“Disappearing Forever” Too Good to be True? Snapchat Reaches Settlement with FTC

ImageBy Chris Ferrell

On May 8th, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that Snapchat, a mobile application company, had agreed to settle with the FTC over several charges, including deceptive advertising, failure to maintain security features, and collecting data from application users. The FTC alleged that Snapchat deceived users by claiming that their “snaps” (which are pictures users take with their cell phones and send to other users) would “disappear forever” after being viewed. According to Snapchat, users send 400 million photos and videos per day. However, recipients of a snap can save the snap in different ways, including: taking a “screen shot” of the picture, downloading the picture as original content, or, at the extreme, hacking into different Snapchat users’ accounts and stealing their photos. We’ve previously covered the legal ramifications of taking a screenshot of snaps in the context of revenge porn.

The FTC further alleged that Snapchat’s failure to secure its “Find Friends” feature resulted in a security breach that enabled attackers to compile a database of 4.6 million Snapchat usernames and phone numbers. Snapchat also allegedly took contacts from Apple iOS users’ address books, as well as geolocation information from people using Android-based phones. Snapchat does not have to pay a fine, but, under the settlement, it is prohibited from misrepresenting the extent to which it maintains the privacy and security of users’ information. Snapchat must also implement a comprehensive privacy program that will be monitored by a third-party privacy group for the next 20 years. Although Snapchat claims to have already addressed the FTC’s concerns by “improving the wording of their privacy policy” and implementing security counter measures, is that enough to allow applications like Snapchat to continue to exist? Continue reading →

Is High-Frequency Trading The Future, Or Will It Soon Be History?

Image

By Stephen Anson

Equipped with some of the most powerful super-computers in the world, high-frequency traders anticipate millisecond changes in the market, allowing them to score immediate gains and affect the market index. These trading practices have been used for years, and though there are many federal rules criminalizing insider trading and securities fraud, no one has used these rules to go after high-frequency traders until recently. Whether or not these trades are illegal remains an open question. In the interim, growing public discontent will likely lead to more lawsuits and perhaps eventual securities reform.

Public interest in high-frequency trading has grown lately, spurred in part by Michael Lewis’s new book “Flash Boys.” In his book, Lewis described the market as being “rigged” by “high-frequency traders armed with fiber-optic lines and computer servers located next to, or even inside, the exchanges.” This advanced technology gives high-frequency traders an advantage over other traders. The technology provides faster access to information about the flow of the market, and the traders then use advanced algorithms to purchase as many of the “in demand” securities as possible. Their computer programs will then, nearly instantaneously, sell those same securities back out in the market, often for a nice little margin. High-frequency traders can still turn a profit, even if they are buying large volumes of stock and selling them for the same price, because they receive a liquidity rebate for each transaction from the relevant exchange. The exchanges, such as the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), pay these liquidity rebates, which typically amount to a fraction of a penny per share, because it increases the overall liquidity in that marketplace.

Continue reading →

Loser Pays: US Supreme Court Gives District Courts Greater Discretion to Award Attorney’s Fees in Frivolous Patent Suits

ImageBy Peter Montine

The United States Supreme Court has made it easier for district courts to award attorney’s fees in frivolous patent infringement cases. In two different cases, the Court held that the decision to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party was within a court’s general discretion, and that a review of such a decision was analyzed under an “abuse of discretion” standard.

In the first case, Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., Octane had been sued by ICON for infringing on ICON’s patent for adjustable elliptical machines. Octane succeeded on a summary judgment motion in district court to dismiss the suit. However, when Octane moved for attorney’s fees, the court denied the motion, following the standard set forth in Brooks Furniture Mfg., Inc. v. Dutailier Int’l, Inc. That standard requires that a court find the claim to be either (1) objectively baseless or (2) brought in subjective bad faith. Finding neither of these things to be true, the court dismissed the motion for attorney’s fees. Octane appealed, but the Federal Circuit, which issued the Brooks standard, upheld the district court’s decision. Continue reading →

Taking (Away) Your TV Shows To-Go

ImageBy Amy Wang

Last week, Hulu announced that it will extend video streaming services this summer—and disrupt already low summertime productivity—by providing free, full TV episodes and movies on mobile devices, a feature normally reserved for Hulu Plus subscribers and limited to select clips. Although this is probably a temporary, promotional stunt to boost subscribership, the announcement comes just a week after the U.S. Supreme Court considered the legal implications of a similar video streaming service.

On Tuesday, April 22, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for American Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc—for a thorough discussion of the case, see our winter publication. The premise of the case focuses on Aereo’s business model. The company provides its subscribers (currently, limited to NYC residents) unique technology: each subscriber is assigned a small antenna located at Aereo’s facility which captures and records live TV broadcasts and re-distributes them to the subscribers’ devices over the Internet. Subscribers can then watch shows live on their mobile devices, stop, and pick up the same programming when they get home on their tablet, computer, or TV. Continue reading →

Innocence Project Northwest Invested in Biological Material Retention, Despite Difficult Legislative Session

ImageBy Rachael Wallace

The Washington State legislative session ended last month, with many issues tackled but some left untouched. The Innocence Project Northwest, operating out of the University of Washington School of Law, worked tirelessly on a biological material retention bill that eventually died in the House of Representatives.

The bill initially placed an 18-month moratorium on the destruction of biological evidence in felony cases. It also created a work group to recommend permanent, statewide standards for preserving biological material. Currently, Washington State has no policy on the preservation of biological material. In the House, Rep. Tina Orwall from Des Moines sponsored the bill. The Senate bill was sponsored by Sen. Jeannie Darneille from Tacoma.

Increasingly in the last 10 years, DNA analysis has been used to convict criminals and to free the wrongfully convicted. Innocence projects have expanded throughout the nation as DNA analysis becomes more reliable and less expensive to use in post-conviction review. In Washington last year, Jeramie Davis was released from a 40-year sentence on a murder he did not commit. In that case, the Spokane police asked that an unidentified DNA profile on the homicide weapon and in the victim’s car be uploaded to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a federal database of DNA profiles. The database came back with a match to another person, Julio Davila, whose fingerprints were also found at the crime scene. Continue reading →