Author Archives: John DiGiacomo

Most people are familiar with Lumosity – the ‘brain training’ program that claimed to delay cognitive impairment caused by aging, among other causes. However, Lumosity will be paying a $2 million settlement because of a recent judgment by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) that its claims were unfounded.

Katherine Craig, a Detroit artist, is suing the Bloomfield-Hills based Princeton Enterprises because the developer wants to tear down a building in Detroit. While opposition to the destruction of buildings is not uncommon—particularly for older, historic buildings—Craig’s reason is quite different: she wants to preserve the 100-by-125-foot mural painted on the side of the building. Why? Because she painted it. 

Over the last fifteen years, federal courts in Michigan have heard nearly 50 cases involving alleged violations of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). Although each has contributed to a better understanding of cybersquatt…

On December 16th, an opinion from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals boosted the number of appellate courts agreeing to an interpretation of a rule related to trademarks and domain names. The court held that re-registering a domain name,…

Ratings websites like Yelp and TripAdvisor are changing the way people choose where to eat, where to shop, where to travel and where to lodge. According to its website, TripAdvisor alone is home to over 250 million reviews made by people wi…

In this episode our Asked and Answered podcast, we discuss the Netflix documentary series “Making a Murder,” its aftermath, and its effect on Internet law. Show notes: Don’t talk to police: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc The right to be forgotten: http://m.independent.ie/business/technology/bankers-and-convicts-among-2300-irish-right-to-be-forgotten-requests-31182796.html Ken Kratz’s law firm’s Yelp reviews: http://www.yelp.com/biz/kratz-law-firm-west-bend Len Kachinsky’s new job: http://www.town-menasha.com/departments/municipal-court/ The Streisand effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect Music: Big Blood – “Endless […]

2015 has been an incredible year for Revision Legal. You have presented challenging questions and we have enjoyed working to protect your interests. And we’re really excited to see what 2016 will bring. 

The Federal Trade Commission recently released an Enforcement Policy Statement on Deceptively Formatted Advertisements. This statement reiterates that Section 5 of the FTC Act, which deals with ”unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce” also applies to online advertisements. Online ads can take many forms, but if an ‘ad’ looks like anything […]

Defamation that takes place online is a big problem in the Internet Age. Chat rooms, message boards, and websites like Facebook and Twitter don’t always require users to provide their real names, which can make finding someone online a real challenge. So what happens when a victim of online defamation doesn’t actually know who defamed them?

The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) creates a civil cause of action against someone who registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that is confusingly similar to, or dilutive of, a trademark or personal name. Significantly, a person accused of violating the ACPA must have “a bad faith intent to profit” from the domain name to be found liable. Bad faith may seem like a vague concept, but the lawmakers who wrote the ACPA provided nine factors that might demonstrate whether one has acted in bad faith. Fortunately, the Internet attorneys at Revision Legal are very familiar with the ACPA, and we’d like to take the opportunity to explain these factors.