A plaintiff claiming Amazon.com Inc.’s voice-activated Alexa devices recorded her private conversations without authorization will have to arbitrate her “surreptitious recording” claim, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in an unpublished ruling Friday.
In a fractured decision, the court held that insofar as the lower court decided the surreptitious recording claim wasn’t subject to arbitration because the allegation is “criminal in nature,” the district court was wrong.
Read the complete story, here.
For a detailed discussion of the decision, see here.
This article first appeared on Urbas Arbitral, here. In lululemon athletica canada inc. v. Industrial Color Productions Inc., 2021 BCSC 15, Mr. Justice Gordon S. Funt determined that a standard of...
By Daniel UrbasICSID and UNCITRAL have just released an update to the draft Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in International Investment Disputes. This new version amends the original draft Code, which was published in...
By Stacie StrongThis article first appeared on the Securities Arbitration Alert (SAA) Blog, here. The recently-introduced Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal (FAIR) Act has been published and, as we suspected, it’s very similar to the...
By George Friedman
With the purchase of a Featured Membership, you will be shown on the front page of Arbitrate.com to web site visitors from your city and region (“state” if you are in the USA). You may appear in more than one city/region by purchasing additional locations.