Google, the search engine company, won a federal court battle against Geico, the insurance company, today that allows the search engine to sell online advertisements tied to keywords that are also trademarked company names. Geico claimed that Google should not be allowed to display advertisements for rival insurance companies when the Geico name is used as a search keyword. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema disagreed.
Tag: Law
Google Beats the Gecko, I Mean Geico
Posted by geeknews at 10:17 PM on December 15, 2004
Tags: e-law, fourth circuit court, geico, google, insurance, intellectual property, ip, ip law, keywords, Law, lonie brinkema, search engine, search terms, trademarks, u.s. district judge
Posted in Commerce, Crime, Dave's Muse, Information, Politics, Security, Services, Software, Technical
Comments Off
FTC Offers Bounty to Name Spammers
Posted by geeknews at 11:02 PM on September 18, 2004The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced, in a public report, that a system of monetary rewards would help improve the enforcement of the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2002 (CAN-SPAM Act.) That Act, which became effective on January 1, 2004, required the FTC to conduct a study and provide a report to Congress on a CAN-SPAM “bounty system.” While the fact that bounties may be offered to those who help authorities in nabbing spammers doesn’t unusual, what is very much out of the ordinary is the projected bounty amounts necessary to make them effective.
The FTC reports three hurdles exist in enforcing the CAN-SPAM Act: 1) identifying and locating the spammer, 2) developing sufficient evidence to prove the spammer is legally responsible for sending the spam, and 3) obtaining the source of funding for the bounties. The report states that those with the information most helpful to authorities are whistleblowers and insiders: those who have had personal or business contact with the spammers, themselves. Because of the real possibility of retaliation, the monetary awards encourage the whistleblowers to come forward. The FTC thinks that awards of about $100,000, upward to $250,000, are reasonable, with funding for the bounty program to come from federal taxes.
Dave’s Opinion
I wish I knew a spammer; for a quarter of a million, I could by RV my kids are clamoring for and go on the road for a few months. Why do we need an incentive to do the right thing. Turning in details of bona fide spammers is just a good thing to do. Why should we expect to be bribed by the government?
Call for Comments
What do you think? Leave your comments on the message center.
References
FTC Report
Message Center
Tags: arrest, bounty, conviction, illegal, Law, reward, snitches, spam, spammers, spamming, whistleblowers
Posted in Commerce, Crime, Dave's Muse, Information, Security, Services, Software, Technical
California Wins Legal Case Against Spammers
Posted by geeknews at 5:01 AM on October 26, 2003Two LA spammers were ordered to pay $2 million and received various business restrictions in Santa Clara County Superior Court, this past Friday. This is the largest judgment won by government prosecutors against senders of unsolicited e-mail. The spammers are also the object of a Federal Trade Commission suit; however, both legal cases are civil suits, so there’s not much chance that the spammers will see the inside of a jail cell anytime soon.
Since 1999, almost three-quarters of states have passed anti-spam laws, but prosecutors have brought only a handful of lawsuits; success in the legal system often requires integrating case law (past judgments), and until more criminal suits are won this catch-22 will continue. Rather than pursue criminal penalties, ISPs and frustrated individuals have been using the courts by filing suit using various laws such as consumer fraud and trespass.
Dave’s Opinion
The U.S. Senate unanimously approved an anti-spam bill this past Wednesday: the first federal legislation to tackle spam. The Sentate bill requires bulk e-mailers to indicate a valid return address, disclose that the content is advertising, and give consumers valid and working opt-out mechanisms. In addition, the bill bans the use of addresses obtained from automated mechanisms, such as web-crawling and e-mail harvesting.
Senate bill S.877, CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, also directs the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) to come up with a plan for a do-not-spam registry, similar to the do-not-call telemarketing registry.
The U.S. House of Representatives is considering competing anti-spam legislation, and may have a more difficult time reaching agreement; however, I’m holding out hope for a valid and reliable do-not-spam registry by 2005.
Call for Comments
What do you think? Leave your comments below.
References
S.877 CAN-SPAM Act of 2003
