appeals
Latest
Facebook's Oversight Board will begin hearing cases before the US election
Faceboook has confirmed that it’s Oversight Board set up to rule on moderation disputes across the company’s platforms will begin to hear cases in mid-October, just ahead of the November US elections.
Apple's App Store appeals process is now open for developers
Developers can now suggest changes to Apple's App Store guidelines.
YouTube’s appeal process is largely ineffective
YouTube's latest transparency report suggests its appeals process is failing creators. Last quarter, YouTube removed 5.9 million videos from the platform. It received just 108,779 appeals, but it only reinstated 23,471 of those videos. That means roughly 78 percent of appeals were rejected.
Court says data swept up by the NSA is protected by the Fourth Amendment
An appeals court may have just shaped how the US treats the NSA's bulk data collection. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that American communications scooped up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's Section 702 and PRISM is protected by Fourth Amendment rights baring unreasonable searches and seizures. Judges found that the "vast majority" of the evidence collected in a terrorism case against Agron Hasbajrami was permissible under the Fourth Amendment, but that the querying that data "could violate" the amendment -- and thus that it was fair to challenge the data use on constitutional grounds. It also believed that the accidental collection of Americans' data raised "novel constitutional questions" that could be answered later.
Instagram will soon let you appeal post takedowns
While Instagram has made it easy for users to report posts that may violate its policies, there hasn't been a way for people to contest those decisions. But that will be changing soon. In a media briefing in New York City, the company said it is going to start rolling out a new appeals feature over the next few months. This will give users the chance to request a review of content that was taken down, all from inside the app. Instagram says that, if it realizes it made a mistake, it'll restore posts. Any appeal will be sent to a completely different reviewer than the one who made the original decision, in order to ensure that the posts are thoroughly inspected.
Texas court rules 2015 revenge porn law is unconstitutional
Revenge porn is getting attention across the nation as state, regional and even federal lawmakers wrestle with how to deal with the practice of posting private, intimate photos of people without their permission. A 2015 Texas law that made revenge porn a misdemeanor with up to a year of jail time and a $4,000 fine was struck down by the 12th Court of Appeals as violating the First Amendment. The court also dropped a charge against Jordan Bartlett Jones, who challenged the law after he was denied a Writ of Habeas Corpus last year.
YouTube clarifies how much cash its creators can make
A lot of creators rely on YouTube to make a living, but despite recent efforts to improve, the Google-owned site still takes videos down for no good reason. On top of that, mismatching ads to offensive videos recently spawned an "adpocalypse" that deprived legitimate creators of revenue. In a blog post, YouTube now says it will unveil new icons to let you know to what extent your video is being monetized. It'll also give you a new way to appeal directly in the Video Manager for copyright and community guideline problems.
Oracle begins appeal process in its Java patent case against Google, Android (Update: Google too)
You should know by now that it's never truly over when tech giants resort to legal warfare over their technology, and just as it said it would, Oracle has filed an appeal of the US District Court ruling in its case against Google. In case you'd forgotten, back in May Judge William Alsup found that the structure of its Java APIs were not copyrightable so Oracle had to settle for $0 in damages over its claims that Android infringed on its patents and copyrights. FOSS Patent's Florian Mueller has a full breakdown of what he sees in the case, meanwhile we'll be preparing our fallout shelters for potential Android Armageddon... again. Update: Haven't had enough of paperwork flying back and forth? Good, because according to Bloomberg, Google has also filed an appeal in the case over the judge's decision not to set aside the jury's copyright verdict or order a new trial.
YouTube scales back automatic Content ID takedowns, improves appeals process
In the last several years Google has become quick to respond to complaints of copyright infringement. Unfortunately, its record in dealing with unfounded claims (specifically on YouTube) is a bit mixed. In particular the process for appealing a Content ID takedown has left many users frustrated and with little recourse in the event of a rejected dispute. And its the content owners themselves who make that decision. Starting today, even if a dispute is rejected, users can file an appeal that leaves a content owner with one of two choices -- rescind the complaint or file a proper DMCA takedown notice. To minimize the amount of appeals and disputes Google is also launching an improved Content ID algorithm that identifies potentially invalid claims and places them in a queue to be reviewed manually before takedowns are issued. For more, check out the source. Update: Wired has a statement from Google clarifying that the queue flagged content ends up in is for it to be reviewed manually by the content owner, not Google itself.
Apple files (again) for a preliminary ban against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
If you found yourself longing for the minor tweaks Samsung made to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany earlier this year, you may be in luck: Apple's filed for a preliminary injunction against the slate stateside. It isn't the first one, either, Cupertino filed something similar back in February, though it didn't quite pass legal muster. After gaining some headway earlier this week, Cook's crew is in for round two, according to FOSS Patents, asking for Judge Koh to rule in their favor without a new hearing. Concerned consumers, however, can sidestep the whole mess by simply opting for an injunction-exempt Galaxy Tab 2. Details and speculation can be found at the source link below, just in case you aren't already sick to death of the whole Samsung / Apple spat.
Apple gets another bite, wins appeal to pursue preliminary injunction against Samsung
We'll forgive you if you've forgotten, given the myriad Apple/Samsung legal shenanigans, but back in February, Apple attempted to obtain a preliminary injunction against Samsung to prevent the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and a few phones from being sold in the US. Samsung emerged victorious, as the district court denied Cupertino's request because it questioned the validity of a couple of Apple's patents and didn't see how Apple would be irreparably harmed if it failed to get Sammy's products banned. Naturally, Tim Cook's crew appealed that decision, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has decided to give Apple another crack at obtaining an injunction. The CAFC upheld the lower court's ruling as to three of the four patents, but found fault with the District Court's holding that Apple's tablet design patent had substantial questions of validity. Essentially, the lower court held that Apple's patent was likely no good because it was an obvious design in light of two tablets that were created long before Apple patented the iPad's look. However, the CAFC found that one of the previous slate's asymmetrical bezel and lack of an unbroken, all-glass surface (among other differences) were sufficient to render Apple's patent non-obvious. Basically, the appellate court found that the District court "construed the claimed design too broadly," and remanded the issue so that the district court could complete its preliminary injunction analysis. So, Apple's cleared a big hurdle towards getting the Galaxy Tab 10.1 off the US market, but the company's still got to persuade Judge Koh that it'll be irreparably harmed without the injunction. This decision assures even longer legal proceedings, but given how well both of these tech titans are doing these days, we're pretty sure they can afford the attorneys' fees.
Telecoms win immunity in wiretapping case, US court approves separate suit against the government
Looks like a case of good news-bad news for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in its fight against warrantless wiretapping. A US appeals court upheld a 2008 ruling, granting telecoms such as AT&T, Verizon and Sprint immunity for cooperating with the government in its surveillance activities. Still, Judge Margaret McKeown of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals insists that immunity only applies to telecoms, not the government, and that "the federal courts remain a forum to consider the constitutionality of the wiretapping scheme and other claims." Indeed, while the 9th Circuit upheld immunity for telecoms, it also gave the go-ahead for a separate suit against the NSA, former president George W. Bush, senior members of the Bush administration and President Obama for using AT&T's network to conduct "an unprecedented suspicionless general search," according to the filing. The court's decision to allow this suit to proceed marks a reversal of an earlier ruling, in which a lower court said the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to pursue the case. [Image courtesy PBS]
Bethesda appeal denied for Fallout Online, work continues by Interplay
Are you enjoying the game of Fallout Online? No, not the actual online game in which you adventure in a shattered wasteland, but the constant back-and-forth between Interplay and Bethesda over which company is allowed to work on the development. The game has been tied up in court for roughly forever, with Bethesda trying to block Interplay's further development via legal tactics, and while the first injunction was denied, the studio appealed to have the development halted. It turns out that the courts remained firmly on Interplay's side, however, as the appeal has been denied and Interplay is in the clear to continue developing the game. Unfortunately, the game will still require express permission from Bethesda to launch, meaning that there's still no end in sight to the legal fighting and name-calling by both companies. For the time being, all that fans of the franchise can do is wait and see... assuming that Interplay remains financially able to develop the game after all.
Appeals court affirms Richard Garriott's lawsuit win against NCsoft
Ever since Richard Garriott won his lawsuit against former employer NCsoft last year, the legal process has been grinding on ever since to hash out the details. Today we've learned that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed the win of almost $32 million in favor of Garriott. The lawsuit came about after NCsoft fired Garriott in 2008 and then marked his departure as "voluntary," causing his stock options to expire instead of remaining intact through the end of his 2011 contract. In 2010 a court found NCsoft to have breached its contract, and it ordered the company to pay $28 million plus interest and attorney fees to Garriott and his legal team. This recent ruling affirms that outcome and paves the path for Garriott to be compensated. In the ruling, the 5th Circuit Court writes, "It would be unjust to allow NCsoft to sit back during trial, observe Garriott's litigation strategy, and then demand a new trial on damages when it dislikes the verdict." [Source: Androvett Legal Media press release]
French court reverses DS flash cart ruling, Nintendo smiles
Nearly two years ago, a French court dismissed a lawsuit that Nintendo filed against a group of vendors accused of illegally selling DS flash carts. At the time, the game-maker argued that sales of the cartridges should be halted on the grounds that they could be used to illegally pirate software, but the presiding judge thought differently, countering that the R4-like devices could be used to develop homebrews or other DIY projects. Last week, however, the Paris Court of Appeals overturned the ruling, in a decision that Nintendo has met with understandable delight. In a statement released today, the company confirmed that Divineo SARL and five other flash cart retailers must pay a total of €460,000 in criminal fines, along with €4.8 million in damages to Nintendo, as ordered by the appeals court. Details behind the ruling remain vague, though Nintendo hailed it as a "strong message to French companies... that such activities are illegal and will not be tolerated," and that convicted vendors will "risk prison terms, face substantial fines and obligations to pay damages." Sail past the break to read Nintendo's statement, in full.
Government says it's got i4i's back in Word patent dispute
As the US Supreme Court prepares to hear yet another appeal in the seemingly unending patent dispute between Microsoft and XML specialists i4i next month, some pretty influential folks are starting to take sides -- officially. Perhaps most notably, Acting Solicitor General Neal Kumar Katyal filed an amicus brief backing i4i and a previous US Court of Appeals decision to uphold the $290 million judgement against the software giant. Other big guns backing i4i with amicus briefs include DuPont, 3M, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and GE. Of course, Microsoft's getting a little help from its friends with official I-got-you-bro statements coming from Google, Apple, Toyota, and Walmart. The appeal is expected to hit the Supreme Court in April and has big implications for patent litigation -- specifically, it could give tech giants like Microsoft more guts to go after patents held by little guys like i4i.
US Supreme Court agrees to hear Microsoft appeal in Word patent case
It's been quite a few months since we've seen any major developments in Microsoft's patent battle with Toronto-based i4i Inc over Microsoft Word, but it looks like things are now about to change in a big way. As The Wall Street Journal reports, the US Supreme Court has today agreed to hear Mircosoft's appeal in the case that dealt it $290 million in damages and prevented it from selling versions of Word that contained the allegedly infringing technology. That could not only have some pretty big ramifications for Microsoft in this particular case, but for patent law in general, as it gets to the very heart of the legal standard for determining the validity of a patent. Needless to say, we'll be watching this one very closely -- the court is expected to hear the case sometime next year.
Court reaffirms: fourth amendment rights not violated if the police install a GPS device on your car when it's not in your garage
Back in January, a court in Portland, Oregon ruled that the Fourth Amendment rights of one Juan Pineda-Moreno had not been violated by the police when they tracked him using various GPS devices they installed on the underside of his Jeep with magnets. You see, the police suspected that Pineda-Moreno was growing Marijuana somewhere, and they really didn't like that. Eventually, Pineda-Moreno was arrested and convicted of crimes involving the growth of said Marijuana -- but he appealed the decision because he thought that his Fourth Amendment rights (the one which guards against unreasonable search and seizure) had been violated. The appeals court has recently upheld the original decision, but there were five dissenting votes, meaning that the case is anything but cut and dried. Now, what's obvious is that the police didn't have to traverse into "private" space to attach the tracking device to the suspect's car, but clearly it's debatable -- even as far as the judges are concerned -- what constitutes private and public space. The case is surely not going to end here, so we'll keep you updated. In the meantime, watch your back.
Court rules against Comcast, Cablevision on new FCC program access rules
Comcast and Cablevision's quest to keep the HD feeds of the networks they own off of satellite and telco services was again dealt a loss Friday when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld new FCC rules requiring them to share. Neither found that pleasing, with Comcast citing the continued exclusivity of NFL Sunday Ticket and NASCAR Hot Pass to DirecTV, while Cablevision whined about its latest spat with ABC. This might not be the end of things however, as the court voted the FCC could later rescind the rule if it decides it "is no longer timely," and it will likely play a part in the ongoing discussions over Comcast's proposed purchase of NBC.
Courts favor AT&T / Verizon, back new video franchising rules
While Verizon and AT&T try to work their FiOS and U-verse services into new areas, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth circuit in Cincinnati handed them a victory today by ruling that the FCC's new rules setting time limits for local authorities to act on new franchise applications are within its authority. The new ruling at the heart of the debate gives local jurisdictions 90 days to act on apps by providers that already have access to city land to run connections, and 180 days for new entrants to citeis or towns, and bar them from mandating new requirements the FCC finds unreasonable, like building a community swimming pool. While we're big fans of municipal pools, we're also into competition and consumer choice, so if you've been waiting to get TV via telco breathe easy knowing the path just got a little smoother.Read - ReutersRead - Verizon's response
