Category - "Enforcement"

Hoisting Scammers with Their Own Petard with the UDRP

Share

With the widespread availability of domain registration and hosting services and the advent of low-cost generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) software, the creation of fraudulent websites has never been easier—or more convincing. With little more effort than a few prompts of an AI program, scammers are able to quickly set up seemingly legitimate websites with text, images, and even video that can look and sound like the real thing. Online consumers, even those savvy enough to recognize your typical email phishing scam, may be fooled by professional-looking websites imitating existing businesses and organizations for less than savory reasons.

For brand owners, the consequences of these imitators can be myriad, including a loss of brand control, irate consumers looking for someone to blame, and ultimately a hit to your bottom line. Indeed, according to the FBI’s 2023 Internet Crime Report, Americans reported over $7.5 billion in losses stemming from intellectual property-related cybercrimes in 2023, up from 2022. Adding to this problem is the fact enforcing your rights against scammer sites can be costly and time-consuming. Scammers themselves are often anonymous and unsurprisingly unlikely to make themselves readily identifiable or easy to track down. Domain registrars and web hosts may require brand owners to navigate byzantine reporting channels in order to flag problematic conduct. And the resources required attempting to litigate every offending domain in court can make it an untenable option for many.

Continue reading “Hoisting Scammers with Their Own Petard with the UDRP”

NO FAKES Here: A New Tool to Protect Against the Misuse of AI?

Share

What do Scarlett Johansson, Drake, The Weeknd, and Taylor Swift have in common (besides being among this millennial’s fav celebs)?  They all have the distinct displeasure of becoming a target of deepfake technology – a type of AI that creates fake, but highly realistic-looking audio, images, or videos using the likeness and/or voice of its victim.

While there are certainly positive uses of deepfake technology (Val Kimer’s AI-generated voice in his reprisal of “Iceman” in Top Gun Maverick comes to mind),1 the widespread potential for abuse and malicious use, from fake musical performances, to fake political robocalls, to pornographic content, is top of mind for the entertainment industry, politicians, and ordinary folk alike.

Continue reading “NO FAKES Here: A New Tool to Protect Against the Misuse of AI?”

Make your Company a Hard Target for Job Scams

Share

Your company’s talent is its lifeblood. Job postings for qualified individuals and other recruitment activities are vital to its operations. What happens, then, when scammers disrupt your business by conducting phishing schemes to trick individuals into applying for nonexistent jobs you did not post with the objective of stealing their personally identifiable information? In the age of remote work and virtual hiring, the impersonation of companies in job recruitment scams has become increasingly prevalent.

It can be difficult for job seekers to recognize a recruitment outreach as a scam, particularly when they’re highly interested in the opportunity. Therefore, it is incumbent upon companies to take steps to mitigate or stop the potential for harm. Leveraging company intellectual property is crucial to combating such schemes and to protecting both job seekers and the company’s good name.

Continue reading “Make your Company a Hard Target for Job Scams”

Avoiding Warhol: How Celebrity Tattoo Artist Kat Von D Turned Defeat Into Victory in the Central District of California

Share

When celebrity tattoo artist Katherine Von Drachenberg (better known as Kat Von D) tattooed a portrait of Miles Davis on her friend Blake Farmer’s arm as a gift, she used a reference photo created by professional photographer Jeffrey Sedlik to guide her work.  This tattoo—which Von D did not charge for—would set off a two-year legal battle that culminated in a jury trial in the Central District of California in early 2024.  Sedlik claimed that Von D’s tattoo infringed his copyright in the photo and pointed to shared elements such as hand placement, overall pose, similar furrowed brows, similar lighting, and the direction of Miles Davis’s gaze.  Von D, for her part, spent the majority of the litigation arguing that the tattoo was transformative and protected by the doctrine of fair use.

And it seemed that Von D was well on her way to being able to plead her case to a jury.  The district court found that Von D had sufficiently shown that the tattoo could have a purpose or meaning distinct from that of the photo “by virtue of the way [Von D] changed its appearance to create what she characterizes as adding movement and a more melancholy aesthetic.”  Thus, it denied Sedlik’s motion for summary judgment on the transformative nature of the tattoo and Von D was poised to argue the issue to a California jury.

Continue reading “Avoiding Warhol: How Celebrity Tattoo Artist Kat Von D Turned Defeat Into Victory in the Central District of California”

The Ninth Circuit Just Provided a Roadmap On How to Defend California Consumer Fraud Claims

Share

Companies that may face consumer fraud claims in West Coast courts will want to take a close look at the Ninth Circuit’s decision this month in McGinity v. Procter & Gamble Co., __ F.4th __, 2023 WL 3911531 (9th Cir. June 9, 2023).  The Ninth Circuit provided some much-needed clarity on how lower courts within its jurisdiction should reconcile two seemingly conflicting precedents on how to apply the “reasonable consumer” test to seemingly fanciful claims brought under California’s consumer fraud laws.

Seven years ago, in the pro-defense Ebner v. Fresh, Inc., 838 F.3d 958 (9th Cir. 2016), the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal of claims that the weight indicator on a tube of lip balm was misleading because some of the balm sits in the tube’s screw mechanism and thus is basically unusable.  In the legalese equivalent of “give me a break,” the Ninth Circuit noted California state appellate precedent holding that consumer fraud claims must be dismissed if it is improbable “that a significant portion of the general consuming public or of targeted consumers, acting reasonably in the circumstances, could be misled” by the challenged practice or language, and called the plaintiff’s lip balm claims “not plausible.”  Id. at 965.  The Ebner decision basically counseled district judges to be on the lookout for, and be ready to dismiss, a plaintiff’s allegations that reflect, at best, the reading “an insignificant and unrepresentative segment” of purchasers might give to a challenged advertisement or language on packaging.  Id. at 966.

Continue reading “The Ninth Circuit Just Provided a Roadmap On How to Defend California Consumer Fraud Claims”