Now more than ever, technology is influencing the way we do business, communicate, move through and around the world, access and manage our homes, receive and administer healthcare, make purchases, secure information, and protect our most valuable property. Morrison Foerster keeps pace with this rapidly evolving landscape across our internationally recognized corporate, finance, intellectual property, and litigation practices. MoFo Tech brings together our insights relating to fields such as blockchain and distributed ledger, cloud and as-a-service technologies, driverless cars, drones, fintech, computer hardware and software, the Internet of Things, semiconductors, and telecommunications. The MoFo Tech blog offers real-time, in-depth analyses of the trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry.<h2>ABOUT MORRISON FOERSTER</h2>Morrison Foerster is a leading global law firm that transforms complexity into advantage for its clients. Our clients include some of the largest financial institutions, banks, consulting and accounting firms, and Fortune 100, technology, and life sciences companies. Highlighting the firm’s commitment to client service, leadership in market-changing deals and impact litigation, and values-based culture, Morrison Foerster has been repeatedly recognized as one of the top 10 firms on The American Lawyer’s A-List. Year after year, the firm receives significant recognition from Chambers and The Legal 500 across their various guides, including Global, USA, Asia‑Pacific, Europe, UK, Latin America, and FinTech Legal. Our lawyers passionately care about delivering legal excellence while living our values. Morrison Foerster has a long-standing commitment to creating a culture that respects and celebrates differences, while providing an inclusive environment. The firm has achieved Mansfield Certification Plus since 2018 as a result of successfully reaching at least 30 percent women, communities of color, and LGBTQ+ lawyer representation in a notable number of current leadership roles and committees. The firm also has a long history of commitment to the community and society through providing pro bono legal services, including litigating for civil rights and civil liberties, improving public education and fostering the wellbeing of children, advocating for veterans, promoting international human rights, enforcing the right to asylum, and safeguarding the environment.

Social

Search

testimage.jpg

MoFo Tech

Scott Llewellyn’s practice focuses on complex litigation in federal and state courts around the country, with an emphasis on patent and trade secret disputes. Over the past decade, he has worked on some of the most significant, high–profile IP cases involving technology for televisions, smartphones, and self–driving cars, relying on 40 years of experience with computer hardware and software. Scott also has significant experience with business divorce cases before courts and arbitrators, involving a mix of trade secret, patent, tort, and contract claims relating to technology development and implementation.Scott also has successfully tried general commercial arbitration and agency matters, briefed and argued various appeals in federal appellate court, and tried more than 20 cases for the Denver City Attorney’s office, most of them jury trials.Scott also has an active pro bono practice, having worked on a variety of criminal and immigration appeals, and having represented Colorado criminal defense and mental health organizations in high–profile suits against the state of Colorado for violations of the constitutional rights of defendants.At MoFo, Scott serves on the board of the Morrison & Foerster Foundation. In the broader legal community, he serves on the boards of the Colorado Lawyers Committee and Drop in the Bucket (a charity that builds wells and sanitation systems in sub–Saharan Africa).After law school, Scott clerked for the Honorable Clarence A. Brimmer, District of Wyoming, and the Honorable Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, Ninth Circuit. He was also previously an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University Law Center.

llewellyn_scott_blog_150x150.png

llewellyn_scott_common_640x280.jpg

llewellyn_scott_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

llewellyn_scott_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

llewellyn_scott_social_600x600.jpg

Partner

Scott Llewellyn’s practice involves complex litigation before state and federal courts around the country, with an emphasis on patent and trade secret disputes for high-tech companies, to which he brings more than 35 years of experience with computer hardware and software, in particular relating to the processing and transmission of audio, video, voice, and other types of data. Mr. Llewellyn has also tried commercial arbitration and agency matters; briefed and argued various appeals in federal appellate court; and tried more than 20 cases for the Denver city attorney’s office, most of them jury trials.

Scott F. Llewellyn

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

MoFo Tech brings together legal insights and in-depth analyses on trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry, covering fields such as blockchain and distributed ledger, cloud and SaaS technologies, driverless cars, drones, FinTech, computer hardware and software, the IoT, semiconductors, and telecommunications.

Mofo Tech testimage

Announcements

Welcome to the MoFo Tech Blog

Blog - Blog Disclaimer

Blog - Terms of Use

Blog - Privacy Policy

Blog - Attorney Advertising

morrison-foerster-blog-logo.png

Provides insights and reports on the most current class actions lawsuits and product liability issues that affect consumer-facing companies.

Class Dismissed Blog

Class Dismissed

In-depth analysis of developments and trends impacting government contracting.

Government Contract Insights Blog

Government Contract Insights

Government Contracts Insights Blog

Govcon

News and thought leadership from lawyers who are adding value to the legal profession and the communities we call home.

  External-Link

MoFo + Blog

MoFo+ Together

MoFo Tech brings together legal insights and in-depth analyses on trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry, covering fields such as blockchain and distributed ledger, cloud and SaaS technologies, driverless cars, drones, FinTech, computer hardware and software, the IoT, semiconductors, and telecommunications.

MoFo Tech

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

MoFo Tech Blog - RSS

Stay Connected

At the Intersection of Technology, Law, and Business

At the Intersection of Technology, Law, and Business

Morrison Foerster - Footer

Blogs -  Home Button

Home

Blog - Topics

Telecommunications

Artificial Intelligence

Asia

Blockchain

Cloud Services + SaaS

European Union

Financings

Fintech

Hardware

Intellectual Property

Internet of Things

Litigation

Mergers + Acquisitions

Privacy + Data Security

Regulatory

Software

Tech Talks

Topics

Blog - Editors

Editors

Blog - About

About

Blog - Subscribe

Subscribe

More

Current State of the AI VC Financing Market

MoFo Tech Law Summit – Tech and Antitrust: Policy Shifts in the Second Trump Administration

MoFo Tech Law Summit – Responsible Tech: Policy Becomes Practice

AI Dynamics: Regulatory Landscape and Industry Insights

Introducing the MoFo Tech Law Summit – Innovation Under Regulation

LinkedIN

On October 3, 2022, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Gonzalez v. Google LLC, No. 21-1333, to address the scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The Court will consider whether Section 230(c)(1) immunizes website operators and other online service providers when they use algorithms to recommend content to users, specifically terrorism-related videos posted on YouTube by other users of the video-sharing service.  Section 230(c)(1) is famously concise, having been referred to as the “the twenty-six words that created the internet.” It says simply “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” Since its passage over 25 years ago, courts across the country have often construed the law to provide broad immunity to online service providers that host user-generated content. Section 230 has facilitated the growth of the modern interactive Web, by protecting companies that host user-generated content from potential liability. But the law has come under intense scrutiny in recent years, with both courts and legislatures chipping away at this important safe harbor.Read our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/221007supreme-court-to-address-section-230-for-first-time">client alert.</a>

L.W. v. Snap Inc.,  675 F. Supp. 3d 1087 

Wamai v. Industrial Bank of Korea , 2021 WL 3038402 

In re Maxus Energy Corp.

In re Energy Future Holdings Corp.

James Paul McCartney v. Sony/ATV Publishing LLC

NFL Enterprises LLC v. EchoStar Satellite LLC

VOOM HD Holdings LLC v. EchoStar Satellite LLC

Change Healthcare Operations, LLC v WebMD Health Corp. 2017 WL 6610411  

Register.com, Inc. v. Verio, Inc.

Komag, Inc. v. Asahi Glass Co. Ltd.

Asante Techs. Inc. v. PMC–Sierra, Inc.

Biovail Corp. v. S.A.C. Capital Mgmt. 2009 WL 2844404 

Multi–Faceted Investigation of University Grants

Confidential International Arbitrations

lawrence_j_blog_150x150.png

lawrence_j_common_640x280.jpg

lawrence_j_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

lawrence_j_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

lawrence_j_social_600x600.jpg

Alex advises on all aspects of complex commercial litigation in federal and state trial and appellate courts and in arbitration. He has represented U.S. and international clients in actions involving 

J. Lawrence

J. Alexander Lawrence

rubin_aaron_blog_150x150.png

rubin_aaron_common_640x280.jpg

rubin_aaron_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

rubin_aaron_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

rubin_aaron_social_600x600.jpg

Aaron is the chair of the firm’s Technology Transactions Group and co-chair of the Interactive + Digital Media Group. He advises clients on a wide range of complex transactions involving intellectual property and technology, including structuring and negotiating strategic licensing, development, collaboration, procurement, and distribution deals.

Aaron Rubin

Aaron is the chair of our Technology Transactions Group. He advises clients on a wide range of complex transactions involving intellectual property and technology, including structuring and negotiating strategic licensing, development, collaboration, procurement, and distribution deals. Aaron’s practice focuses on advising both established and emerging companies in a variety of data– and technology–intensive sectors, including software, SaaS, cloud computing, AR/VR, AI, gaming, healthcare, consumer electronics, social media, e–commerce, other online business models, and mobile applications. He also maintains an active practice counseling companies on the intellectual property aspects of mergers, acquisitions, asset spin–offs, and private equity investments.

Aaron P. Rubin

kraus_dillon_blog_150x150.png

kraus_dillon_common_640x280.jpg

kraus_dillon_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

kraus_dillon_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

kraus_dillon_social_600x600.jpg

Associate

Dillon Kraus is an associate in Morrison Foerster’s Privacy + Data Security, Investigations + White Collar Defense, and Commercial Litigation + Trial groups and is based in the firm’s New York office.

Dillon Kraus

mofotechblog-litigation-600x295-scales.jpg

Supreme Court to Address Section 230 for First Time

California Supreme Court Clarifies Standards for Whistleblower Claims Under California Labor Code Section 1102.5

638601140

On October 3, 2022, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Gonzalez v. Google LLC, No. 21-1333, to address the scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The Court will consider whether Section 230(c)(1) immunizes website operators and other online service providers when they use algorithms to recommend content to users, specifically terrorism-related videos posted on YouTube by other users of the video-sharing service.  

Supreme Court to Address Section 230 for First Time

AI and machine-learning advances have made it possible to produce fake videos and photos that seem real, commonly known as “deepfakes.” Deepfake content is exploding in popularity. In this article, we explore deepfake technology and the legal risks it presents to companies while providing practical tips to manage these risks.  Read our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/210210-ai-machine-learning-manipulation.html">client alert</a>.

Fertility Center Litigation

Fitbit

MicroPort

Leading Healthcare, Pharmaceutical, and Medical Device Company

Lethal Injection Matters – Major Pharmaceutical Company

Pain Pump Matters – Large Pharmaceutical Company

Major Technology Company

Leading Chemical Company

Security Device Company

In re Air Crash Near Peixoto de Azevedo, Brazil

bosman_erin_blog_150x150.png

bosman_erin_common_640x280.jpg

bosman_erin_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

bosman_erin_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

bosman_erin_social_600x600.jpg

Erin Bosman is chair of MoFo’s Class Actions and Mass Torts Practice Group and is a founder and co-head of the Artificial Intelligence Group. Clients value her business strategy, seeking her comprehensive counsel throughout the product life cycle, especially in high-stakes litigation and product recalls.

Erin M. Bosman

Erin Bosman is chair of MoFo’s Class Actions and Mass Torts Practice Group and is a founder and co-head of the Artificial Intelligence Group. Clients value her business strategy, seeking her comprehensive counsel throughout the product life cycle, especially in high-stakes litigation and product recalls.

Erin Bosman

201217-game-growth-tech-transactions.jpg

The Collision of AI’s Machine Learning and Manipulation: Deepfake Litigation Risks to Companies from a Product Liability, Privacy, and Cyber Standpoint

The Collision of AI’s Machine Learning and Manipulation: Deepfake Litigation Risks to Companies from a Product Liability, Privacy, and Cyber Standpoint

201217-game-growth-tech-transactions

AI and machine-learning advances have made it possible to produce fake videos and photos that seem real, commonly known as “deepfakes.” Deepfake content is expl

<p style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(33, 37, 41);font-size: 13.93px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;line-height: 22.98px;margin-bottom: 48px;margin-top: 0px;" class="mb-5">2020: the year that will be remembered for privacy litigation. Well, OK, maybe not. But there were many developments in privacy litigation. In this four-part series, Privacy Litigation 2020 Year in Review, we will cover the key litigation developments arising out of data breaches, the California Consumer Privacy Act, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. We discuss the key trends you need to know and what to watch for in 2021.<h5 style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(3, 65, 147);font-size: 16px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;line-height: 19.2px;margin-top: 16px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 16px;margin-left: 0px;">Read more: </h5><ul style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(33, 37, 41);font-size: 13.93px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;list-style-position: outside;list-style-image: none;list-style-type: none;margin-top: 0px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 0px;margin-left: 0px;padding-top: 0px;padding-right: 0px;padding-bottom: 0px;padding-left: 0px;"><li style="box-sizing: border-box;font-size: 13.93px;left: auto;line-height: 20.89px;margin-top: 16px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 16px;margin-left: 0px;padding-left: 24px;position: relative;top: auto;"><a style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(3, 65, 147);text-decoration-line: none;transition-duration: 0.2s;transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.42, 0, 0.58, 1);transition-delay: 0s;transition-property: color;" href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/210104-data-breach-litigation-2020.html">Data Breach Litigation 2020</a></li><li style="box-sizing: border-box;font-size: 13.93px;left: auto;line-height: 20.89px;margin-top: 16px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 16px;margin-left: 0px;padding-left: 24px;position: relative;top: auto;"><a style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(3, 65, 147);text-decoration-line: none;transition-duration: 0.2s;transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.42, 0, 0.58, 1);transition-delay: 0s;transition-property: color;" href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/210106-privacy-litigation-2020-year-review.html">CCPA Litigation 2020</a></li><li style="box-sizing: border-box;font-size: 13.93px;left: auto;line-height: 20.89px;margin-top: 16px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 16px;margin-left: 0px;padding-left: 24px;position: relative;top: auto;"><a style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(3, 65, 147);text-decoration-line: none;transition-duration: 0.2s;transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.42, 0, 0.58, 1);transition-delay: 0s;transition-property: color;" href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/210111-bipa-litigation.html">BIPA Litigation 2020</a></li></ul> <p style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(33, 37, 41);font-size: 13.93px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;line-height: 22.98px;margin-bottom: 16px;margin-top: 48px;" class="mt-5">Visit our <a style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(3, 65, 147);text-decoration-line: none;transition-duration: 0.2s;transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.42, 0, 0.58, 1);transition-delay: 0s;transition-property: color;" href="https://www.mofo.com/capabilities/privacy-litigation.html">Privacy + Data Security Litigation</a> practice page to learn how our team can help your company with potential privacy litigation.

CCPA and Data Breach Class Action for Leading Software Company

BIPA Class Action Against Gaming and Hospitality Company

TCPA and Other Class Actions for Major Technology Company

Data Breach Class Action for Technology Company

Wiretap Act action against a Major Consumer Electronics Manufacturer

TCPA Class Action Against National Chain

In re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation

In re Verizon Wireless Data Charges Litigation

cheung_tiffany_blog_150x150.png

cheung_tiffany_common_640x280.jpg

cheung_tiffany_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

cheung_tiffany_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

cheung_tiffany_social_600x600.jpg

Clients seek out Tiffany for her successful track record in defending class action claims on behalf of clients in a broad range of industries, including technology, healthcare, and consumer product companies. She represents numerous Fortune 500 companies in high-stakes litigation involving privacy and marketing claims in courts throughout the United States.

Tiffany Cheung

Clients seek out Tiffany for her successful track record in defending class action claims on behalf of clients in a broad range of industries, including technology, healthcare, and consumer product companies. She represents numerous Fortune 500 companies in high-stakes litigation involving privacy and marketing claims in courts throughout the United States.

patel_purvi_blog_150x150.png

patel_purvi_common_640x280.jpg

patel_purvi_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

patel_purvi_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

patel_purvi_social_600x600.jpg

Purvi G. Patel is the former managing partner of the Los Angeles Office. She represents retail, e-commerce, and other businesses in significant advertising, unfair competition, consumer fraud, and privacy 

Purvi G. Patel

Purvi G. Patel defends retail, e-commerce, and other businesses in significant advertising, unfair competition, consumer fraud, and privacy matters. She has built a robust practice defending household names in complex and class action litigation in federal and state courts across the country, winning motions to dismiss, defeating class certification, and securing summary disposition in several multi-million dollar lawsuits. Purvi is a strategic and practical thinker who is in tune with her clients’ priorities, which leads to successful outcomes both inside and outside the courthouse.

Purvi Patel

mofo-tech-blog-image-29.jpg

Privacy Litigation 2020 Year in Review

CPRA Passes: California Voters Approve Proposition 24

mofo-tech-blog-image-29

2020: the year that will be remembered for privacy litigation. Well, OK, maybe not. But there were many developments in privacy litigation. In this four-part se

Privacy Litigation 2020 Year in Review

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) just issued new rules that directly affect trademark owners.  Going forward, trademark applicants, registrants, and parties to a proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will need to provide their email address in USPTO filings. Unfortunately for trademark owners, unscrupulous third parties will likely take advantage of this new rule and start to use the email addresses to spam trademark owners, as they will be publicly available on the USPTO website. We therefore recommend trademark owners set up an email address specifically for the purpose of complying with the rule. Read our <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/BF9ACxk78yUg5RYYUvEQY7?domain=www2.mofo.com">client alert.</a>

huq_muzamil_blog_150x150.png

huq_muzamil_common_640x280.jpg

huq_muzamil_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

huq_muzamil_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

huq_muzamil_social_600x600.jpg

Of Counsel

Muzamil Huq represents clients in the protection and enforcement of U.S. and non-U.S. trademark matters and other IP transactions. 

Muzamil Huq

Muzamil Huq represents clients in the protection and enforcement of U.S. and non-U.S. trademark matters and other IP transactions.

New USPTO Rule Likely to Increase Spam

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) just issued new rules that directly affect trademark owners.  Going forward, trademark applicants, registr

New USPTO Rule Likely to Increase Spam

<p style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(82, 83, 87);font-size: 16.93px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;line-height: 27.08px;margin-top: 0px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 20px;margin-left: 0px;padding-top: 0px;padding-right: 0px;padding-bottom: 0px;padding-left: 0px;overflow-wrap: normal;">In 2017, the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property issued a report to Congress estimating that the theft of trade secrets could cost the United States economy as much as $600 billion annually. In the years following, news reports indicate that alleged instances of corporate espionage and the theft of trade secrets continue at a rapid pace. But sometimes trade secret assertions can be overbroad, vague, and anticompetitive. Many commentators have cautioned that trade secret assertions should not be used improperly to inhibit employee mobility. <p style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(82, 83, 87);font-size: 16.93px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;line-height: 27.08px;margin-top: 0px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 20px;margin-left: 0px;padding-top: 0px;padding-right: 0px;padding-bottom: 0px;padding-left: 0px;overflow-wrap: normal;">In a recent example of corporate espionage and theft of trade secrets, on November 21, 2019, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Haitao Xiang, a Chinese national who had previously worked for the Monsanto Company (now a part of Bayer AG), and its subsidiary The Climate Corporation, had been indicted by a federal grand jury on one count of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, three counts of economic espionage, one count of conspiracy to commit theft of a trade secret, and three counts of theft of a trade secret. <p style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(82, 83, 87);font-size: 16.93px;font-variant-numeric: normal;font-variant-east-asian: normal;line-height: 27.08px;margin-top: 0px;margin-right: 0px;margin-bottom: 20px;margin-left: 0px;padding-top: 0px;padding-right: 0px;padding-bottom: 0px;padding-left: 0px;overflow-wrap: normal;"><a href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/191209-balance-corporate-espionage-disputes.html" target="_blank" style="background-color: transparent;box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(77, 169, 197);line-height: 27.08px;text-decoration-line: none;">Read more</a>

Striking the Balance in Trade Secret and Corporate Espionage Disputes