Complaint. Answer. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $65,000 penalty. (Consolidated with complaints from two other passengers)
Summary: price advertising violations including mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
American Airlines – price advertising violations (February 2013)
Complaint. Answer. Edelman Reply. American Surreply. Edelman supplemental filing. American response and supplemental response. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $60,000 penalty.
Summary: price advertising violations including mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Cathay Pacific – price advertising violations
Complaint. Answer and Oneworld answers to questions. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order.
Summary: mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
British Airways – price advertising violations (2013)
Complaint. Answer. Edelman Reply. British Airways Surreply. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order.
Summary: price advertising violations including a “fuel surcharge” in excess of cost of fuel
Apple in-app purchase litigation
I served as cocounsel in class action litigation challenging Apple charging users for purchases made by kids, refusing refunds to such users, and allowing purchases (and charging users’ credit cards) without users reentering their passwords to authorize the purchases. In response, Apple agreed to grant refunds to customers who so requested.
In Re In-App Purchase Litigation, Case No. 5:11-CV-01758-EJD (N.D. Cal.)
Google typosquatting litigation
I served as cocounsel in trademark holder class action litigation challenging Google and its partners using domain names that are typographic variants of trademarks in order to show advertising.
Vulcan Golf, LLC, et al., v. Google, Inc., et al., No. 07 C 3371 (N.D. Ill.)
Case docket including third amended complaint
Yahoo syndication fraud litigation
I served as cocounsel in class action litigation challenging Yahoo placing advertisers’ advertisements in low-quality locations such as adware, popups, and typo squatting, while charging advertisers high prices predicated on search advertising. After motion practice denying Yahoo’s motion to dismiss, Yahoo agreed to cease certain of the practices at issue and allow advertisers to exclude themselves from certain low-quality advertising placements.
In re: Yahoo Litigation, No. 06-2737-CAS (C.D. Cal.)
Case docket including consolidated second amended class action complaint and settlement agreement
Benjamin Edelman v. N2H2, Inc.
I sought to research and document sites categorized and restricted by Internet blocking program N2H2. N2H2’s block site list is protected by technical measures including an encryption system, but I sought to write software that would nonetheless allow me to access, analyze, and report its contents. However, I feared that conducting this work might expose me to liability for violation of the N2H2 License, of the Copyright Act of 1976, and of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, as well as for misappropriation of N2H2’s trade secrets. With representation by the ACLU, I therefore sought from federal court a declaratory judgement that I could conduct this research and publication without fear of liability.