David Canton is a business lawyer and trade-mark agent with a practice focusing on technology issues and technology companies.
That’s the title of a seminar I spoke at today for the London Small Business Centre.
Jayme Cousins of In House Logic talked about how to develop a web presence.
David Ciccerelli of Voices.com talked about search engine optimization and search engine marketing.
I spoke about legal considerations around having a web site.
Michael Geist wrote an interesting article about a situation where a popular Canadian website containing public domain music scores has shut down after getting a demand letter from an Austrian music publisher. Seems that the laws in Austria regarding public domain are different enough that some of the content might have been unlawful to post in Austria.
Michael points out several reasons why this is troubling, including the perspective that if this is correct, then the public domain becomes an offline concept, since posting works online would immediately result in the longest copyright term applying on a global basis.
ITBusiness.ca has an article about the recent case that said a web site had to charge GST to foreign customers, and the proposed change in the recent Federal budget that would reverse that.
Anyone with a web site based in Canada should consult with their tax advisors to determine their position on GST.
Rather than adding my 2 cents worth to the HP (thats Hewlett Packard – not Harrison Pensa) board of directors privacy/phone monitor controversy today (they didn’t think it was illegal?? – does the word fraud come to mind?), I’m pointing to a Digg post that mentions browsershots.org.
While Explorer may be the most popular web browser, its not the only one. That site allows you to enter your URL, and see what it looks like on other browsers. The site is suffering from too much traffic caused by the Digg effect – I suggest trying it in a couple of days.
ITBusiness.ca has an article about the responsiblity of Canadian hosts of web sites, blogs, and wikis for defamatory content that others post.
The hosts can be held liable. Hosts don’t have to monitor their sites to feret out potentially libelous material. But if someone complains that their site contains something defamatory about them, the safest approach is to remove it immediately.
The policy problem is that the allegation may or may not be true – but for most hosts, its not worth the fight.
Read the ITBusiness.ca article
Read a recent post of mine on the topic referring to a Toronto Star article by Michael Geist
I’ve been on vacation for the last 2 weeks, hence the lack of blog entries. While trying to catch up, I noticed a recent Toronto Star article by Michael Geist that does a good job of summarizing Canadian intermediary liablity.
This means the liability and obligations of owners of websites for material others post on them. Owners of such sites understandably don’t want to be liable for what others post – and don’t want to be forced to remove material based on a simple allegation that something posted violates someone else’s rights.
The article points out that for the most part, Canadian intermediaries do not have to remove third party material based just on an allegation, but that: allegations of defamation are the exception to the rule. Under current Canadian law, intermediaries can face potential liability for failing to remove allegedly defamatory content once they receive notification of such a claim, even without court oversight.
The article is a must read for any intermediary.
Do you read the phrase “no user servicable parts inside” as a challenge, not a warning?
Then you should read the Washington Post article entitled Six Rules for Rescuing Dead Gadgets Don’t toss that broken gizmo just yet–you may still be able to save it.
It refers to several websites, including the 2 linked below.
Read the Washington Post article
Rob Hyndman had a post yesterday that said: Iâm so impressed with the artistry of this disclaimer that I may just have to find a way to work it into the technology contracts I draft.
Rob linked to an amusing but clear rock climbing disclaimer.
I took that as a challenge, and offer below an amended version for technology contracts. I’m sure it can be improved upon (this calls for a wiki).
Read Rob’s post and the rock climbing disclaimer
WARNING
Business is unpredictable and unsafe. The Internet is dangerous. Many blogs have been written about these dangers, and there’s no way we can list them all here. Read the blogs.
The Internet is covered in slippery slopes with loose, slippery and unpredictable footing. The RIAA can make matters worse. Patent trolls are everywhere. You may fall, be spammed or suffer a DOS attack. There are hidden viruses and worms. You could break your computer. There is wild code, which may be vicious, poisonous or carriers of dread malware. These include viruses and worms. E-mail can be poisonous as well. We don’t do anything to protect you from any of this. We do not inspect, supervise or maintain the Internet, blogsphere, ISPâs or other features, natural or otherwise.
Real dangers are present even on the Web. E-commerce is not the mall. It can be, and is, steep, slippery and dangerous. Web features made or enhanced by humans, such as firewalls and spam filters (if any) can break, collapse, or otherwise fail catastrophically at any time. We don’t promise to inspect, supervise or maintain them in any way. They may be negligently constructed or repaired. The web is unsafe, period. Live with it or stay away.
Stay on trusted sites whenever possible. The terrain, in addition to being dangerous, is surprisingly complex. You may get lost. Carry food, water and an APU at all times.
Ads for things you donât want and other objectionable content can arrive from nowhere. This can happen naturally, or be caused by people around you that are being used as bots. Spam and disgusting images of all sizes, including huge images, can arrive, or pop-up with no warning. Use of spam filters is advised for anyone approaching the Internet. They can be purchased or rented from us. They won’t save you if you get hit by something big or on a port you left open. A whole DOS attack might collapse on you and squash you like a bug. Don’t think it can’t happen.
Public opinion can be dangerous, regardless of the forecast. Be prepared with extra damage control, including press releases. Ticking off the blogsphere can kill you. The Streisand effect can turn a simple nastygram into a deathtrap.
If you make hasty comments about those in high places (making unsupported comments that reduce the image of a person, often posted quickly and without thinking) without proper thought and, or allow your employees to do so, you are making a terrible mistake. Even if you know what you’re doing, lots of things can go wrong and you may be sued for libel. It happens all the time.
We do not provide rangers or security personnel. The other people on the web, including other visitors, our employees, agents, and guests, and anyone else who might sneak in, may be stupid, reckless, or otherwise dangerous. They may be mentally ill, criminally insane, drunk, using illegal drugs and/or armed with deadly malware and ready to use them. We aren’t necessarily going to do anything about it. We refuse to take responsibility.
If you surf at work, you may become pre-occupied with it. This is true whether you are experienced or not, trained or not, equipped or not, though training and equipment may help. It’s a fact, surfing at work is extremely dangerous. If you don’t like it, surf at home. You really shouldn’t be doing it anyway. We do not provide supervision or instruction. We are not responsible for, and do not track how much time you surf at work (although we could if we wanted to.) As far as we know, your employer may find out and send you plunging to unemployment. There are countless tons of loose management staff ready to be dislodged and fall on you or someone else. There are any number of extremely and unusually dangerous conditions existing on and around the Web, and elsewhere on the Internet. We may or may not know about any specific hazard, but even if we do, don’t expect us to try to warn you. You’re on your own.
Rescue services are not provided by us, and may not be available quickly or at all. Local computer geeks may not be equipped for or trained in hard drive recovery. If you are lucky enough to have somebody try to get rid of a virus or find that deleted file, they may be incompetent or worse. This includes your local computer store. We assume no responsibility. Also, if you decide to participate in a rescue of some other unfortunate, that’s your choice. Don’t do it unless you are willing to assume all risks.
By entering our site, you are agreeing that we owe you no duty of care or any other duty. We promise you nothing. We do not and will not even try to keep the premises safe for any purpose. The premises are not safe for any purpose. This is no joke. We won’t even try to warn you about any dangerous or hazardous condition, whether we know about it or not. If we do decide to warn you about something, that doesn’t mean we will try to warn you about anything else. If we do make an effort to fix an unsafe condition, we may not try to correct any others, and we may make matters worse! We and our employees or agents may do things that are unwise and dangerous. Sorry, we’re not responsible. We may give you bad advice. Don’t listen to us. In short, ENTER AND USE THIS SITE AT YOUR OWN RISK. And have fun!
Circle ID has a post that refers to a Wall Street Journal article on Whois privacy. ICAAN and CIRA are now trying to figure out how to deal with this issue.
Now, one can do a whois inquiry and find out the name and contact information for the owner of any domain name. That has raised privacy concerns. Some feel that information should not be made public.
Even though I support privacy principles in general, and advise clients on privacy issues, I disagree with a total ban on the ability to find that information.
First, privacy concepts apply to individuals, not corporations or other other non-human entities. So at the most any publication ban should be only for individuals that own domains.
Second, I have a real problem if I as a lawyer can’t look up the owners of domain names. It is often necessary to know who a site owner is to deal with situations where a site has, for example, violated trade-mark or copyright or has defamed a client. Or a client may simply want to contact a domain owner to see if they are interested in selling a site.
The Wall Street Journal article mentions how the Red Cross used whois information to shut down sites that were fraudulently trying to collect money for Katrina victims.
DAVID CANTON – For the London Free Press – April 9, 2005
Having a website is a critical marketing strategy for any business, whether big or small.
Creating a website is not, however, a one-time exercise that can then be forgotten, as shown by a recent New Zealand court decision in which a restaurant operator was fined for misleading advertising due to neglecting to keep the website up to date.
In this case, the restaurant’s website posted out-of-date menus and prices. Many of the dishes listed on the menu were not actually available for order and for other dishes the prices had increased substantially from those posted on the Internet.
Unless otherwise stated, all original material created by David Canton included in this blog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
