EdLawConnect Blog

A recent decision of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals demonstrates the risks of using “stock” photographs and other images found on the internet without obtaining a license from the copyright holder. (Brammer v. Violent Hues Productions, LLC (4th Cir. 2019) 922 F.3d 255.) Under U.S. copyright law, all “works of authorship” are protected by copyright, regardless of whether they are posted online and regardless of whether they feature a copyright symbol or notice. So-called “stock” images posted online are protected to the same extent as other visual works.

For many people, social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, and LinkedIn are essential for communicating in their daily lives.  Social media plays an integral role in the transmission of news, ideas, opinions, and personal expression.

How could thy notes flow in such a crystal stream? — Percy Bysshe Shelley

Streaming school or college events live over the Internet allows anyone in the world — relatives, friends, and sundry interested parties — access to student choir concerts, plays, sporting events, or graduations. It’s almost like being there! But live streaming these events raises a variety of legal concerns. Before deciding to stream an event online, districts should carefully consider these issues.

Across the country, students, parents, and community members rely on websites as a primary source for information about their children’s education, meal planning, and community events. The websites may be operated by a school, a district, a county office of education, or a state-level educational agency. A recent study entitled Tracking: EDU: Education Agency Website Security and Privacy Practices, produced by consulting firm EdTech Strategies, LLC, highlights significant privacy, online surveillance, and other security issues with the websites of many school districts and state departments of education.

Ransomware is a profitable criminal enterprise that continues to expand while targeting the education sector.

Ransomware is a form of damaging software used by hackers to prevent or limit users from accessing the user’s own system, either by locking the system’s screen or by locking the files. It’s called ransomware because the attackers demand to be paid a “ransom” before allowing a victim to ...

California’s SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) laws are intended to prevent litigation filed for the improper purpose of censoring, intimidating, or silencing critics. (Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16.)  A defendant in a lawsuit that may improperly silence his speech may file an “anti-SLAPP” motion in the case, designed to be an efficient and cost-effective defense against ...

Beginning in 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice investigated complaints against the University of California, Berkeley, that Berkeley’s free audio and video online content was not fully accessible to individuals with disabilities. The primary complaint was filed by the National Association for the Deaf on behalf of members of the public who alleged they could not adequately access course content ...

Senate Bill 1072, approved by the Governor in September 2016, brings to fruition efforts to guard against students being left unattended on a schoolbus. (Statutes of 2016, ch. 721.) By the 2018-2019 school year, schoolbuses and other qualifying vehicles must be equipped with an alarm system that essentially forces bus drivers to check the bus at the end of a route to make certain all children are off the ...

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) was enacted in 1991 to lessen the impact of calling practices that invade consumer privacy and threaten public safety.  One such intrusive calling practice is known as a “robocall.”  Robocalls are made either with an automated telephone dialing system (autodialer) or with a prerecorded or artificial voice.  The TCPA and its implementing rules prohibit ...

On February 11, 2016, a federal district court in New York allowed a former executive to proceed with his defamation lawsuit against the company that terminated him. (McCusker v. Hibu PLC (E.D.N.Y. 2/11/16) 2016 WL 538472.)