Harris Bricken is proud to be the key program sponsor for the December 15, 2022, event hosted by the Madison (Wisconsin) International Trade Association (“MITA”), titled, “Major Markets: Trade Updates with Europe and BRIC Nations.” The event will feature leading international economist, Byron Shoulton, who will speak on economic, trade, and political risks, including their expected impacts on international trade flows over the next 12-18 months, with a particular focus on Europe, Russia, and China.

Click here to learn more.

Harris Bricken’s newest international attorney, Ngosong Fonkem, will be attending this event live and speaking briefly regarding his and our firm’s international trade and Africa law practices. Ngosong joined Harris Bricken a few weeks ago to bolster our international trade law practice (especially customs law and export controls) and to head up our Africa law practice. Please be sure to attend this event to learn more about what your

Read More

Adam Kovacevich has defined the “Prager Effect” as “suing Big Tech to make your MAGA censorship allegation, resulting in Courts significantly strengthening platforms’ legal rights to moderate.” Prager, which makes misleading videos that appear designed to radicalize kids to the MAGA agenda, sued YouTube over its demonetization decisions, claiming that YouTube had engaged in biased content moderation. That lawsuit produced a game-changer Ninth Circuit decision that has become the flagship federal opinion on account terminations and content removals.

While the Ninth Circuit case was pending, Prager doubled down by initiating a parallel state court lawsuit. Prager advanced four claims: California Constitution article 1, section 2 (free speech); Unruh Act violations; UCL; and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. YouTube defended on Section 230 and other grounds. See my blog post on the lower court ruling. The resulting state court lawsuit has reinforced the Prager Effect,

Read More

Register Here

This year’s Chinese Association for Science and Technology in Utah (“CAST-UT”) Conference will be on Dec 10, 2022, from 2:00 PM to 8:30 PM at the Guest House of the University of Utah. The Chinese Association for Science and Technology in Utah was founded in 1996 as a non-profit organization dedicated to serving local Chinese scientists, scholars, and business people in Utah.

This annual conference is the platform for gathering and discussing essential topics on scientific advancement, technological development, entrepreneurship, and the growth of the Utah State community. The topic of this year’s conference is “Innovation and Entrepreneurship”. CAST-UT will host the following panels with notable speakers and guests: “The Future of the US-China Relationship in Business, Science, and Technology”; “Resources for Small Businesses and Startups”; and “Research Presentations by Young Scholars & Students”.

Harris Bricken attorney, Jonathan Bench, will be one of the panelists for the China

Read More
At the same time, China’s legal approach to sexual harassment in the workplace is being overhauled. Until now, the women’s protection law has only stipulated that victims of harassment have the right to complain to their employers. Going forward, employers must abide by certain affirmative obligations, including the establishment of internal policies that prohibit sexual harassment and of procedures that provide for timely handling of complaints. Failures to take these steps could lead to personal legal liability on the part of supervisors and other responsible staff.
According to Chinese media, the draft changes to the women’s protection law were the subject of more than 700,000 submissions during the public comments period. While views on the new legislation are surely not unanimous, it is reasonable to assume that there is considerable support for the changes. This in turn suggests that the Chinese authorities will be directed to meaningfully enforce the
Read More

It’s typically pointless to bring a 512(f) claim because the law makes it almost impossible to win. Plus, 512(f) plaintiffs have to consider the possibility of a costly fee shift against them.

The plaintiff in this case claims that the defendant’s takedown notices got it permanently banned in Reddit. Nevertheless, the court concludes that the plaintiff’s 512(f) suit was objectively unreasonable because:

  • the state law claims had been previously dismissed in state court.
  • “Plaintiff asserted 512(f) without apparently having any evidence to support the ‘knowingly’ component of the first element.” As I’ve discussed many times, 512(f) plaintiffs rarely possess a smoking gun piece of evidence to show defendant scienter at the time of filing, so the pleadings must necessarily rely on inferences and circumstantial evidence.
  • the plaintiff’s Reddit account got reinstated and shut down several more times, and the plaintiff admitted the subsequent account drama wasn’t due to the defendant.
Read More