1) Define ant cybersquatting in your own words. What are the major provisions in
Anticybersquating Consumer Protection Act?
It is a PC law in the United States that on a very basic level assurances people and relationship against different people who wish to preference from an Internet space name or trademark that is extensively utilized by a business or brand. Going before the approbation of ACPA the lacking validity practice of enlisting the space name of an unmistakable business or brand and a brief while later attempting to offer it to an affiliation that for the most part participates under that name was normal. In a few delineations, the extent name was not offered available to be acquired, but rather the registrant still attempted
…show more content…
There are generally two answers for trademark holders in this situation. To begin with, you can treat it like a general trademark case and sue to get rights to the space name and possibly procure money hurts as well. Second, under the 1999 law known as the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), you are allowed to dispatch intervention systems under the force of the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), so you may have the ability to win your territory name back without expecting to go to court by any stretch of the creative …show more content…
In circumstances where it can be shown that a name was being used going before the transcendence of an affiliation issuing a dissenting, an officer may pick for the first segment that enlisted the name. Then again, at a judge's sensibility, a name that was by then utilized may be cleared as a part of case it is dead arranged that the name's utilization is making naughtiness to an affiliation moreover chipping in under that name or moniker. The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, regardless, generally identifies with occasions where a name is in effect not well utilized and abused for the sole clarification behind focal
...motion. The court correctly held that there were insufficient allegations to state a First Amendment claims against Defendant. Furthermore, the court accurately concluded that Plaintiff failed to show that relevant aspects of Defendant’s search engine were equivalent of a traditional public forum. The Court decided properly when dismissing Plaintiff’s defamation allegations because these did not alleged malice. The holding of the United States Supreme Court in Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149 (1991), United States v. E. I.du Pont de Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377 (1956), Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585 (1985), the interpretation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125, Cal. Civil Code §47 and Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 and the decision in New.Net, Inc. v. Lavasoft, 356 F. Supp.2d 1090 (2004) were crucial to properly decide on the case.
No one has been prosecuted under COPA; the ACLU brought suit as soon as the law was passed, and a federal judge in Pennsylvania agreed to block enforcement. The Third Circuit upheld the injunction, ruling that COPA's reliance on community standards improperly allows the most conservative communities to dictate what should be considered indecent. The ACLU represents a number of plaintiffs who publish materials online, including an art gallery, Salon.com magazine, a bookstore, and the producer of a...
Peer-to-peer (P2P) networks have had a staggering growth in the past few years. Since Napster, dozens of P2P networks have been created in its imitation. Due to the growing accessibility of broadband, which increases the speed of downloads, P2P networks generate nearly 1.8 billion downloads per month. Popularity and acceptance is still continually growing.
Australia is dependent on technology, everything from state security, economics and information collaboration is more accessible resulting in an increased reliance on digital networks. The rapid increase in cyber activity has a symbiotic relationship with cyber crime. The evolving nature of cyber crimes are constantly leaving counter measures obsolete in the face of these new technologies. Australia takes insufficient action against cyber crime, inaction is based on Australia’s previous focus on counter-terrorism. This study will use the Australia’s National Security Strategy 2013 to show the increasing trend towards cyber security. Unfortunately the Australia Government is lacking in the presence of this growing phenomenon. Recently cyber crimes including attacks from Anonymous and Wiki-leaks prove that no network is completely secure. This study will conclude that the exponential growth of the Internet has resulted in an inability to properly manage regardless of the governmental strategies being implemented.
... middle of paper ... ... Gonzaga Law Review 33.3 (1998): 653-668. HeinOnline.com -.
Everything is stored on the internet including highly classified government information, and your bank information. How do we make sure no one steals, views, or sells your passwords, and private information? Congress passed a law in 1986 called the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) to protect the government’s information. Many laws have been passed that revises the CFAA. The CFAA has imprisoned many people, and many people want changes to the CFAA today.
The Stop Online Piracy Act was proposed in January of 2012. SOPA was a legislative act that attempted to prevent piracy through DNS blocking and censorship. The legislation caused the protest and blackout of multiple online internet services including Reddit, 4Chan, Google, Wikipedia, Mozilla, and Tumblr. Now, internet users are faced with another possible challenge called the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA. CISPA was quickly passed by the House of Representatives on April 26th, 2012, and is now being processed through the Senate (Beadon). CISPA's purpose is to promote national cybersecurity through allowing private companies and the federal government to exchange users' private information, including emails and text messages, with complete legal immunity and one hundred percent anonymity. To some, CISPA appears as SOPA 2.0, another attempt to further limit American rights and privacy. Meanwhile, to others, CISPA appears as a milestone that needs to be reached in order to advance technologically and improve the nation's security. CISPA's purpose appears noble, but the current version of the legislation at least requires a revision due to its privacy invading policies, vague terminology, possible restrictions of internet freedom, and violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The government has passed some laws which are intended to protect children on the internet. The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) are to give protection for children who are accessing the internet. There are requirements and protective information for both COPPA and CIPA. Both acts are similar and different in ways to protect children but needed to be done with two acts. There are challenging elements with the COPPA and CIPA to implement in order to be compliant with the acts. There are reasons for the acts to define protection for different age groups such as COPPA defines a child under 13 and CIPA is under 17. When COPPA and CIPA was made into law, there were people who were for the acts but there were also people who opposed the acts.
The Consumer Product Safety Act states that any company that receives numerous complaints about a products defects must report these claims to the CPSA. According to the CPSA reporting responsibilities belong to manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers of consumer products. Each is required to notify the Commission if it obtains information which reasonably supports the conclusion that a product fails to comply with a consumer product safety standard or banning regulation. Also if the product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury, or death to the consumer.
WE can however, accommodate mechanisms which operate as additional or subsidiary processes in the discharge of sovereign responsibility. These enable the court system to devote its precious time and resources to the more solemn task of administering justice in the name of sovereign." Street, The language of alternative dispute resolution' (1992) 66 Australian Law Journal, 1994.
The internet has been one of the most influential technological advancements of the twenty-first century. It is in millions of homes, schools, and workplaces. The internet offers not only a way of communicating with people around the world, but also a link to information, shopping, chatting, searching, and maps. This freedom to be anyone and to "go" anywhere right from the comfort of home has become a cherished item. However, there is always a down side to every up. Because of the freedom to post anything and access anything on the internet, the issue of regulation has arisen; for example, what should and should not be allowed on the internet? Who has the right to regulate this space that we cherish for its freedom?
“an attorney representing a free-speech coalition and companies including America Online and Microsoft, told the court the
In today's society, many aspects of crime committed on a regular basis. Civilians take advantage of people all the time using online resources such as a fraudulent website requiring credit card information to get a free monthly trial. Other examples of cyber crimes are online chatting website, full of predators or websites needing a downloadable program that contains a hacking virus. Sadly, there are many cases of cyber crime all over the internet. The acts of cyber crimes are considered violent acts like any other. Every day citizens are constantly losing money and being victimized due to these fraudulent activities. Cyber crime, including fraud, identity theft, stalking, and hacking, is a growing problem which can be prevented by taking the proper precautions.
All of us know about the crimes committed every day by people all over the world. Theft, assault, grand theft auto, underage drinking, fraud, prostitution, and rape. But what about crimes on the internet? Last year, SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) was introduced to the world. If this bill was passed, many sites would have to censor certain pieces of information, as well as remove a lot of the content already uploaded. SOPA would also crack down on terminating torrent sites, which are used to share files such as music, movies, video games, e-books, and whatever else is a digital file. In my opinion, SOPA should not be passed due to the fact that censoring information on the internet is an act against the first amendment. SOPA should not be passed due to the fact that it goes against the first amendment and will lead to a corrupt information sharing system.
would like to put you in a situation and show you how a consumer can