Communications Decency Act Provides No Safe Harbor Against Antifraud Liability for Hyperlinks to Third-Party Content under the Securities and Exchange Act

In 2008, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released interpretive guidelines regarding antifraud liability for statements and disclosures made on company Web sites. The SEC noted that a company may incur both criminal and civil liability under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 for hyperlinks to third-party content. However, the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c), expressly preempts civil liability for interactive computer service providers that post hyperlinks to third-party content on their Web sites. This Article examines whether section 230 immunizes companies from civil liability for hyperlinks to third-party content despite the SEC’s interpretive guidelines imposing antifraud liability. This Article concludes that companies would likely be considered information content providers under section 230 and therefore outside the scope of the safe harbor provision for interactive computer service providers

Invalidity of Covenants Not to Compete in California Affects Employers Nationwide

In Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, the Supreme Court of California rejected the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ “narrow restraint” exception to California Business and Professional Code section 16600 regarding the unenforceability of covenants not to compete (CNCs). Edwards affirms that, unless the agreement falls within a statutory exception, CNCs in employment agreements are invalid as a matter of law in California because of California\u27s strong interest in protecting employee mobility as codified in section 16600. Despite California’s strong public policy against CNCs, an employee who wins the race to a California courthouse may not necessarily benefit from section 16600 if the employee was not a California resident or employed by a Californian employer at the time she agreed to a CNC. This Article evaluates California law and the resolution of the conflict of law issues that arise between California and other states more willing to enforce CNCs