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will have to arbitrate her “surreptitious recording” claim, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in an unpublished ruling Friday.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.
A foundational principle of Arbitration is that it based on an agreement between the parties to submit their dispute for a binding decision by a neutral third party. The Federal...
By Jerome RockIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Prof. Brian Farkas of Cardozo School of Law and attorney at Arent Fox LLP focusing on complex commercial litigation. The discussion...
By Brian Farkas, Amy SchmitzIn this episode of The Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Prof. Catharine Titi of the University of Paris Center for Law and Economics on investment treaty arbitration and UNCITRAL Working Group...
By Catharine Titi, Amy Schmitz
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.
