New answers tagged

0

You can probably remove banners for non-European IPs, but there's no clear case law or guidance on this matter. The GDPR does not apply to all websites that are accessible from Europe. A non-European website only has to comply for those activities that relate to the offering of goods or services to people who are in Europe. This offering or targeting implies ...


1

There are several misunderstanding in this question. First of all, the GDPR applies based on whether a user is actually located in the EU or not, and an IP address is not a fully reliable way of determining this. There are various ways in which the geolocation of an IP might be incorrect. Use of a VPN is only one. Secondly, the GDPR does not apply at all if ...


3

united-states In US law this is covered by 17 USC 512 (c) which was added to the US copyright law by the Digital Millineum Copyright Act (DMCA) Under that law, the service provide is not liable if The service provider does not actually know that content posted is infringing; and The provider does not have good reason to belive that content is infringing; ...


5

Who owns my website? YOUR website is owned by YOU. If you want it to be owned by your company, you need to transfer the ownership. The domain name registrant and the entity to pay Wix need to be the company, not you. Same applies to any intellectual property that is used for the website functioning and profit generation.


11

A litigant could issue a subpoena to you demanding the information on your phone relevant to their case. If your employer or you are parties to a lawsuit, you can also be required to provide information through what is a called a "request to produce" issued by one party to another party without a subpoena, and under general information disclosure ...


0

If the use of the content qualifies as fair use without the request for donations, it will quite probably still qualify as fair use with them. But the mere fact that the purpose is educational by no means ensures that it qualifies as fair use. The answer by DM correctly quotes US law (17 USC 107) and lists the four factors which must always be considered in ...


7

17 U.S. Code § 107, which governs fair use in the US, says (emphasis mine): Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including ...


0

Copyright prevents making copies A link is not a copy and there is plenty of case law from the early days of the internet that says so. Copying an image (or anything else) to a repository is making a copy and is prima facie copyright violation. Whether it is actually copyright violation depends on if the copier can avail themselves of a defence: either that ...


1

Ahem, questions about "should" are requests for legal advice, so I assume you did not ask what should be done, instead you asked what the law is. The main legal consideration regards "fair use". This is a canonical instance of fair use. This (the first graphic) use does not undercut the copyright holder's financial benefit (the article is ...


2

Certainly none of the standard open source licenses will accomplish the desired end of prohibiting reuse of the HTML, CSS, and JavaScript source in other web sites and applications. Such reuse is prohibited by copyright (and the source code is definitely protected by copyright) unless the copyright holder affirmatively grants permission. So simply being sure ...


8

Anyone can sue anyone for anything- you don't need a law that says "user39137 is allowed to sue Microsoft for restarting his PC". The question is whether you will succeed. You won't, for two reasons. Three if you count the fact that it's trivial to stop updates restarting your PC at inconvenient times. First, you probably agreed to this in the EULA....


3

Plagiarism is an academic concept, not a legal one. The issue you are concerned about is copyright infringement. A work based off of another copyrighted work is a derivative work. This requires permission of the copyright holder. Simply listing your source and saying "no crime intended" does not help. However, recipes are generally not ...


1

Using such an app doesn't seem illegal. There is no magic trickery or privacy violation involved with such apps, it just looks at your friend list: Day 1: ask the FB servers for your current friend list and save it locally. Day 2: ask the FB servers for your current friend list again and compare this list with the saved list from day 1. Notify you about ...


4

Google is an international company. It has employees in France. It has offices in France. It has costs and revenue in France. It has French subsidiaries, with French bank accounts. Google could absolutely try to ignore a French judgment against it, but the government could seize assets from their French bank accounts, and/or real property they have in the ...


Top 50 recent answers are included