This week we highlight three writers discussing timely subjects in copyright and privacy law, as well as the on-boarding process for Software as a Service (SaaS) customers: Eric Goldman wrote in the Technology & Marketing Law Blog about the use of copyright law as a “reputation management” tool; Katie Townley and Christie Grymes Thompson posted in Ad Law Access about a request from advocacy groups that the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recall the Google Home Mini smart speaker over privacy concerns; and Aleksander Gora provided useful guidance on the Webdesigner Depot website about designing effective sign-up forms.
First Circuit Rejects Copyright Workaround to Section 230 – Small Justice v. Ripoff Report
Eric Goldman published an interesting article in the Technology & Marketing Law Blog about using copyright law as a way to protect one’s reputation. In Small Justice v. Ripoff Report (which was most recently argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit), the plaintiff, Richard Goren, ran a law firm called Small Justice and one of the defendants, Christian DuPont, wrote two negative reviews about Small Justice on the website Ripoff Report. Goren sued DuPont in state court for libel and intentional interference with prospective contractual relations, and the court awarded Goren a copyright over the reviews as a default judgment. Goren then asserted a copyright claim against Ripoff Report, who had published the reviews. (Interestingly, Professor Goldman questions whether the state court had the authority to award copyright ownership, but notes that the First Circuit did not address this point.)
Mr. Goldman points out that much of Goren’s other claims of defamation, intentional interference, and unfair competition were barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA), which “provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an ‘interactive computer service’ who publish information provided by others.” Professor Goldman is critical of the use of copyright as a tool to get around Section 230 and protect one’s reputation. He concludes that “[w]e need to build industrial-grade doctrines in copyright law to prevent its misuse as a reputation management tool.”
What we like: We thought Professor Goldman’s discussion of the implications of the case were particularly thoughtful. He is alarmed at what, to him, seems a transparent end-run around the limitations of CDA Section 230 in a purely defamation case. He explains that efforts to use copyright law as a way to protect one’s reputation is troubling and contrary to the purpose of copyright law by suppressing content rather than encouraging it – writing that “this turns copyright law on its head, by making our society dumber, not smarter.” We look forward to reading Professor Goldman’s upcoming paper with Jessica Sibley on this topic.
“OK, Google. Send a Letter to the CPSC”: Privacy Groups Request Recall of Google Home Mini
In an Ad Law Access post, Katie Townley and Christie Grymes Thompson discuss a letter from consumer and privacy advocacy groups to the CPSC, in which the groups urge the CPSC to recall Google’s Home Mini smart speaker. The letter came in response to a glitch the caused the speakers to remain constantly on. The advocacy groups claim the devices pose a risk to consumer safety by leading to the interception and recording of private conversations without consumers’ knowledge or consent. They asked the CPSC to act under its “broad mandate”, but acknowledged that “the privacy concerns associated with Internet-connected devices appear different from traditional public safety concerns.” The advocacy groups further claim that the Federal Trade Commission failed to protect consumers from the risks of Internet-connected devices.
What we like: In addition to being an interesting and timely topic, we like the main point made by Townley and Thompson that the CPSC would be breaking new ground if it took action based on a non-physical injury, such as privacy concerns. We agree that if an invasion of privacy were deemed a safety concern in a manner similar to a defective toy or crib, such would be a significant new consideration for “manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of IoT and other connected products.”
Ultimate UX Design Guide to SaaS On-Boarding, Part 1: Sign-Up Forms
Aleksander Gora provides useful guidance on Webdesigners Depot about how to design effective sign-up forms for SaaS customer on-boarding in order to maximize user experience (UX). As explained by Gora, the “on-boarding process sets the tone for a good user experience” and the emphasis should be on making the process flawless. The article sets out 6 general techniques for readers: (1) keep the questions limited; (2) back your sign-up form with strong social evidence; (3) make the email sign-up a beneficial deal for the customer; (4) utilize a pleasing design; (5) manage user expectations; and (6) consider enabling sign-up via social media accounts. The article also explains three common sign-up flows and expounds upon ways to evaluate whether sign-up design will create “friction” for the end user experience.
What we like: We are lawyers and not UX designers nor developers at all, but we can appreciate commentary from the developer world that’s practical and user-friendly. Literally. We like the simple and practical advice on a UX issue faced by many SaaS providers. For example, we like the advice that providers manage the UX by having the “submit” button say something other than “submit” – such as “Access Now.” In addition, Gora suggests that giving users the option to sign-up using social media services like Facebook can “drastically speed up the process for the user and increase probability of conversion.”
Add Comment