KinderStart.com, L.L.C. v. Google Inc., No. C06-2057JF (RS), 2007 WL 831806 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 16, 2007) Statement of Facts: Plaintiff website operator, KinderStart.com enrolled in Defendant, online search engine, Google’s AdSense Program in 2003 and paid for sponsored links. Plaintiff then began placing Defendant’s network advertisements onto its site and received payment from google. On March 19, 2005, Plaintiff realized that his website had suffered a fall in traffic and page views. Plaintiff realized that common key word searches on Google’s search engine did not list his website in relation to past visibility. As a result of this drop in referrals, Plaintiff’s monthly revenue also suffered a loss of over 80%. Furthermore, Plaintiff website’s usefulness rating dropped and its website was blocked by Defendant, Google blocked. Plaintiff was not notified that the blockage would occur, nor was he instructed as to how to prevent the blockage. Procedural History: Plaintiff website operator, KinderStart.com filed a complaint against Defendant Google, alleging nine claims for relief: violation of the right to free speech under the United States and California Constitutions; attempted monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act; monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act; violations of the Communications Act, unfair competition under California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200; unfair practices under California Business and Professions Code; breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; defamation and libel, and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage. The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s first complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff then proceed to file an amended complaint asserting s... ... middle of paper ... ...motion. The court correctly held that there were insufficient allegations to state a First Amendment claims against Defendant. Furthermore, the court accurately concluded that Plaintiff failed to show that relevant aspects of Defendant’s search engine were equivalent of a traditional public forum. The Court decided properly when dismissing Plaintiff’s defamation allegations because these did not alleged malice. The holding of the United States Supreme Court in Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149 (1991), United States v. E. I.du Pont de Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377 (1956), Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585 (1985), the interpretation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125, Cal. Civil Code §47 and Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 and the decision in New.Net, Inc. v. Lavasoft, 356 F. Supp.2d 1090 (2004) were crucial to properly decide on the case.
Vignette two: Families who previously had children enrolled in a nearby preschool have told you stories of what happened to their children in that center. They describe dirty sheets on the cribs, harsh punishments including withholding food, and ratios of twenty children to one adult. One day you drive by and see a lot covered with asphalt and dry grass. There are a few rusting pieces of playground equipment. Several children are standing along the chain link fence looking at the cars going by. There are no adults in sight.
Justice Jackson's disagreement on the ruling of the Terminiello case is supported by many historical examples which demonstrate that freedom of speech is not an absolute right under the law. Although Terminiello had a right to exercise his right under the First Amendment, had the majority carefully considered this principle it should have rejected his claim. In this case, the majority's treatment of Terminiello's case skirted the real issue and did not benefit from true constitutional interpretation.
Therefore, the court evaluated the facts the Plaintiff provided and evaluated if they support a reasonable belief that the Defendants’ statements were misleading. The court held that (1) Defendants statement that Plaintiff would double his money is mere puffery and no reasonable investor would rely on such representations; (2) the table of financial projections must be viewed only as “estimates” and not binding, which do not demonstrate fraudulent intent; (3) the e-mail was not sent to Plaintiff. Therefore, it is not relevant to Plaintiff’s claim; (4) Because Defendants could not have disclosed the ongoing litigation at the time Plaintiff made first investment, Defendants did not violate the securities laws by failing to inform Plaintiff of litigation; (5) documents given to Plaintiff prior to investment expressly acknowledged potential challenges with respect to permitting. The false statements related to permits were not sent to Plaintiff before his decision to invest. Therefore, those misrepresentations are not actionable under the provisions of the Exchange act relied upon by the
GANNETT CO. v. DEPASQUALE. (n.d.).The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. Retrieved April 7, 2014, from http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1978/1978_77_1301
II. People with only a high school diploma will more than likely get paid less than someone with a college degree.
The Head Start program began as an eight-week pilot program in the summer of 1965, in the summer of 1966 an additional eight-week trial was conducted. The program was offered through the Office of Economic Opportunity in response to Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty. Coinciding with Johnson’s declaration were research findings that began to show the impacts that poverty can have on many aspects of life, including on education. This research ended up being the framework that the Head Start program was built upon. The aim of this new program was to provide comprehensive services that would help break the cycle of poverty. The services this program would offer were designed to address the psychological, nutritional, social, emotional, and health
The Vet-Net employee network sponsors the Toys For Tots toy drive each year in support of the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve Toys For Tots mission of collecting new, unwrapped toys during the months of November and December and distributing those toys as Christmas gifts to less fortunate children in the community in which the campaign is conducted.
The social issue that I have chosen to discuss is concerning a Head Start program that was designed for educational purposes of underprivileged children in 1964 (Schultz, 2013). During Lyndon B. Johnson’s campaign, he sought to end poverty and promised that he would boost education. In fact, he wanted to implement a series of programs that would give the people of our nation the right tools to pull themselves out of their current situations. After winning the election, Johnson called on all Americans to wage war on poverty and convinced Congress to pass the Economic Opportunity Act that would help to battle this and other issues. The Head Start program which started out serving only children ages 3 to 4 years old is very different today
The rapid growth of the internet worldwide in the early 1990s sparked a technological revolution that continues to shape the world we live in today. This boom brought with it the perception of limitless opportunities and success in the "dot com" world. As a result, entrepreneurs of all kinds took to the internet with their ideas. After the initial rush into this new-found gold mine, the advantages of the World Wide Web were apparent to all who came to know and love it. While the success of opportunities appeared to have come to a screeching halt, several entities still continue to make the best of the situation. Today, names such as EBay and Amazon are commonplace in almost every household with a computer and internet connection. But, perhaps even more surprisingly, the name Google has become more than just a silly word with a meaning most people do not know. It represents a story of unbelievable success in a market that did not take kindly to small competitors. Google Inc. is now a major public corporation in the United States, but going back to its inception, growth, and success, we witness a truly compelling story.
In 1965 a federal program known as Head Start, was born to assist America's low-income children out of poverty and enrich their lives and offer opportunities for learning. Head Start has continued to play an essential role to our nation's early learning and development. The Head Start program is the only preschool that caters to the low-income communities and serves nearly one million children.
Google’s search engine is the company’s greatest asset. Its search engine brings in its users as well as its large sums of the company’s revenue. Its users are constantly searching and browsing the web, and while they do this, Google is given access to all their information. Google has many software services such as Google+. Once a user decides to utilize one of these services, they are allowing the company access to publish or modify these outlets into its search engine. In other words the user’s information or search results can be viewed by a third party (8). This practice violates the ethical norm of privacy and is concerned in the eyes of many an unethical business
It is no secret that low income communities are at a disadvantage when it comes to health. Studies have repeatedly shown that people with low income tend to be in poorer health and also be more at risk for health complications. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation notes that economic stability, neighborhood and physical environment, education, community and social context, food, and the health care system are all factors that play a role in health outcomes (Heiman & Artiga, 2015) which has also been articulated in class. Many of those are factors in the lives of families in the Northern Virginia Family Service (NVFS) Early Head Start program (EHS) which creates complications presently and in the future for communities. Some of the main factors
This report will describe the history of government regulations and FTC. How that applied to Google search and personal privacy. The changes made from the settlement between Google and the FTC, the difference Google's practices and policies from before the settlement and after the settlement, and the current demands and expectations from current and vocal Google users. The report will also draw a conclusion from the findings and will determine if additional regulations are needed or if the regulations currently in place are sufficient.
When analyzing a company for investment, there are many quantitative and qualitative measurements to be considered. Not only is the financial information important, but so too is the analysis of the company’s ethics, political environment, and long-term sustainability of the company’s services. In analyzing Kinder Morgan, the quantitative data considered were things such as the trading volume, average stock prices, as well as financial ratios such as the liquidity ratio or earnings per share ratio. Qualitatively, Kinder Morgan has many community outreach programs, sound political ethics, as well as a desire to protect the environment.
In June 2012, a social media defamation case was brought to trial, the Clay Corporation v. Colter. In Massachusetts, Clay Nissan fires an employee and the emplo...