|
|
|
Iran judge summons Facebook CEO to court
Headline Legal News |
2014/05/27 21:39
|
A judge in southern Iran has ordered Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg to appear in court to answer complaints by individuals who say Facebook-owned applications Instagram and Whatsapp violate their privacy, semiofficial news agency ISNA reported Tuesday.
It quoted Ruhollah Momen Nasab, an official with the paramilitary Basij force, as saying that the judge also ordered the two apps blocked. It is highly unlikely that Zuckerberg would appear in an Iranian court since there is no extradition treaty between Iran and the United States. Some Iranian courts have in recent years issued similar rulings that could not be carried out.
Another Iranian court last week had ordered Instagram blocked over privacy concerns. However, users in the capital, Tehran, still could access both applications around noon Tuesday. In Iran, websites and Internet applications have sometimes been reported blocked but remained operational.
Facebook is already officially banned in the country, along with other social websites like Twitter and YouTube as well as their mobile apps. However some senior leaders like Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif are active on Twitter, and many Iranians use proxy servers to access banned websites and applications.
While top officials have unfettered access to social media, Iran's youth and technology-savvy citizens use proxy servers or other workarounds to bypass the controls.
The administration of moderate President Hassan Rouhani is opposed to blocking such websites before authorities create local alternatives. Social media has offered a new way for him and his administration to reach out to the West as it negotiates with world powers over the country's contested nuclear program. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court takes up case of fired air marshal
Headline Legal News |
2014/05/20 19:21
|
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider the case of a federal air marshal who was fired after leaking information to the press about aviation security plans.
The justices will hear an appeal from the Obama administration, which claims Robert MacLean is not entitled to whistleblower protection for disclosing that the Transportation Security Administration planned to save money by cutting back on overnight trips for undercover air marshals.
MacLean was fired in 2006, three years after he told a reporter the cuts were being made despite a briefing days earlier about an imminent terrorist threat focusing on long-distance flights. MacLean said he leaked the information after his boss ignored his safety concerns.
When news of the planned became public, congressional leaders expressed their concerns and the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged that the plan was a mistake. No flight assignments requiring overnight hotel stays were canceled.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled last year that MacLean should be allowed to present a defense under federal whistleblower laws. But the government argues that the law does not protect employees who reveal "sensitive" security information.
MacLean asserts that no law specifically prohibited him from revealing the information because it wasn't considered sensitive when it was shared with him. The agency's decision to curb the overnight trips was sent as a text to MacLean's cellphone without using more secure methods. He says the law protects government employees who report violations of the law or specific danger to public safety. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Red Bulls must pay $2.8M in property tax
Headline Legal News |
2014/05/16 22:21
|
A New Jersey appeals court ruled Monday that the state's Major League Soccer franchise is liable for nearly $3 million in property taxes to the town of Harrison.
The New York Red Bulls have played at Red Bull Arena in Harrison since 2010. During that time, the town billed the team for about $1.5 million for the 2010 tax year and about $1.3 million for 2011, according to court documents.
The team has paid the taxes, according to a team spokesman, but had filed a lawsuit to have them reimbursed.
In the lawsuit, the Red Bulls claimed they are exempt from paying taxes under state law because the property and stadium are devoted to "an essential public purpose."
The Red Bulls have the rights to all revenues from the stadium including naming rights, while the town and the Harrison Redevelopment Agency are allowed to use the stadium for events such as high school or college sports championships or public ceremonies.
Monday's appellate ruling held that while those other uses benefit the public, they are subordinate to the Red Bulls' uses of the stadium and therefore don't qualify the stadium for exemption under state law. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
European court: Google must yield on personal info
Headline Legal News |
2014/05/13 19:34
|
People should have some say over the results that pop up when they conduct a search of their own name online, Europe's highest court said Tuesday.
In a landmark decision, The Court of Justice of the European Union said Google must listen and sometimes comply when individuals ask the Internet search giant to remove links to newspaper articles or websites containing their personal information.
Campaigners say the ruling effectively backs individual privacy rights over the freedom of information.
In an advisory judgment that will impact on all search engines, including Yahoo and Microsoft's Bing, the court said a search on a person's name yields a results page that amounts to an individual profile. Under European privacy law, it said people should be able to ask to have links to private information in that 'profile' removed.
It is not clear how exactly the court envisions Google and others handling complaints, and Google said it is still studying the advisory ruling, which cannot be appealed.
In the ruling, the court said people "may address such a request directly to the operator of the search engine ... which must then duly examine its merits." The right is not absolute, as search engines must weigh "the legitimate interest of Internet users potentially interested in having access to that information" against the right to privacy and protection of personal data. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Casino law hinges on Massachusetts high court case
Headline Legal News |
2014/05/05 23:02
|
The fate of casino gambling in Massachusetts may hinge on a case before the state's highest court Monday.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is set to hear arguments in a case centered on whether a question should be allowed on the November ballot asking voters if they want the state's 2011 casino law repealed. The court is expected to issue a decision by July.
If allowed on the ballot, the referendum could upend the state's ongoing casino licensing process.
Gambling giants MGM, Wynn, Mohegan Sun and others have expressed concern they could lose millions of dollars they've invested in the planning, development and promotion of their proposals if the referendum prevails. They also argue the state risks losing much more.
"Jobs certainty and billions of dollars in economic development hang in the balance," said Carole Brennan, a spokeswoman for MGM, which has proposed an $800 million casino project in downtown Springfield. "The Gaming Act allows for the creation of more than 10,000 jobs and the recapture of billions of dollars in tax revenues that are currently leaving the state. It doesn't make sense to forgo those opportunities."
State Attorney General Martha Coakley, a Democrat running for governor this year, has ruled that the question violates the state constitution and shouldn't be allowed on the ballot. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court considers whistleblower free speech rights
Headline Legal News |
2014/04/30 18:19
|
When Edward Lane testified about corruption at a community college program he headed in Alabama, he was fired.
The Supreme Court on Monday considered whether the First Amendment protects Lane and millions of other public employees from job retaliation when they offer testimony about government misconduct in court.
The high court has previously ruled that the constitutional right to free speech protects public workers only when they speak out as citizens, not when they act in their official roles.
Most justices appeared to side with Lane's view that court testimony revealing official misconduct should be constitutionally protected even if it covers facts a government employee learned at work.
But the justices struggled over whether that protection should automatically cover all public workers, even police officials or criminal investigators whose job duties require them to testify in court about specific cases. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to hear dispute about TV over Internet
Headline Legal News |
2014/04/21 21:49
|
Thirty years ago, big media companies failed to convince the Supreme Court of the threat posed by home video recordings.
Now they're back — and trying to rein in a different innovation that they say threatens their financial well-being.
The battle has moved out of viewers' living rooms, where people once marveled at their ability to pop a cassette into a recorder and capture their favorite programs or the sporting event they wouldn't be home to see.
The new legal fight shifts to the Supreme Court Tuesday with arguments against a startup business using Internet-based technology to give subscribers the ability to watch programs anywhere they can take portable devices.
Aereo takes free television signals from the airwaves and sends them over the Internet to paying subscribers in 11 cities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media. |
|
|
