As long as it is specified in the description of the item that it is, in fact, a photo, then it's their fault for not reading the description, and not illegal. If there is no such thing in the description, then it is false advertising, which is illegal.
The bill does not apply to Donald Trump.
Trump is neither a "journalistic enterprise," nor a political candidate:
A social media platform may not willfully deplatform a candidate for office who is known by the social media platform to be a candidate, beginning on the date of qualification and ending on the date of the election or the date the ...
Trump is not a candidate
The law regulates certain activities by large social media platforms (defined) and declares certain activities to be an "unfair or deceptive act or practice", which is already illegal Fla. Stat. 501.204 and analogous laws exist throughout the US. The key provisions of this law are that standards for censorship (defined), ...
No, but Yes.
So what the bill does is fine a social media platform opperating in the State of Florida (Legally speaking having an internet presences in Florida counts) $100,000 per day per instance. The Social Media platform does not need to comply with the rule if they pay the fine. But that's a lot of money to expend on bans on individuals, so they ...
There are two reasons why this will probably not work.
First, the law is likely to be considered unconstitutional. Forcing a private entity to host views that they do not want to violates their first amendment rights.
If Facebook or Twitter are fined, they can ignore it, have it taken to the supreme court, and win.
Second, Florida cannot prevent Facebook ...
Such a law would be constitutional
The US Congress could decide to require VPN providers to register the IPs that they provide to VPN customers. The use of such techniques would almost surely be considered "interstate or foreign commerce" and so Congress would have power under the Commerce Clause of the constitution to legislate concerning it.
The Google terms and conditions cover how a business can make and operate an account. Nothing states the business can't use a free account, besides the practical issues that may arise from only having 15gb.
This is not a completely settled matter, but we can discuss some consequences and limitations. I will discuss legitimate interest, consent walls, and the special case of cookies.
When legitimate interest is OK
A legitimate interest is a great and very flexible legal basis.
However, not every interest is a legitimate interest.
Before this legal basis can be ...
The GDPR is not as specific as you might like. I doubt that your strategy would work.
The GDPR does not explicitly allow you to choose in which format your requests will be answered. If the data controller chooses a different format or medium, I would assume they are compliant. All the GDPR says is this (Art 12(1)):
The information shall be provided in ...
Reproducing someone else's copyrighted material without permission is a violation of that copyright. This includes using it to promote your Twitter account. This is a violation of copyright law and of Twitter's TOS.
There may be Fair Use exceptions- this question is arguably fair use. However, it's extremely unlikely your intended post counts.
In the case of ...
I know the OP is asking about America, but its also worth knowing about other countries.
This is legal if both subscriber and subscription are within the EU. There was also a court case about this. In another case in 2014 the pub lost, but that seems to have been because the decoder was only licensed for domestic use.
These cases were for satellite decoders ...
"...all of them have a clause against automated data collection."
'...most of the examples are aimed at crawling and scraping data in
How do you interrpret that?
...You must not crawl, scrape, or otherwise cache any content from
Instagram. ...You will not engage in Automated Data Collection without
Facebook's express ...
Please see this related answer where this is discussed, although is a slightly different context.
There have not been many cases on this subject, but it appears that, at least in the US and EU, a person is free to post web pages that link to others without permission and indeed against the wishes of the operator of the destination site. However, "deep ...
Licenses to use websites fall into two main categories: browsewrap licenses, where the website has a page users can go visit to see all the terms and conditions; and clickwrap licenses, where a user has to check a box or otherwise affirmatively indicate his agreement to the website's terms and conditions.
Under Nguyen v Barnes & Noble, Inc., 763 F.3d ...