US Civil Litigation - Spyware Claim Dismissed

Just under a year ago I blogged a report of a class action in Illinois against 180 Solutions Inc and 180 others ("Spyware Claim in Illinois" 15 Sep 2006). I did so mainly because of the opportunity to study the claimant's statement of case which was very curious to my eyes but also because of the subject matter which just about falls within the scope of this blog. Extravagantly, I promised to follow this case and keep everyone posted.

Now I have some news of this litigation thanks to Mr Steve Stratz, Director of Public Relations of
Zango. Mr Stratz says that "the putative class action lawsuit (Simios, et al. v. 180solutions, Inc.) filed nearly a year ago in federal court in Chicago has been dismissed, with prejudice." He adds that "a dismissal with prejudice prevents the plaintiff(s) from bringing the same lawsuit against Zango in the future and is a drastic remedy and one granted only in the most egregious cases". He invites further enquiries on + 1 425 2791321 or indeed his mobile on + 1 206.300.9134 or sstratz@zango.com.

Mr Stratz sent me a press release about the decision to substantially the same effect. In it he describes his company as
"a pioneer of what we call the Content Economy ...... an online media company, fulfills millions of consumers’ growing demand for free, sought-after online videos, games, music, tools and utilities, giving those consumers greater choice and control over when, where, and how they access that content. Zango’s vision enables content creators to monetize and distribute their content, provides publishers access to valuable and unique content as well as a way to make money from their web traffic, and delivers to advertisers industry-leading ROI through time-shifted ad delivery by engaging more than 20 million consumers precisely when they are most likely to make a purchasing decision. Committed to safe and ethical practices, Zango welcomes more than 200,000 new opt-in consumers every day. For more information, visit www.zango.com."
So there. Never let it be said that this blog does not keep its promises to keep its public informed. If anyone wants to discuss this case, please get in touch with Mr Stratz rather than me.

Comments

New Jersey Attorney said…
Hi,This is obviously one great post. Thanks for the valuable information and insights you have so provided here.In this case you always hire good lawyer.
09:52
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Copyright: Primary Infirngement - Copying

The right to copy a copyright work is restricted to the copyright owner by s.2 (1) and s.16 (1) (a) of the  Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 . The restriction applies to every description of copyright work though different provisions apply to different types of work (s.17 (1)). This right to restrict copying is referred to as the right of reproduction in art 9 of the Bern Convention and art 2 of the "Copyright in the Information Society" or  Copyright and Related Rights Directive  (Directive 2001/29). Literary Musical, Dramatic or Artistic Works Copying in relation to an artistic, dramatic, literary or musical work  work means reproducing the work in any material form including storing the work in any medium by electronic means. In the case of an artistic work this includes making a copy in 3 dimensions of a 2 dimensional work and the making of a copy in 3 dimensions of a 3 dimensional work. Films and Broadcasts S.17 (4) of the 1988 Act as amended  includes within the
Read more

Patents - Gilead Sciences Inc v NuCana Plc

Image
  Jane Lamber t Patents Court  (Mr Justice Meade) G ilead Sciences Inc and another NuCana PLC  [2023] EWHC 611 (Pat) (21 March 2023) This was an action by Gilead Sciences Inc. and its British subsidiary Gilead Sciences Ltd ("Gilead") for revocation of two European Patents (UK) that had been granted to NuCana Plc ("NoCana"), namely  EP 2 955 190 B1 (“EP190”)  and   EP 3 904 365 B1 (“EP365”) .  NuCana complained that Gilead's product  sofosbuvir  infringed its patents. Mr Justice Meade, who tried the action, could see no real defence to the counterclaim if the claims of the patents were valid. Grounds of Revocation Gilead sought revocation of the patents on the following grounds: Added matter in that the  Markush group definitions of the claims  of the patents are not clearly and unambiguously disclosed in the original application; Lack of plausibility in that the Patents do not plausibly disclose any technical contribution common to substantially all the claimed
Read more

Copyright in Photographs: Temple Island Collections and Creation Records

Image
In our very first NIPC newsletter which we published in June 1997 I wrote a case note on Mr. Justice Lloyd's decision in  Creation Records Ltd. and Others v News Group Newspapers Ltd   [1997] EMLR 444, [1997] EWHC Ch 370, (1997) 16 Tr LR 544. In that case Mr. Noel Gallagher of Oasis and others applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain The Sun from offering for sale and selling a poster of Oasis that featured a photo of an elaborate set that included a white Rolls Royce in a country club swimming pool. The Sun's photograph was very similar to the photograph that appeared on an Oasis album cover. The similarity arose because The Sun's photographer shot the same scene at roughly the same time and from the same angle as Mr. Gallagher's photographer but he did not reproduce any part of Oasis's print or negative. The learned judge held that the plaintiffs had no arguable case for infringement of copyright though he accepted that they had an arguable case for br
Read more