Many companies are guilty of copying other’s contracts as a shortcut to creating their own templates. While some companies do, in fact, have great technology contracts, one should be aware of the pitfalls in failing to cater the contract to the needs of their business. These pitfalls can be especially tricky in privacy and data security agreements, which are often premised on convoluted and ever-changing laws. For example, as we approach the one-year mark until new E.U. laws

Photo Credit: Omar Bariffi, “A hole in the water” - CC BY 2.0 Generic A case adjudicated by the Ninth Circuit last month, Beckman v. Match.com, LLC (Beckman), demonstrates how intermediary liability, tort law, and contract law can come together to produce surprising results. This post focuses on Beckman and its implications, importantly, potential liability where internet law does not necessarily immunize a company against claims of failure to warn of potential harm from usin

(Note: This post previously appeared as a guest blog post on IUS&VITA.) Last year, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released an order for the purpose of protecting the Open Internet. In doing so, it reclassified broadband service as a Title II telecommunications service and established a “general conduct rule . . . to stop new and novel threats to the Internet.” Specifically, under this standard, service providers cannot “unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably