Dec 172016
 

Woodhull Freedom Foundation, et al. v. United States, et al. – supporting the plaintiffs challenge of the 2019 law known as FOSTA, arguing that by making platforms fear so much new civil and criminal liability it causes speech to be unconstitutionally chilled. [Amicus brief on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute, Engine, and Reddit]

Daniel v. Armslist – arguing that Internet platforms with specialized commercial content are facilitating speech and therefore entitled to Section 230 protection and that the pre-emption clause of Section 230 prevents local authorities from imposing liability on platforms for handling speech. [Amicus brief in support of a petition for review by the Wisconsin Supreme Court on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Floor64/The Copia Institute | Amicus brief on the merits in support of Armslist on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute]

Homeaway and Airbnb v. City of Santa Monica – arguing that Internet platforms handling specialized or transactional speech are entitled to Section 230 protection, even if they profit from those transactions consummating, and that the pre-emption clause of Section 230 prevents local authorities from imposing liability on platforms for handling speech that might be illegal under local law. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute]

Fields v. Twitter – arguing that even in cases with unfortunate facts, platforms should not lose their statutory protection immunizing them for suit over how people use their systems. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute]

Montagna v. Nunis – arguing that for online speech to be protected, platforms need to be able to resist subpoenas demanding to unmask their users. [amicus brief on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute | letter urging depublication of negative precedent]

Hassell v. Bird – arguing that injunctions forcing non-party Internet intermediary platforms to delete content on their systems are contrary to federal law. [amicus letter on behalf of GitHub to California State Supreme Court in support of it hearing appeal]

Doe 14 v. Internet Brands – arguing that 47 U.S.C. Section 230 pre-empts state laws that attempt to impose liability on Internet platforms who are alleged to have breached a “duty to warn” users of their systems and services of others’ use of them. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute in support of petition for rehearing/rehearing en banc | reply to opposition to motion to file amicus brief]

Lenz v. Universal – arguing that, by only requiring DMCA takedown notice senders to have a “subjective” good faith belief that user-posted content infringes their copyrights, this weak standard invites illegitimate censorship of non-infringing speech in a way that the First Amendment does not permit. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of Public Knowledge and the Organization for Transformative Works in support of petition for rehearing/rehearing en banc | brief in support of a Petition for Writ of Certiorari at the United States Supreme Court]

Multi-time Machine v. Amazon – written arguing that the doctrine of initial interest confusion in trademark law does not apply to search engine results. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of law professors in support of petition for rehearing/rehearing en banc]

Smith v. Obama – written to argue that government surveillance programs targeting communications’ metadata violates the Fourth and Sixth Amendments. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers ]

Jewel v. NSA – written to argue that the NSA program diverting a copy of all of AT&T’s internet traffic to the government violates the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. [District Court brief on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers | Ninth Circuit brief]

Garcia v. Google – arguing that statutory law precluded enjoining an Internet platform hosting user-generated content to remove that content. [Ninth Circuit brief on behalf of Floor64/The Copia Institute and the Organization for Transformative Works in support of petition for rehearing/rehearing en banc | brief in support of granted rehearing]