E-Commerce Law Week, Issue 369

Will Arnold Say "Hasta La Vista, Baby" To Phishing?
Financial institutions and other online businesses no longer have to take it sitting down when fraudsters highjack their trademarks to fool unwitting individuals into giving up their financial information. On September 2, California joined Arizona and Washington as the first states to enact legislation granting online businesses and Internet service providers a private right of action to sue perpetrators of “phishing” attacks -- a form of online fraud in which Internet users are tricked into providing financial account data and passwords to phony websites. California’s “Anti-Phishing Act of 2005” (S.B. 355) passed the state Senate on August 30, after passing the Assembly on August 26. Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) has not yet taken a position on the bill. He has until the end of September to sign or veto it. The California bill is very similar to the Arizona and Washington laws, which were enacted this past April and May, respectively.

Alaska Takes Aim At Adware
There’s not a whole lot that Alaskan lawmakers can do about the state’s arctic temperatures or dark winters. So perhaps they spend more time online than most people -- and consequently get even more annoyed by adware than the rest of us. Whatever the reason, on September 1, Governor Frank Murkowski signed into law an anti-adware bill (S.B. 140) that bans pretty much any pop-up advertisement that targets Alaska residents. And to further increase the legal headaches of companies that rely on pop-up advertising, the bill also amends Alaska’s Trade and Commerce Code to grant residents of the state a private right of action to sue violators. The law goes into effect on November 28, 2005.

Microsoft Continues Legal Struggle Against European Competititon Authorities
In what appears to be a largely strategic maneuver, Microsoft has filed an appeal against the European Commission in the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, the latest wrinkle in the long-running battle between Microsoft and competition authorities in Europe. The Commission’s Decision in March 2004 required Microsoft to share interoperability information -- specifically, its server communications protocols -- with competitors. Microsoft lost its attempt last year to stay the Decision, and is currently appealing it, with a decision from the Court expected early next year. Microsoft and the EC fought for months over the terms of the sharing arrangement mandated by the Decision. The protocols are essential for seamless operations with Microsoft servers. This wrangling over remedies reportedly led to the Commission's issuing a statement to Microsoft during the summer demanding that it immediately comply with the 2004 Decision and disclose the interoperability information.  Microsoft’s latest action is essentially an appeal of the Commission’s position.

Questions and comments about E-Commerce Law Week are always welcome.  Please send your feedback to Sally Albertazzie.