Vogel Internet, Information Technology, and e-Discovery Blog : Texas Internet, Information Technology, eCommerce, & E-Discovery Lawyer & Attorney Peter S. Vogel : Gardere Wynne Sewell Law Firm : Dallas TX

The EU is considering a plan to require Internet companies to report loss or theft of personal information. The New York Times reported that the new EU laws will apply to “enablers of Internet services, e-commerce platforms, Internet payment gateways, social networks, search engines, cloud computing services, application stores.” The report went on to describe the reason for considering the new laws:

Cybercrime has risen sharply in Europe. A series of high-profile hacking attacks on governments and businesses has galvanized European lawmakers to focus on the need to strengthen and harmonize existing laws, which vary widely across the Union and differ on the levels of disclosure required.

This news about the EU tackling Internet crime comes on the heels of my January 2013 eCommerce Times column entitled "2012's Most Notable Computer Crimes" which I encourage you to read.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Behind Apple’s huge verdict in the Samsung trial it’s likely that eMails may have caused the most damage to Samsung on two levels: first, Samsung destroyed eMails which led the Judge to instruct the jury that they should assume the destroyed emails were adverse to Samsung (the legal term is an “Adverse Inference”); and second, the jury concluded that eMails they read were clear that Samsung intended to mimic the Apple iPhone.

To learn more about Samsung’s eMail problems in the Apple patent infringement trial please read my September 2012 column at eCommerce Times entitled “Email Trashing May Cost Samsung More Than $1B.”

Given what is at stake in the cell market, without question the Apple v. Samsung litigation will continue to be headline news for quite a while.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

When employees use their personal cell, tablet, laptop, or PC it’s not so simple to determine who owns the content of their email and intellectual property. Notwithstanding the 2010 US Supreme Court 9-0 ruling (in the City of Ontario v Quon) that an employee who uses a company issued device is not entitled to constitutional privacy, when an employee conducts company business using their own personally owned device the question of ownership is much more complex.

I encourage you to read my June 2012 column in eCommerce Times entitled “The BYOD Maelstrom: Legal, Technical Issues Abound.”

Let me know what you think about the complex legal issues surrounding BYOD and how BYOD impacts your business.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Google recently announced revised Terms of Service (ToS) and Privacy Policy which go into effect on March 1, 2012. Google claims that the ToS were rewritten “to make them more readable and to reduce the repetition and legalese.” And with regards to the Privacy Policy Google stated:

We’re getting rid of over 60 different privacy policies across Google and replacing them with one that’s a lot shorter and easier to read. Our new policy covers multiple products and features, reflecting our desire to create one beautifully simple and intuitive experience across Google. 

I encourage you to read Google’s new ToS and Privacy Policies, but my personal experience is that about 1% of users actually ever bother. Please read my eCommerce Times legal columns about ToS and Privacy Policies to get a better idea how important the legal terms are.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

My eCommerce Times column for October is entitled “Shore Up Your Privacy Policy Before Disaster Strikes” and I encourage you to read it. Actually it was published the same day as my blog that more than 7.5 million children under 13 are on Facebook. Since the Federal Trade Commission regulates Internet privacy in the US and particularly the 1998 Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act , it’s only a matter of time before we can expect some action.

Facebook’s latest user statistics are that more than 75% of Facebook users are outside the US.  So it seems likely that the EU, Japan, Canada, and many other countries will inquire about what Facebook intends to do about children using Facebook!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

All Social Media and Internet businesses rely on TOS and Click Agreements to protect their legal rights, but few businesses take the time to make sure that the TOS and Click Agreements actually protect their business operations. I welcome you to read my eCommerce Times column entitled “Your Customers May Not Review Your ToS and Click Agreements, but You Should!”

Early this fall in my Law of eCommerce class at the SMU Dedman School of Law the class reviewed the TOS for the major search engines – Google, Bing, Yahoo!, and AOL. Even though these search engines compete head to head, no surprise the legal terms varied widely. But it was a surprise to my students, none of whom had had taken the time to review TOS before.

So take some time and review your TOS and Click Agreements to see if they actually protect your business.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A NY Times stock market report for August 8, 2011 highlighed the fact that Apple’s stock was the most valuable company in the world ahead of Exxon Mobil, but by the close of the day Exxon Mobil was still number one. Many stock analysts “expect Apple and Exxon Mobil to continue jockeying for the top slot while the markets remain volatile.”

I welcome you to read my August Technology Law Column at eCommerce Times entitled “Apple Mounting Trademark Challenges.”  

Given the headlines of Apple’s great market value my column was very timely to explain Apple’s legal risks at a time of great success.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Let’s see a show of hands- do you read Terms of Service? Privacy Policies? Or Click Agreements? I routinely ask audiences this question and rarely do I ever get any hands raised. My recent Technology Law column in eCommerce Times entitled “Who Reads Terms of Service, Privacy Policies or Click Agreements?” identifies many legal issues concerning website contracts. Every fall since 2000 I’ve taught a course on theLaw of eCommerce at the SMU Dedman School of Law and every fall I find that virtually none of my students have ever considered reviewing Terms of Service, Privacy Policies, or Click Agreements. But by the end of the semester they routinely review these contract terms. I was pleased to see a former student from 2004 recently who told me that he regularly reviews these contract provisions. The irony of not reviewing these contract provisions is that people have no idea what legal rights and privacy they may be giving up.

FTC and Privacy

TheFederal Trade Commission regulates privacy in the US and if a website does not have a Privacy Policy that’s okay but if there is a Privacy Policy the website must follow its promises to website visitors. Since so few people review Terms of Use, Privacy Policies, and Click Agreements the FTC is considering making changes to US privacy laws particularly regarding the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. However in the meantime until the US privacy laws are changed, websites have pretty much a free hand since no seems care.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

My recent Technology Law column in eCommerce Times describes why the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) has merely driven Internet Gambling off-shore and as result the US is losing billions of dollars of tax revenue. Generally the UIGEA resulted from four major policy concerns of the federal government:

First, the Internet was too easy a venue for compulsive gamblers.

Second, the age of Internet gamblers could not easily be determined, and underage gambling could not be controlled as with a brick-and-mortar casino.

Third, a lack of regulation of Internet gambling made it easy to defraud gamblers and rig the odds.

Fourth, the anonymity of the Internet made online gambling a medium for potential money laundering.

Since the US economy is doing so poorly Congress is considering legislation to regulate Internet Gambling which would result in an estimated $42 billion in tax revenues over the next ten years. Outlawing Internet Gambling failed much like Prohibition did in the 1920s. It’s high time Congress rescinded UIGEA, to help the economy and regulate Internet Gambling which clearly we cannot stop.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link