Krueger on Lessons From the Chicago Sit-In and the WARN Act

Kreuger Alan Krueger, the Princeton economist, has this commentary in the New York Times on the recent sit-down strike at the Republic Windows plant in Chicago and the WARN Act:

The sit-in at the Republic Windows & Doors factory in Chicago last week brought the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988 — or WARN Act for short – to the forefront of attention. This law requires large employers (those with 100 or more employees) to provide 60 days of written advance notice prior to a plant closing or mass layoff.

The WARN Act was passed after a long-running, rancorous debate. President Ronald Reagan vetoed a trade bill because it included provisions of the WARN Act. The WARN Act was later reintroduced as a stand-alone measure and passed by Congress with enough votes to override a presidential veto in July 1988. The WARN Act became law without President Reagan’s signature, and he issued a statement calling the law “counterproductive.” . . .

Continue ReadingKrueger on Lessons From the Chicago Sit-In and the WARN Act

Eric Goldman on the Lori Drew Case

Former Marquette law professor Eric Goldman is posting a three-part series on his blog on the Lori Drew/Myspace “cyberbullying” case, in which the prosecution won a conviction based on an extremely broad interpretation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Basically, Drew was convicted of a misdemeanor for violating MySpace’s terms and conditions. Goldman is always worth reading on these matters; I cite him explicitly to my Internet law students every year for the proposition that if you can’t demonstrate $5,000 of “loss” under the CFAA, you’re just not thinking hard enough.

Part 1 of Goldman’s series discusses the possibility that, under the prosecution’s theory, ISPs may lose their Section 230 immunity for the activities of users if those users violate the terms of some other website. Part 2 looks at the question of whether someone who does not actually click on a click-through agreement can nevertheless be bound by it. Courts in the few non-criminal cases to consider this have essentially said “yes.” Part 3 will offer suggestions for drafters of website terms. [Update: Part 3 is now up.]

In other news related to the case, the defense, assisted by George Washington University law professor Orin Kerr, has filed a supplemental brief on its motion to dismiss, on the question of whether violation of contractual terms vitiates consent for purposes of a criminal unauthorized use statute. In true Internet law fashion, they look to the nearest litigated real-world analogues, in this case rental car agreements.

Continue ReadingEric Goldman on the Lori Drew Case

Ex-Foley & Lardner Associate May Proceed with Discrimination Suit

This story gets filed under: “How Not to Deal with Associate Layoffs and Subsequent Discrimination Allegations” (via the WSJ Law Blog):

Zafar Hasan, a Muslim of Indian descent, claims that, post-9/11, he was fired from Foley & Lardner because of his religion, race, national origin and color. The district court granted the firm’s motion for summary judgment. [Yesterday], a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit reversed.

The Seventh Circuit opinion in Hasan v. Foley & Lardner, 07-3025 (7th Cir. Dec. 15, 2008) notes:

Foley initially claimed that it fired Mr. Hasan for poor performance. . . . However, after Foley located Mr. Hasan’s work evaluations, which were mostly positive, the firm changed its tune, maintaining that it actually fired Mr. Hasan not because his work was unacceptable but because it only had enough work to keep the best associates in the department occupied.

Continue ReadingEx-Foley & Lardner Associate May Proceed with Discrimination Suit
Newer Posts
Older Posts