Internet Lawyer Blog

Employers use non-compete agreements often to protect trade secrets and keep valuable employees from moving to competing firms. Most employers who conduct business involving highly valuable business secrets require employees to sign non-compete agreements before commencing employment. These contracts prohibit employees from releasing trade secrets to competing companies. Additionally, non-compete agreements prevent employees from working for a direct competitor within a period of time after leaving the company.

In light of the emphasis that the legal system places on an individual's right to earn a living, courts require a high level of reasonableness to uphold non-compete agreements. Courts generally look at the length of time, geographic area, and types of business that these contracts cover to determine whether they place an undue hardship on an employee's ability to seek employment. In states that allow for non-compete agreements, courts require reasonable scope and duration in order to uphold such contracts. Furthermore, non-compete agreements may be valid regardless of whether an employee leaves of his own choosing or is terminated.

California's policy regarding non-compete agreements emphasizes a strong public interest in open competition. The California Business and Professions Code § 16600 dictates that any contract that restricts business is "void" unless the agreement falls within the exception outlined in Business and Professions Code Section 16601. The exception looks to whether competition would dispose of a substantial ownership interest or goodwill of the company. However, California employers maintain the option of using non-solicitation agreements and non-disclosure agreements to protect trade secrets and employees from competitors. Non-solicitation agreements prevent employees from seeking out the company's clients after leaving, unless the employee developed a relationship with the client before working for the company. Nondisclosure agreements are contracts that hold the parties responsible for protecting confidential information utilized in the course of employment or during a business transaction.

In Washington D.C., while there is no specific statute that governs non-compete agreements, the entirety of its laws governing business operations void any contract that unreasonably restrains business. However, courts may enforce non-compete agreements that are limited in scope, in line with public policy, and reasonable in light of the circumstances. Washington D.C. seeks to balance the employer's business interest with hardship on the employee if the agreement is enforced. An employer that is successfully able to enforce a non-compete agreement may seek an injunction to stop the employee from releasing further trade secrets or from continuing to work for a competitor. Additionally, the employer may seek damages sustained as a result of the employer's violation of the contract. However, Washington D.C. places the burden of proof on employers to prove that the agreement at issue does not restrain trade beyond the acceptable limits.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The proliferation of cloud computing has given rise to increased privacy concerns. These concerns are especially grounded in Google's new terms of service that allow the company to gather user information and data and release it to government entities upon request, without obtaining user consent. According to these new terms, as of March 1, 2012, Google has been consolidating data on users who access Google and creating a single profile that contains all of this information. Google's new terms have caused concern with the Electronic Privacy Information Center ("EPIC"), which argues that these terms conflict with an FTC Consent Order that outlined privacy standards for all Google products and services. The order required Google to obtain users' consent before gathering and sharing personal user information with third parties.

In response to Google's new terms, EPIC petitioned the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") to compel Google to abide by the terms of the 2011 consent order. EPIC brought suit in the United States District Court of the District of Columbia against the FTC, urging the organization to enforce the consent order, and stop Google's new policy of gathering and storing user information in individual profiles. The court heard EPIC v. FTC in 2012 and ruled that the court lacked the jurisdiction over the FTC to compel it to act according to EPIC's demands. Nonetheless, the court noted that it had "serious concerns" regarding Google's revised terms of service.

The National Association of Attorneys General sent a letter to Google on behalf of 36 states, expressing concern with Google's intention to gather information about users from all products that utilize Google services, such as cell phones, computers, and tablets. This is especially concerning for Android smartphones, which rely heavily on Google systems and products. Users with electronic devices use various Google products, such as Gmail, YouTube, and the Google search engine, in different ways. However, according to Google's new terms, user profiles would consolidate usage from all such products into a single profile for each user. The Attorneys General also voiced a specific complaint towards users' inability to opt out of these new terms. According to the letter, the lack of choice poses a severe threat to individual privacy.

In fact, Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the European Commission also commented that Google's new terms of service are in violation of European Union law, specifically the European Union Data Protection Directive. The European Union has urged Google not to implement its new terms. Throughout the European Union and in America, consumer groups have voiced their disapproval of Google's new terms.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 ("ECPA") prohibits disclosure of stored communications without a court order. This includes instant messages, emails, and communications on Facebook. The issues that can arise from such a standard came to light in 2005, when Loren Williams died in a motorcycle accident in Arizona, and his mother attempted to access his Facebook account in the hopes of feeling closer to her son. However, according to the ECPA, Loren's mother did not have the authority to access her son's Facebook account. Loren's mother eventually sued Facebook in 2007 and a court granted an order allowing her to access his Facebook account. Facebook has revised its policy, allowing relatives to report a death online, at which time, Facebook allows restricted access to an account for friends and relatives.

However, Facebook was merely abiding by the terms and conditions that Loren had agreed to when he signed up for his Facebook account. Under these terms, the "assets" that fell under the license agreement become subject to licensing rules. Accordingly, a license expires when the license owner dies. The rights to that license and those assets do not automatically transfer to the next of kin or to the decedent's estate upon death. Many states throughout America are in the midst of considering legislation that would allow access to online accounts after death. However, any law in this field is still in its early stages.

In light of these legal circumstances, family members file lawsuits against email servers to gain access to emails after the owner of the account dies. In some cases, the courts have allowed the servers to release the emails as raw data to family members, but courts rarely allow access to accounts. To avoid costly litigation in order to gain access to such accounts, individuals could begin incorporating social media account access and the respective passwords in their wills. Alternatively, individuals could create accounts under a trust to ensure that other members of the trust can access the account in the event that one member passes away. This issue is especially impactful in light of all the other tasks that people are able to conduct online. For example, many people manage their banking online by and through the bank's website.

Digital estate planning is especially important for Internet-based companies. Although, the law has not kept up with this growth in technology, it is nonetheless important for online companies to notify their attorney of the important digital assets. The company may also store the relevant information and asset list on a thumb drive. Regardless of the means of securing the assets that the company finds most suitable for its needs, it is important to leave instructions for these assets in the case of death.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") requires public businesses to provide equal access to their venues for persons with disabilities. Under Subchapter III of the ADA, such public establishments include, among others, restaurants, movie theaters, stores, and places of education. Now, the increases in businesses that operate exclusively online, without a physical location, call the reach of the ADA into dispute.

In June 2012, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts decided this issue of first impression in National Association of the Deaf v. Netflix, Inc. The court held that the ADA applies to businesses that operate exclusively on the Internet. The National Association of the Deaf sued Netflix, Inc., arguing that by failing to provide closed captioning for all of its content, Netflix was in violation of the ADA. Netflix, Inc. argued that it was not required to provide disability access to its site because it was not a "place of public accommodation" within the meaning of the ADA. The court based its opinion on the public policy underlying the ADA, which aims to provide equal access to public amenities for persons with disabilities. With the exponential rise in online businesses, the court found that it was within this public policy to allow persons with disabilities to access these sites alongside other members of society. One month later, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California reached the opposite conclusion in Cullen v. Netflix, Inc. In this case, the court looked to its prior decisions and held that the ADA's reach is limited to public establishments with "physical structures." These two opposite holdings show that the nature and reach of the ADA, as it pertains to online businesses, has not been solidified yet.

The Department of Justice has reviewed the ADA and provided regulations and guidelines for accessible website designs. For example, business can make their sites accessible to persons with disabilities by adopting a simple page layout throughout the site. This makes it especially easier for visitors with visual impairments to locate information quickly and easily. Websites may also provide transcriptions for any video or audio on the site for visitors with hearing impairments. Finally, websites may improve accessibility for persons with disabilities by inviting such visitors to notify website managers of ways to improve site accessibility. Nonetheless, in the absence of a binding uniform standard for website access, the reach of the ADA towards online businesses is still very much in the hands of courts in their individual jurisdictions.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The possibility of identity theft is a growing concern. However, banks, credit card companies, and various other institutions that house private information regularly take steps to protect customers' identities. Nonetheless, a different type of identity theft continues to thrive. Online impersonation is a quick and easy form of identity theft that takes place over the Internet. It is an easy type of identity theft given the breadth and convenience of social media and expanding networking sites. However, in light of the Sandy Hook Elementary School incident, state and federal authorities are considering the possibility of bringing criminal charges for online impersonation.

State legislatures called for laws against online impersonation following the case of Megan Meier, a 13-year-old girl who killed herself after a woman impersonated a boy and engaged in cyberbullying. After the Sandy Hook shooting, people began posting incorrect information about the shooting and the suspect. Others began posing as the shooter and staging crime scenes similar to the shooting. Connecticut State Police Lieutenant J. Paul Vance called attention to this matter in a public press conference. He noted that these posts, in addition to being highly inappropriate, were also threatening and criminal in nature.

A spokesman for Commissioner Reuben Bradford stated that, harassing anyone who was a victim of the shooting would be criminally prosecuted. He noted that harassment would not only include in person contact, but also harassment through via the Internet and social media sites. Charges could include criminal impersonation and criminal misrepresentation. California and several other states have established online impersonation as a criminal offense. Critics argue that criminal regulations that prohibit online impersonation may arm interest groups with the power to suppress speech. For example, Electronic Frontier Foundation argues that such laws could silence groups like The Yes Men, which utilizes online impersonation as a form of commentary on the government and large corporations.

However, it is much harder to identify potential suspects online because they are able to operate behind the safety of false identities or even anonymity. Even though investigators could connect an account to an IP address, they would then have the responsibility of showing who was accessing the IP address at the time. With family computers and public computers, it is difficult to establish who was using the computer when multiple people had access to the same computer. There may also be an added burden of establishing that the online impersonation posed an actual threat. In order to sustain a case for online impersonation, prosecutors must also show that the online communication went beyond protected speech and crossed into criminal behavior.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

Starting an online business requires acquiring many of the same permits and licenses that are generally required for a traditional business. Generally a business, including an "e-business" or a company that operates on the web, requires a business license before it begins to operate. When a city grants a business license, it permits the business to operate within that city. A business license also registers the business for tax purposes.

Certain cities and counties may also require additional permits to operate a business in that location. Different types of businesses also have different license and permit requirements. The California Secretary of State can provide all the requirements for starting a business. Also, certain trades require professional or occupational licenses. For example, contractors, doctors, accountants, real estate agents, and lawyers must all acquire the required license before they may begin to practice. Each occupation has specific procedures and requirements for obtaining the required licenses. The respective licensing agencies provide the standards and procedures for these requirements. Licenses may also be required based on the products the business sells. For example, selling alcohol, firearms, or gasoline requires specific licenses.

Businesses that operate on the Internet may also be required to collect sales tax if the business maintains a physical presence in the state. Without a physical presence, such as an actual store or warehouse, an e-business is not required to charge sales tax. Some states do not have a sales tax or tax exemptions for specific items such as food or clothing. Before a business can sell taxable goods on the Internet, the business must obtain a certificate allowing the business to collect sales tax. In order to properly charge sales taxes, businesses must also be familiar with the appropriate tax rates. Online businesses may use programs that calculate sales tax for each transaction based on the items and applicable rates. Examples of these licensed shopping carts, or e-commerce platforms -- include Magento, LemonStand, and IBM WebSphere Commerce. In an effort to improve tax-collecting efforts for businesses, some states have passed the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. This Agreement aims to pass federal regulations that will make tax collection across the country more uniform in order to simplify the process.

Businesses that operate without a license run the risk of being fined or being forced to cease operations entirely. Regulatory agencies such as the California Secretary of the State or the Internal Revenue Service may discover that a business is operating without the necessary licenses by simply reviewing tax returns. You may also visit the District of Columbia Business Resource Center to learn more about the process of obtaining a business license.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

Bullying has plagued people of all ages for many generations. Now, with the expansion of the Internet, bullies are able to threaten and harass people at an even greater level through cyberbullying. Stopbullying.gov, a government supported website aimed at spreading awareness, defines cyberbullying as any bullying that involves electronic technology such as computers and cell phones. Instances of cyberbullying aimed towards adults are generally referred to as cyber-harassment or cyber-stalking, whereas cyberbullying generally refers to harassment directed towards children.

Since cyberbullying can largely remain anonymous, it can be very difficult to trace the harassment back to a specific user. The effects of cyberbullying also last longer because the inappropriate posts or messages may be difficult to delete and therefore, have a permanent presence on the Internet. Cyberbullying is also not reserved to the Internet, since cyber-bullies often also target their victims in person. However, due to the expansive nature of the Internet, victims face cyberbullying at all times of the day.

Examples of this harassment includes sending vulgar or threatening messages directly to another person, posting inappropriate information about another person online, pretending to be another person online with the intent of ruining a reputation, posting inappropriate pictures of another person online, harassing another person with a multitude of text messages, or hacking into another person's online account. Cyberbullying can take place through email, in online chatrooms, on webpages, or through text messages. Advanced features on social networking sites have also led to increased avenues for cyberbullying. For example, the ability to tag other people in a picture on Facebook has led to instances of cyber-bullies posting inappropriate pictures of other people and tagging them in these pictures.

The unfortunate case of Megan Meier, a 13-year-old girl from Missouri who committed suicide in 2006, brought national attention to the devastating effects of cyberbullying. Megan's neighbor, Lori Drew - an adult female, impersonated a teenage boy on MySpace, a social networking site, and engaged in a relationship with Megan. The relationship ended with a fight and the boy proceeded to post online that the world would be a better place without Megan. Megan hung herself a short time after.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services suggests certain steps that can help prevent and end cyberbullying. For example, parents should make sure to listen to their children's complaints of bullying in order to take proper steps to end the harassment. The Department of Health and Human Services also suggests that victims of cyberbullying should not respond to harassing posts. Instead, they should make sure to save the posts and report them to the appropriate service provider. Service providers may help locate cyber-bullies. Cyberbullying may be criminal in nature if it involves violent threats, extortion, constant telephone calls or text messages, stalking, hate crimes, or child pornography. In these cases, victims may engage the appropriate law enforcement agencies such as the Police or FBI.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

Cloud computing offers a revolutionary new way to conduct business over the Internet. This service is a form of cyber-outsourcing where virtual servers provide certain services or applications for consumers online. Cloud computing vendors include, IBM SmartCloud, Cisco Cloud Computing, Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (aka Amazon EC2), and various smaller vendors. These providers offer a range of services including storage services and spam filtering.

There are various forms of cloud computing available over the Internet. Managed Service Providers ("MSPs") are the oldest form of cloud computing. A "managed service" is an application such as virus scanning for email or anti-spam services. The most common form of cloud computing is through Software as a Service ("SaaS"), which delivers an application to multiple customers through a browser using a multi-tenant architecture. Customers benefit because they do not have to invest in servers or purchase software licenses. Providers benefit because they are able to reduce costs because they only need maintain one application for their multiple customers. Salesforce.com is a well-known example of SaaS cloud computing, but Google Cloud Storage is a fast growing option as well.

Similar to SaaS computing, some providers offer Application Programming Interfaces ("APIs"), which allow developers to offer certain functions over the Internet without having to offer entire applications. These functionalities range from specific business services to wider-ranging APIs, such as Google Maps. Another version of SaaS computing allows users to develop their own application and offer the application through a provider's infrastructure over the Internet. The developers are limited by the provider's capabilities, but the developers benefit from the established predictability. Google App Engine is an example of such cloud computing.

Commerce Service Providers (CSP) are a combination of SaaS and MSPs. This form of cloud computing offers a service community wherein users interact. This is most common in trading environments that allow users to order services from a platform, which arranges delivery and pricing within the consumers set specifications. Ariba is a common example of such cloud computing. Utility Computing is another form of cloud computing that provides storage and virtual servers on demand. Entities generally use this option for supplemental storage in addition to their primary datacenters.

The innovative nature of cloud computing has introduced novel legal implications. Senator Amy Klobuchar has proposed the Cloud Computing Act of 2012, which aims to "improve the enforcement of criminal and civil law with respect to cloud computing." This law's main purpose is to protect "cloud computing services" under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA"), which is codified under Title 18 U.S.C. § 1030. The Cloud Computing Act suggests that each unauthorized access of a cloud computing account should count as a separate CFAA offense with a minimum of $500 in damages for each offense.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

Former CIA Director David Petraeus from his position after the FBI looked through Petraeus' private Gmail account and discovered that he was having an extramarital affair. These events have brought to light the fragile state of individual privacy on the Internet, particularly in relation to individual email accounts.

According to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 ("ECPA"), which is current and applicable cyber law, the FBI has the authority to look through any email account simply by accessing the account through providers such as Yahoo or Gmail. Under the ECPA, law enforcement agencies do not need a search warrant to look through such accounts if the message is more than 180 days old.

In addition, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("FISA"), under Title 50, sections 1801 et seq. of the United States Code, allows the government to monitor communications between foreign parties, without a search warrant. A 2008 amendment to FISA further allows the government to monitor communications between American parties if the government does not know of the parties' exact locations or identities. A group of attorneys raised a constitutional challenge to this amendment, and the matter is now before the United States Supreme Court. The justices have focused on whether the amendment offers the government an inappropriate range of power, or whether the amendment simply expands the government's resources to protect America.

In response to public discontent, the Senate Judiciary Committee has considered an update to ECPA that would require police to obtain a search warrant before searching private emails. As technology advancements give law enforcement agencies increased avenues to access private information, the public calls upon legislatures to "catch up."

There are certain legal remedies in place to protect individual privacy on the Internet. For example, the Stored Communications Act ("SCA"), which Congress also enacted in 1986, allows a party to sue in civil court when there is unauthorized access of personal email. However, the SCA's main focus is the privacy of emails upon delivery, which does not necessarily protect the privacy of stored emails after delivery.

However, the government is also taking action to protect privacy on the Internet. The Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") initiated a lawsuit against Google for violating a 2011 privacy settlement. Google paid $22.5 million for violating the settlement by allowing cookies to track user information on the Safari web browser on Apple products. According to the FTC, this is the largest settlement they have ever obtained for their efforts to protect individual privacy. However, skeptics argue that this will only be a "slap on the wrist" for Google and actual Internet privacy will call for Do Not Track Legislation.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

Facebook is struggling to decide how to handle its pictures. While consumer companies urge Facebook to profit from its face recognition technology, international regulators insist that user identities remain protected. According to a New York Times article entitled, Facebook Can ID Face, But Using Them Grows Tricky, Facebook agreed to delete user identification information, which the site gathers through facial recognition technology. The technology at issue is Facebook's "tag suggestion" which automatically matches names with faces when a user uploads a photo. Facebook has deactivated this feature to make improvements that international regulators can approve.

Chris Hoofnalge, a professor at the University of California Berkeley, School of Law stated in the article that increasing developments in this field "directly affects civil liberties." Although, the public is more likely to accept using identifying information from facial recognition technology for security purposes, Wall Street is now pressuring Facebook to utilize its users' personal data for profit. Legislators, such as Senator Al Franken, have expressed concern over Facebook's "database of face prints," which Facebook has gathered "without the explicit consent of its users." Franken urged Facebook to provide the same right of privacy to its American users as it does its European counterparts.

The Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") has issued a guide, "Facing Facts Best Practices for Common Uses of Facial Recognition Technologies," aimed at defining facial recognition technology and outlining authorized uses. In addition, earlier this year Google announced a new tool that would allow individuals to blur their faces in YouTube videos. This is one of the first steps to provide "visual anonymity" in cyberspace.

In a Villanova Law Review comment entitled, "Every Breath You take, Every Move You Make, I'll Be Watching You: The Use of Face Recognition Technology," author Bridget Mallon paints a picture of a future where surveillance cameras have the capacity to instantly look up an individual's entire history and record from a picture. And while this extreme may be a reality of a far more distant future, the privacy threats of face recognition and video surveillance are concerns today. The threat that Facebook employs face recognition technology stems from a concern that the website will then allow access to this data for surveillance purposes. The Electronic Privacy Information Center has warned the FTC that it should prohibit any law enforcement agency from using Facebook's face recognition technology and database "absent a showing of adequate legal process, consistent with international human rights norms." As the technology continues to develop, the FTC is conducting studies to better understand the benefits and consequences of face recognition capabilities. However, in the meantime, Facebook's database of personal information and pictures continues to grow, absent any real limitations.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in legal matters by using extensive knowledge and skills to create innovative solutions. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The content of an online search result for an individual generates a profile of the individual. Such content paints a picture for potential employers and colleagues, and the information may not be ideal. Therefore, in order to protect your online reputation and your overall image, it is important to take certain steps to monitor your online content.

First, signing up for social networks like Facebook and LinkedIn allows you to control the content that a web search will produce. Personalized Facebook and LinkedIn pages show up as the first results of a Google online search. This controls the content that attaches to your online reputation.

Andy Beal, who co-authored Radically Transparent: Monitoring and Managing Reputations Online, suggests that people should monitor their online reputation the same way they monitor their credit. This helps catch defamatory online postings in time to prevent a damaging reputation from solidifying. Beal suggests setting up a news feed that notifies individuals when their name is mentioned in an online posting. Google provides this option through Google Alerts, which will accomplish this for full name searches.

Beal also suggests that it is important to register names as a domain name and register for all possible social networks. This prevents against unauthorized impersonations and maintains a presence on the Internet. A Google search will produce all of these social networking pages first, which also allows you to control the content that is available online. Furthermore, if there is unfavorable content on the Internet, it is possible to "crowd out" the content with your own, approved content.

Additionally, it is also important to remember to take online postings seriously. Beal explained that 35% of recruiters have turned down candidates based on their online reputation. Certainly any derogatory remarks about jobs and current employers will have negative implications.

Google has also introduced the option to generate individual Google+ Profiles that will appear as the first item of an online search. The profile links to individual names, photos, contact information, and employment history so that individuals can control the content of an online search and their individual online reputations. As Eric Kopelman, an Internet advertising professional, explains, a person's "name is their brand" and it is important to protect your brand.

Protecting online identity is also important to prevent against identity theft. When filling out online registration forms, it helps to limit the information you provide to only the required fields. Also, enabling a browser's "lock" feature, ensures secure website connections. In instances of online transactions and purchases, this prevents against hacking and helps ensure that personal information such as names and account numbers remain safe.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in matters related to Internet and Cyber law transactions and litigation by using legal knowledge and skills to create solutions for our clients. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

In January 2013, the California Homeowner Bill of Rights will take effect, providing unparalleled protection for homeowners across the state. This Bill, which is the first of its kind, will reform the foreclosure process and provide unique protection for homeowners. The Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris pioneered the Bill in an effort to find a solution to the state's foreclosure crisis. Under this legislation, homeowners in this state will have the best protection against foreclosures and lender abuses in the nation.

The foreclosure rates in California are one of the highest in America. This law comes at a time when homeowners struggle with banks to keep their homes, a battle that banks win more often than not. Indeed, a recent audit of the foreclosures in San Francisco revealed that 99% of the underlying loans had some legal issues. In addition, 84% of those loans exhibited "clear violations of the law." However, after California passed the Bill, homeowners should be able to take on lenders more effectively in an effort to keep their homes.

A key provision in the Bill restricts "dual-track foreclosures." As a result, lenders will be barred from continuing foreclosure proceedings while they are in loan modification discussions with homeowners. The Bill also imposes civil liability against lenders for utilizing "robo-signing" to file foreclosure documents. Through robo-signing lenders' employees approve foreclosures without first reviewing the underlying mortgage documents. In order to help improve communications between lenders and homeowners, the Bill will also require that lenders present a single contact person for each customer. This will ensure that homeowners are able to facilitate sufficient communications with their lenders in order to efficiently reach a solution regarding their mortgages.

This piece of legislation also allows homeowners to sue lenders directly for violations of these rights. While this will certainly increase protections for homeowners, Beth Mills, a spokesperson for the California Bankers Association, explained that it may also increase litigation costs for lenders, who will in turn increase costs for future buyers. Rodney K. Brown, the president and CEO of the California Bankers Association, has responded to the Bill stating that the Association does not support this legislation because it "promotes meritless litigation" in a system that is already flooded with cases. Brown goes on to explain that he does not believe that the opportunity to sue lenders directly will improve the homeowner's financial conditions. Nonetheless, Mr. Brown did agree that homeowners are "entitled to an answer regarding their loan modification before" foreclosure proceedings and homeowners should have a single contact person with lenders to facilitate effective communication.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in matters related to real estate transactions and litigation by using legal knowledge and skills to create solutions for our clients. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The technological advancements and the ever-expansive world of cyberspace are in a perpetual state of conflict with individual privacy concerns. For example, a recent research project by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology demonstrates that independent component analysis allows companies to track changes in pulse by the subsequent change in skin color that is readily visible through a video signal. In addition, employers, credit agencies, and health insurance providers can now purchase indexes that contain consumer profiles based on individual consumer's browsing history, site membership, and online purchases.

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a report that proposes the steps companies can take to ensure optimal protection of consumer privacy. The report, "Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: Recommendations for Businesses and Policymakers," urges companies to incorporate privacy protection in every stage of their products, provide a mechanism against online activity tracking, and fully disclose what user information it shares with other entities.

The California legislature has proposed a new bill that would impose new restrictions on social networking sites, which would limit the information available about users. The proposed legislation would allow users to select privacy settings before ever using the site, which limits the sites accessibility. Social Networking sites, such as Facebook, have responded that such legislation would inappropriately burden the sites, in turn devastating cyber-business in California.

The American Civil Liberties Union ("ACLU") is also heavily involved in efforts to compel companies to improve privacy protection measures on their respective websites. Digital Due Process, a broad coalition that includes the ACLU, Google, and AT&T, is working with legislatures and law enforcement agencies to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA"). Congress enacted the ECPA in 1986 as a means of extending government restrictions on telephone wiretaps to include electronic transmissions via computers. However, in the changing face of the Internet, the ECPA has failed to keep up. Congress has not updated the ECPA to reflect the privacy concerns that exist today because of the existence of the Internet. The mission of the Digital Due Process includes efforts to initiate changes that will restrict sharing of users' location and limit electronic communication tracking.

In 2011, Senator Patrick Leahy introduced the Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act. The amendment will establish heightened privacy protections for email content and electronic communications that would otherwise be subject to search warrants under the guise of probable cause. Growing security concerns and the threat of cyber-terrorism have caused government officials to increase cyber security for the purpose of maintaining national security.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in matters related to Business, Internet and Cyberspace by using legal knowledge and skills to create solutions for our clients. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

The Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") may be preparing to file an antitrust suit against Google for abusing its dominance as an Internet search engine to stifle competition from other search engines and arbitrarily increase advertisement costs.

The Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7, which governs American antitrust law, makes direct and indirect "restraint of trade or commerce" illegal, both in interstate and foreign markets. The Clayton Antitrust Act, under 15 U.S.C. §§ 12-27, amended the Sherman Act in 1914 to include specific prohibited acts, such as price discrimination and mergers and acquisitions that substantially reduce competition. The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act, 15 U.S.C. § 6a, also limited the Sherman Act's application to foreign trade only where "such conduct has a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect" on "trade or commerce" within the United States.

The FTC investigation is rooted in accusations that Google engages in "preferencing," which means that Google engineers searches to produce results that profit its own secondary services, while limiting search access to competing services. In addition, the investigation concerns whether Google favors advertisements from its own services against competing services.

If the government chooses to pursue an anti-trust lawsuit against Google, it could prove to be the "most far-reaching antitrust investigation" since the United States v. Microsoft Corporation, a monumental antitrust suit in the 1990s.

The FTC has questioned NexTag, also known as Wize Commerce since June 2012, regarding accusations that Google has been channeling search traffic away from the NexTag engine to deter competition from NexTag's comparison shopping services. NexTag alleges that traffic from Google searches has decreased by half in the last year. NexTag has responded by increasing spending in Google paid ads and expanding partnerships with websites such as Bing and Yahoo.

A parallel investigation into Google's operations is also taking place in Europe by the European Union. Six individual states -- Texas, Ohio, New York, California, Oklahoma, and Mississippi -- are also conducting individual investigations into potential Google's antitrust conduct.

Google has replied that it is "happy to answer any questions" in the course of the investigation. Google further explains that while its growing empire may naturally stifle competition, it nonetheless continues to provide quality products and services, which are beneficial to individual consumers and the economy as a whole.

Experts suggest that if the government chooses to file a lawsuit against Google, Google will likely settle, agreeing to refrain from discriminatory behavior towards competitors and their products and services. However, enforcing these principles will prove to be difficult in the fast-paced world of the Internet.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in matters related to Business, Internet and Cyberspace by using legal knowledge and skills to create solutions for our clients. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.

Through globalization, outsourcing, and growing industry abroad international commerce has come to the forefront of business practices. Especially in the realm of electronic commerce, or e-commerce, where entire transactions take place online, international commerce is a major factor. Accordingly, legal considerations arise out of international business conduct, which includes questions of applicable law, jurisdictional concerns, and appropriate service of process in the case of a legal dispute.

One such applicable body of law is the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods ("CISG"). The CISG was enacted in 1980 when international business and international e-commerce were a much less prominent mode of commerce. However, a growing international business community has placed the CISG in the forefront of fundamental business legislation in the international community. The CISG is intended to establish a "uniform and fair regime" for international contracts in order to provide for certainty in international commerce.

Additionally, the Hague Conference on Private International Law is an international organization that combines different legal traditions and practices to form a comprehensive legal framework to govern international legal transactions. The various Hague Conference Conventions have established frameworks for the practice of law across international borders. For example, the 1965 Hague Convention on Service Abroad has installed a system of service for legal documents that is not only more reliable, but certainly much more efficient and simple. The United States Department of State provides the applicable guidelines for various methods of service of legal documents abroad. By offering a more streamlined process, international legislation allows parties to conduct business more efficiently and regulates international legal disputes, which in turn minimizes costs and saves time for clients.

At the Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh, we guide our clients in matters related to Business, Internet and Cyberspace by using legal knowledge and skills to create solutions for our clients. Please contact us today to set up a confidential consultation.