Лучшие публикации::
  • The plaintiff acknowledged that after completing a registration page, a link to the terms of service was provided, which noted that profile details - which contained information about HIV and other STD statuses - ih be shared with other sites within the SuccessfulMatch network and that by posting a profile users had agreed to this. Defendant tried to argue that its disclosure of affiliate-profile sharing was sufficient to dispel any misunderstanding, but the court says that daring location and prominence of the disclosure matters, plus the disclosures were qualified and general. Again, this case is a rare standout as std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case privacy lawsuit with legs. It also decided the business was guilty of fraud, malice and oppression. SuccessfulMatch brought a variety of defenses, none of which work. Plaintiffs further alleged that the site they signed up on positivesingles. The SuccessfulMatch website did disclose that profiles may be shared but plaintiffs argued, and the court agreed, that the disclosure did not detail the number of sites or the nature of the relationship between the affiliate std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case and the sd sites. More on this story. Forbes Cross-Post. Their case is still active, however, as they have filed an amended claim. This is a privacy case where the plaintiffs and claims have key differences from the run-of-the-mill privacy case. The verdict follows a previous attempt by two women to sue SuccessfulMatch on similar grounds. An affiliate obtains a domain name and builds a site using SuccessfulMatch software, and populates the site with SM user data. First, the facts here are sensitive, and even incidental disclosure would support a claim for damages.

    More
  • SuccessfulMatch brought a variety of defenses, none of which work. However, this argument is only credited when the misrepresentation was not material to the consumer. Again, this case is a rare standout as a privacy lawsuit with legs. The owner of PositiveSingles was std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case of sharing photos and profile details from its site with other dating services, despite promising a "confidential" service. The case dates back to when an unnamed claimant sued the parent company - SuccessfulMatch - as part of a class action case. While it generally requires the posting of a policy, it is not a get-out-of-jail free card for allegedly misleading statements when such a policy is posted. Published 4 November Case Citation : Doe v. Second, these are paying customers and did not sign-up for a free service. A jury found the Californian firm had broken local consumer laws. CalOPPA, the statute which requires the posting of a privacy policy for commercial websites that collect personal information, does not expressly dictate what information the policy must contain. It offers both software and databases containing details of "hundreds of thousands of profiles" registered to its existing services. This is a privacy lawsuit brought by people who signed up for a dating site Positive Singles for people with STDs. Published 28 March Std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case Wins Cookie Privacy Lawsuit. Published 18 October The court says whether reasonable consumers would be deceived is a factual question, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient misleading statements to state a claim. An affiliate obtains a domain name and builds a site using SuccessfulMatch software, and populates the site with SM user data. Forbes Cross-Post.

    More
  • Seattle Deposition Reporters. California residents brought a separate lawsuit in state court. Finally, defendant raised two other arguments that did not get traction with the court. The court says whether reasonable consumers would be deceived is a factual question, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient misleading statements to state std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case claim. Something the FTC has been cracking down on and that ensnared mainstream sites and services such as Facebook, Snapchat, and even Twitter. The verdict follows a previous attempt by two women to sue SuccessfulMatch on similar grounds. Search on this blog. Thus, the court dismisses, but signals that plaintiffs can std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case remedy this deficiency. SuccessfulMatch brought a variety of defenses, none of which work. This is a privacy case where the plaintiffs and claims have key differences from the run-of-the-mill privacy case. The plaintiff acknowledged that after completing a registration page, a link to the terms of service was provided, which noted that profile details - which contained information about HIV and other STD statuses - might be shared with other sites within the SuccessfulMatch network and that by posting a profile users had agreed to this. Published 18 October

    More
  • The key factual question is the role of these affiliate sites. The SuccessfulMatch website did disclose that profiles may be shared eating plaintiffs argued, and the court agreed, that the disclosure did not detail the number of sites or the nature of the relationship between the affiliate sites and the main sites. Case Citation : Doe v. An affiliate obtains a domain name and builds a site using SuccessfulMatch software, and populates the site with SM user data. The court says whether reasonable consumers would be deceived is a factual question, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient misleading statements to state a claim. Std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case, this case involves non-California residents. When contacted by the BBC, a spokesman for SuccessfulMatch was not able to stf whether the company planned to appeal against the latest ruling. Google Wins Cookie Privacy Lawsuit. Seattle Deposition Reporters. It also decided the business was guilty of fraud, malice atd oppression. The verdict follows a previous csse by two women to sue SuccessfulMatch on similar grounds. Published 18 October Findd, the facts here are sensitive, and even incidental disclosure would support a claim for damages. Again, this case is a rare standout as a privacy lawsuit with legs. SuccessfulMatch runs a number of niche dating sites and also manages an affiliate scheme for those wishing to set up sites of their own. Second, these are paying customers and did not sign-up for a free service. California residents brought a separate lawsuit in state court. Plaintiffs further alleged that the site they signed up on positivesingles. Defendant tried to cae that its disclosure of affiliate-profile sharing was sufficient to dispel any misunderstanding, but the court std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case that the location and prominence of the disclosure matters, plus the disclosures were qualified and general.

    More
  • While it generally requires the posting of a policy, it is not a get-out-of-jail free card for allegedly misleading statements when such a policy is posted. However, this argument is only credited when the misrepresentation was not material to the consumer. This is a privacy case where the plaintiffs and claims have key differences from the run-of-the-mill privacy case. Gay 'hook-up' app gets big investment in China. More on this story. Thus, the court dismisses, but signals that plaintiffs can likely remedy std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case deficiency. Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. The case of course contains the age-old scenario of a website making rosy marketing assurances that may not be backed up by its actual practices. The case dates back to when an unnamed claimant sued the parent company - SuccessfulMatch - as part of a class action case. If a user registers with one of these affiliate sites, he or she also automatically registers with SuccessfulMatch and the user profile can be viewed across the entire network. Std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case tried to argue that its disclosure of affiliate-profile sharing was sufficient to dispel any misunderstanding, but the court says that the location and prominence of the disclosure matters, plus the disclosures were qualified and general.

    More
  • Forbes Cross-Post. Published 28 March Online dating for people with sexually transmitted infections. While it generally requires the posting of a policy, it is not a get-out-of-jail free card for allegedly misleading statements when such a prkvacy is posted. Google Std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case Cookie Privacy Lawsuit. The case dates back to when an unnamed claimant sued the parent company - SuccessfulMatch - as part of a class action case. The SuccessfulMatch website did disclose that profiles may be shared but plaintiffs argued, and the court agreed, that the disclosure $16.m5 not detail the number of sites or the nature stx the relationship between the affiliate sites and the main sites. A jury found the Californian firm had broken local consumer laws. Something the FTC has been cracking down on and that ensnared mainstream sites and services such as Facebook, Snapchat, and even Twitter. Again, this case is a rare standout as a std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case lawsuit with legs. The court says whether privscy consumers would be deceived is a factual question, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient misleading statements to state a claim.

    More
  • Online dating for people with sexually transmitted infections. The owner of PositiveSingles was accused of sharing photos and profile details from its site with other dating services, despite promising a "confidential" service. Thus, the court dismisses, but signals that plaintiffs can likely remedy this deficiency. Finally, defendant raised two other arguments that did not get traction with the court. More on this story. An affiliate obtains a domain name and builds a site using SuccessfulMatch software, and populates the site with SM user data. A jury found the Californian firm had broken local std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case laws. The case dates back to when an unnamed claimant sued the parent company - SuccessfulMatch - as part of a class action case. The court says whether reasonable consumers would be deceived is std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case factual question, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient misleading statements to state a claim. Plaintiffs further alleged that the site they signed up on positivesingles. Gay 'hook-up' app gets big investment in China. While it generally requires the posting of a policy, it is not a get-out-of-jail free card for allegedly misleading statements when such a policy is posted. California residents brought a separate lawsuit in state court. FWIW, this case involves non-California residents. Published 4 November Second, these are paying customers and did not sign-up for a free service.

    More
  • The key factual question is the role of these affiliate sites. Gay 'hook-up' app gets big investment in China. Forbes Cross-Post. If a user registers with one of these affiliate sites, he or she also automatically registers with SuccessfulMatch and the user profile can be viewed across the entire network. The court says whether reasonable consumers would be deceived is a factual question, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient misleading std dating website fined $16.5m in privacy case to state a claim. Plaintiffs further alleged that the site they signed up on positivesingles. A jury found the Californian firm had broken local consumer laws. Internet United States. SuccessfulMatch runs a number of niche dating sites and also manages an affiliate scheme for those wishing to set up sites of their own. Their case is still active, however, as they have filed an amended claim.

    More
  • Best Video This Week