E-Commerce Law

Nine Must-Have iPad Apps for Lawyers (Plus One More)

After months of waffling, I finally purchased an iPad 2 last fall.  I already had a laptop and an iPhone and feared that an iPad might be technology overkill but was hoping that the iPad would let me leave my laptop bag at home while on vacation. The iPad won't ever replace my laptop but it has become a vital part of my practice.  Here are the nine "must-have" iPad apps for attorneys that have changed the way I take notes, prepare for hearings, take and defend depositions, bill, and travel:

 

1.  Dropbox (Available on App Store, FREE) - Dropbox is a cloud storage service used by more than 25 million people.  The Dropbox app allows me to use my iPad to access Word, Excel, PDF, and other documents that I've stored "in the cloud."  The service offers 2 GB of storage for free, with additional storage available for a fee.  If you use this link to sign up for the Dropbox service, you'll receive an extra 250 MB of free storage.

2.  Sugarsync (Available on App Store, FREE) - Sugarsync is another cloud storage service with an iPad app.  Like Dropbox, both the app and some amount of storage are free but Sugarsync provides more free storage (5 GB) than Dropbox.  Like Dropbox, additional storage is available for a fee.  If you use this link to sign up for the Sugarsync service, you'll receive an extra 500 MB of free storage.

I use both Dropbox and Sugarsync, so I have a total of 7 GB of free cloud storage accessible from my iPad, iPhone, and work and home computers.

Leveraging Private Enforcement to Improve Internet Privacy

Our article, entitled "Putting the Genie Back in the Bottle:  Leveraging Private Enforcement to Improve Internet Privacy," leads off the most recent issue of the William Mitchell Law Review.  In the article, we argue that Congress should enact an omnibus Internet privacy statute which balances the needs of Internet users against those of the Internet businesses that drive the e-commerce economy while leveraging a private enforcement scheme to minimize cost and bureaucratic burden.

If you get the chance to read the article, please let us know what you think.

The Law of Blogging

At 10 a.m. on Saturday, I'll be appearing on Blueprint for Wealth on Federal News Radio (1500AM and 820AM in the D.C. Metro Area and streaming live at www.federalnewsradio.com) to discuss the law of blogging.  If you get a chance to listen, make sure to leave a comment here letting us know what you thought about the interview.

5,000 BitTorrent Users May Not Proceed Anonymously Nor Quash Subpoenas Seeking Their Identities

Over 5,000 John Doe Defendants unsuccessfully sought to quash subpoenas issued to Internet Service Providers ("ISPs") by Plaintiff West Coast Productions to learn the identity of the Defendants known in the Complaint only by their internet protocol ("IP") addresses.  West Coast Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-5829, Civ. Action No. 11-57 (CKK), 2011 WL 2292239 (D.D.C. June 10, 2011).  The District Court for the District of Columbia held that the Defendants failed to show that their privacy interests outweighed the Plaintiff's need to obtain their identifying information to pursue its copyright claims.

Game Over for Winklevosses in Facebook Case

The social networking saga appears to have finally come to an end in a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirming the decision to enforce the Settlement Agreement between Facebook and the Winklevosses.  The Facebook, Inc. v. Pacific Northwest Software, Inc., 2011WL 1843509 (C.A.9 (Cal.)).   The tone of the decision was one of vexation towards the Winklevosses for the protracted litigation, despite the agreement to release all claims against Facebook.  If you have watched the movie, "The Social Network," you know the genesis of the battle between Mark Zuckerberg and the Winklevosses.  Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss and Divya Narendra (the Winklevosses) claimed that Mark Zuckerberg poached the idea for Facebook from them. The Winklevosses sued Facebook and Zuckerberg in Massachusetts and Facebook countersued them and their competing social network site, ConnectU, in California.  The District Court in California ultimately ordered the ConnectU, Facebook and the Winklevosses to mediate their dispute.