HARTFORD–Thirty state attorneys general have launched an investigation into Google’s practices of gathering Wi-Fi “payload” data. “My office will lead a multistate investigation — expected to involve a significant number of states — into Google’s deeply disturbing invasion of personal privacy,” Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said.

In May Google started getting sued around the country over its practice of collecting Wi-Fi data from potentially millions of people as the company photographed streets for Google maps.  In May, the House Energy Committee launched an inquiry into Google’s practice of gathering Wi-Fi data. The Electronic Privacy Foundation also wrote a letter to the FCC calling for a full investigation of the matter.

In June, the FCC said Google had clearly infringed on consumer privacy: “Whether intentional or not, collecting information sent over WiFi networks clearly infringes on consumer privacy.” On June 9 Google responded to the Congressional probe by stating that “being lawful and doing the right thing are two separate things.”

Blumenthal’s inquiry seeks records from Google including:

• Copies of the company’s internal procedures and protocols for Street View cars and data collected by them;
• What steps Google has taken to keep unauthorized code out of its products in the future;
• Whether Google conducted internal or external audits, analysis or performance reviews of its Street View program and data collected;
• How and when Google learned that its Street View cars were capturing data sent over unencrypted networks;
• Why Google Street View cars recorded the signal strength and quality of personal and business wireless networks.

SEATTLE–The newly-minted Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts has embraced web-2.0 in an effort to bring cutting-edge legal analysis to practicing attorneys. The Journal, which published its inaugural issue yesterday, is already connecting with bloggers, attorney-networking sites like JDSupra, and the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). This use of emerging communications media is consistent with the Journal’s new partnership with the Law, Technology & Arts group, an integrated academic unit at the University of Washington that delivers education, research, and outreach on the law’s role in promoting and regulating innovation in technology and arts.

SEATTLE—Today the University of Washington School of Law published the inaugural issue of the new Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, the nation’s first student-run electronic law journal focusing on technology, commerce, and artistic innovation.

The Journal replaces the Shidler Journal of Law, Commerce + Technology as part of a merger with the Law, Technology & Arts Group (LTA), a new interdisciplinary research unit at the law school. LTA was formed in 2009 to take a comprehensive approach to legal issues involved in artistic and technological innovation. LTA consolidated the J.D. and LL.M. programs, the former Shidler Center for Law, Commerce + Technology, and the Center for Advanced Research in Intellectual Property (CASRIP) into a single research team to cover the full scope of these areas.

The Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts will publish concise legal analysis aimed at practicing attorneys. The Journal will publish on a quarterly basis. This month’s issue includes six articles on topics including:

* Cloud Computing
* Arbitration Clauses in Wireless Telephone Service Contracts
* Cell Phone Text-Message Spam
* Liability for Posting Hyperlinks in Financial Disclosures
* Modifying Contract Through E-Mail
* Attorney-Client Ethical Issues Raised by Gmail

The Journal is the nation’s first technology and law journal that also publishes articles involving the arts. The new Journal will play a key role in furthering the University of Washington School of Law’s reputation as a center of innovation and path-breaking legal research.

The Journal accepts outside submissions from students, law professors, and practicing attorneys. For more information about the Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts please visit their new website at: http://www.law.washington.edu/WJLTA/.

NEW YORK–The judge presiding over Shepard Fairey vs. Associated Press recently made statements suggested Associated Press would win the case if artist Shepard Fairey does not settle. AP News quotes Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein as saying that “whether it’s sooner or later, The Associated Press is going to win.” The statements were allegedly made during a hearing on May 28, 2010. Huffington Post has more details on the hearing.

The litigation began February 2009 when Fairey sued for a declaratory judgement that his “Hope” poster did not infringe AP’s copyright of an Obama photograph taken by Mannnie Garcia.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown today filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting a Connecticut woman who seeks the return of two 500-year-old paintings stolen by the Nazis during World War II.  According to the brief, the paintings were kept for a time in the estate of Nazi leader Hermann Göring and then purchased 40 years ago by the Norton Simon Museum of Art in Pasadena, California.

The paintings at issue, two panels of “Adam and Eve,” were painted by 16th century German artist Lucas Cranach the Elder.   Last year the paintings were appraised at $24 million.  According to the attorney general’s press release, the works were confiscated by Nazi soldiers from an Amsterdam gallery owned by a relative of Marei Von Saher during the war.

Brown’s amicus brief, submitted in support of Von Saher’s petition for a hearing before the Supreme Court, argues California has the right to extend the statute of limitations for filing Nazi-era claims beyond the usual three-year limit.  Brown argues “California has a compelling interest in preserving its ability to regulate in areas of traditional state responsibility and in defending its lawfully enacted statutes where they do not conflict with federal law or foreign policy.”

At issue is whether the Ninth Circuit in Marei Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art improperly invalidated section 354.3 of the California civil procedure code, which extends the limitations period in which plaintiffs may seek recovery of artwork looted during the Nazi-era.  The Ninth Circuit said regulating stolen property within state museums was not a traditional state interest and was therefore subject to field preemption analysis.

Brown argues the statute should have been subject to conflicts-preemption analysis, not field preemption, because California was regulating within an area of traditional responsibility.  According to the amicus, the Ninth Circuit improperly expanded the doctrine of field preemption, as it relates to the foreign affairs doctrine, beyond the limits set by  American Ins. Assn. v. Garamendi.  Moreover, California did not inject itself into relations with foreign countries by extending the limitations period for claims to recover artwork from museums and galleries within the state.

The docketed case is Marei Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena, et al., No. 09-1254 (April 16, 2010).

# # #