent decision decided on May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court allowed an antitrust suit to move forward against Apple. Consumers brought suit based on Apple’s operation of its App Store – which serves as the exclusive...more
In a 5-4 ruling issued on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court in Apple Inc. v. Pepper determined that iPhone users may proceed with their claims against Apple over its alleged anticompetitive app store practices. The decision...more
• The U.S. Supreme Court split 5-4 on how to apply Illinois Brick’s prohibition on federal indirect purchaser lawsuits to a case where plaintiff app purchasers bought apps from the Apple App Store, paying a price set by the...more
The United States Supreme Court decided this week that purchasers of apps through the Apple App Store have standing under federal antitrust law to bring a class-action lawsuit against the tech giant....more