Brinan Weeks claims to be a comedian. I strongly suspect this lawsuit is an extension of his routine or that he’s using it to generate new material. He claims: he purchased a device called a Stamina Training Unit (STU) from the fleshlight.com website (the website) on or around September 21, 2021, on the basis of Interactive’s claims that the device would help him “perform better,” “last longer,” and “improve [his] sexual stamina.” Despite his frequent use of the product over several months, Weeks alleged “there was no improvement in [his] sexual performance or stamina.” Typically, allegatio ..read more

This is another case asserting that Internet access providers are liable for their subscribers’ copyright infringements. The IAP, Frontier, argued that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Taamneh modified the venerable standards for secondary copyright infringement. The court doesn’t agree. The court summarizes its holding: The Court declines to graft an analysis of secondary criminal liability for aiding and abetting terrorism onto the well-established branch of law governing secondary liability for copyright infringement. Contributory Infringement The court explains that the plaintiffs have alle ..read more

After a multi-year hiatus due to the pandemic, the Internet Law Works-in-Progress conference is returning! (Some background about the series). The conference provides a venue for authors of Internet Law papers (broadly conceived) to workshop their drafts and get pre-publication feedback from peers. We are also putting together a game night that should feature a very rare gaming experience you won’t want to miss. The conference will be hosted by the High Tech Law Institute and held at Santa Clara University School of Law on March 8, 2025. We’ll circulate a call for participation with more detai ..read more

This case involves “defeat devices.” When installed on a car, they suppress or bypass emission controls designed to protect the environment. It’s terrible that anyone uses defeat devices because we urgently must do more, not less, to prevent climate change. Section 203 of the Clean Air Act bans the manufacture or sales of defeat devices. (Yes, I struggled throughout this post keeping 203 separate from 230). The US government brought a civil lawsuit against the defendants for 203 violations. A reminder that if the US government had prosecuted the defendants for violating the Clean Air Act, Sect ..read more

[A reminder that I don’t do April Fools’ pranks.] The court summarizes the allegations: Roblox has a virtual currency designed for use on its platform called “Robux.” Users can buy Robux and exchange them on the platform for in-game experiences. Developers create in-game experiences, and when they make Robux selling those experiences on the platform, Roblox will let them cash out. But, outside the Roblox platform, there are a number of online casinos that take wagers in Robux. Those online casinos entice minors to come gamble away their Robux. To make the Robux available for gambling, an onli ..read more

Haocheng ran several monetized channels on YouTube. He claims that the Chinese Communist Party submitted takedown demands targeting his content, which YouTube ultimately honored. He sued YouTube claiming that the content removals breached YouTube’s contract. YouTube easily wins. The plaintiff claims that YouTube removed his content without providing the promised notice and without adequate cause. However, no such obligations exist per the “clear and unambiguous” agreement terms: The Agreement does not require that YouTube provide users notice before removing content or that YouTube otherwise ..read more

Yet another cryptocurrency fraud case. I previously described this case: This lawsuit relates to the “Toast Plus” app that was available in Apple’s app store. The plaintiffs claim it was a spoof app designed to steal cryptocurrency worth $5k in Diep’s case and $500k in Nagao’s case (ouch). The plaintiffs’ “claims are based on Apple’s part in authorizing and negligently distributing a ‘phishing’ / ‘spoofing’ app in its App Store, the Toast Plus application, while continuing to affirmatively represent that the App Store is a [sic] ‘a safe and trust[ed] place.’” The district court dismissed th ..read more

As you know, I am not a fan of the EU’s DSA. Without First Amendment guardrails in the EU, the DSA represents a comprehensive government intrusion into the editorial processes of UGC services–with surely more intrusions to come. This will not end well. One of the DSA’s standout features is that it imposes due process-like obligations on non-governmental actors, as if there is no meaningful distinction between taxpayer-funded public actors and market-supported private actors. This paradigm also appears in the Florida and Texas social media censorship laws, such as the notice-and-appeal obligati ..read more

Self-proclaimed free-speech absolutist Elon Musk is notoriously thin-skinned when it comes to criticism directed at him. (As the phrase goes, “he can dish it out, but he can’t take it“). This well-publicized lawsuit is an example of Musk waging lawfare over a critic’s speech. Judge Breyer of the Northern District of California had none of it. He calls out Twitter for its bad choice: This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech…X Corp. has brought this case in order to punish CCDH for CCDH publications that criticized X Corp.—and perhaps in order to dissuade others who might wi ..read more

More Bitcoin litigation . This time, malefactors hijacked popular YouTube channels and uploaded videos promoting Bitcoin scams: First, scammers will breach YouTube’s security to unlawfully gain access to verified and popular YouTube channels with tens or hundreds of thousands of subscribers. The scammers then transfer ownership or control of the channel to themselves or a co-conspirator, rename the channel to impersonate tech celebrities or companies, and delete the channel’s pre-existing content. Next, they upload and play scam videos they have created using pre-existing images and videos of ..read more