Double-check before swiping right. Ubiquitous dating app Tinder scored a court victory when the U.S. District Court in New Jersey ruled in Ciapinska v. Tinder that the arbitration clause in the app’s terms of use (TOU) is binding. At the center of the suit is Tinder’s photo verification process. The plaintiff brought the action in late 2023 when she discovered that a number of fake accounts, which had passed Tinder’s verification protocol, were using her photos – even though she left the platform in 2019. In the ruling, Judge Jamal K. Semper wrote, “[Plaintiff] created numerous accounts and even purchased a subscription indicating sufficient opportunity to consult and assent to the TOU before continuing to use the platform.” Tinder maintains that its verification tool is not a guarantee.
TikTok finds itself facing a federal lawsuit over the tragic death of a ten-year-old girl who passed away while attempting the viral “blackout challenge.” The challenge dares users to choke themselves to unconsciousness and stream the act on TikTok. The deaths of more than a dozen children have been linked to the viral trend. TikTok parent company ByteDance maintained that Section 230 immunized it from liability, but three federal judges disagreed. U.S. Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz wrote that Section 230 only immunizes information provided by third parties, not recommendations that TikTok itself made via an algorithm underlying its platform, adding: “TikTok makes choices about the content recommended and promoted to specific users, and by doing so, is engaged in its own first-party speech.” This begs a question: Does any effort to curate the presentation of third-party content automatically make it first-party content and therefore not protected under Section 230?
Dupe.com, a startup search tool that scrapes the web for knockoff versions of name-brand products at steep discounts, is being sued by home retail colossus Williams-Sonoma. The complaint, which was filed in the U.S. Court for the Southern District of New York, maintains that Dupe.com illegally used furniture images made by the Williams-Sonoma creative team to promote its online search tool and craft social media ads disparaging the William-Sonoma family of brands. The lawsuit asserts claims for copyright infringement, false advertising, unfair competition, and deceptive trade practices. With the proliferation of dubious online retailers offering counterfeit versions of premier products, we’ll be watching this litigation closely.
A California bill designed to stop social media companies from using algorithms to target minors has passed the state legislature and is headed to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk. The legislation is similar to laws recently passed in New York and could mark the beginning of a significant shift in social media policy across the United States. If the Governor signs the bill, social media companies would be prohibited from providing an algorithm-driven social media feed to anyone younger than eighteen in the state of California. It would also ban social media notifications during school hours and at night without prior parental consent. Proponents of the bill feel legislation is necessary to protect children, while critics maintain the law will be difficult to enforce and could be susceptible to misuse.
Everyone’s mom’s favorite soft rock icon, Barry Manilow, has sued Hipgnosis Songs Fund, a music IP investment and song management company that acquired the Manilow catalog in 2020. The suit alleges that Hipgnosis has not paid more than $1 million in contractually obligated bonus payments. Manilow sold the song catalog to Hipgnosis based on promises that the company would exploit social media and spark a “Copacabana” dance trend on TikTok. To the surprise of no one (except perhaps Mr. Manilow), this did not happen. Instead, Hipgnosis hemorrhaged cash after a number of high-profile catalog acquisitions and was sold to Blackstone in July 2024. Social media and music streaming have confounded the old guard of the music industry as they’re eclipsed by younger, more tech-savvy artists who have a deeper understanding of the contemporary music business landscape. Despite the nearly identical names, Hipgnosis Songs Fund is not related to the art collective Hipgnosis that designed all your favorite 1970s album covers.