Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Hepting v. AT&T, 439 F.Supp.2d 974 (N.D. Cal., 2006), was a class action lawsuit argued before the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, filed by Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on behalf of customers of the telecommunications company AT&T.
Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir., 2014), was a case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacating portions of the FCC Open Internet Order of 2010, which the court determined could only be applied to common carriers and not to Internet service providers. [1]
The TCPA restricts telephone solicitations (i.e., telemarketing) and the use of automated telephone equipment. The TCPA limits companies or debt collectors from calling clients or prospective customers using automatic dialing systems, artificial or prerecorded voice messages, SMS text messages, and fax machines.
The Telephone Cases, 126 U.S. 1 (1888), were a series of U.S. court cases in the 1870s and the 1880s related to the invention of the telephone, which culminated in an 1888 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the priority of the patents belonging to Alexander Graham Bell.
Hepting v. AT&T is a US class action lawsuit filed in January 2006 by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) against the telecommunications company AT&T, in which the EFF alleges that AT&T permitted and assisted the National Security Agency (NSA) in unlawfully monitoring the communications of the United States, including AT&T customers, businesses and third parties whose communications were ...
The civil lawsuit remains pending, per the El Paso Times. If you suspect child abuse, call the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline at 1-800-4-A-Child or 1-800-422-4453, or go to www.childhelp ...
(Reuters) -A U.S. federal appeals court on Thursday revived a defamation lawsuit accusing CNN of defaming Project Veritas in its explanation of why the conservative group, which is often accused ...
3. Patterson's business contract with CompuServe should have given him notice that he might be required to answer lawsuits in Ohio. Holding: selling software through a company's online service is enough to establish minimum contacts in the state where that company is located. Inset Systems, Inc. v. Instruction Set, 937 F.Supp. 161 (D. Conn ...