Tag: lawsuits

Kiwi Farms Challenges DMCA Subpoenas as Tools to Unmask Anonymous Speech

A new lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York offers a clean example of something that keeps happening and keeps getting ignored: the Digital Millennium Copyright Act being used to censor speech and unmask anonymous speakers.

The case is Lolcow LLC v. Fong-Jones, filed on March 12, 2026, and it pits the operator of the web forum Kiwi Farms against Liz Fong-Jones, an activist and field Chief Technology Officer at SaaS observability platform Honeycomb, who has been filing DMCA subpoenas in an attempt to identify anonymous forum users.

The content Fong-Jones wants censored is a screenshot of a Fong-Jones Bluesky post and an edited version of a Fong-Jones headshot, both related to what Fong-Jones has previously described publicly as a “consent accident.”

Forum users posted and discussed those images. Fong-Jones responded by claiming copyright ownership and filing DMCA subpoenas to force the site to hand over the identities of the people who posted them.

The copyright claims seem thin. Kiwi Farms operator Joshua Moon argues that the screenshot is a derivative work over which Fong-Jones holds no copyright, and that the edited headshot represents a textbook case of fair use, given that the image has no commercial value and was modified specifically for purposes of criticism and commentary.

That argument carries weight. Courts have long recognized that transformative use of images for commentary or ridicule sits comfortably within fair use protections.

What makes this case useful as a case study is less the copyright question itself and more the mechanism being exploited. The DMCA subpoena process, codified in Section 512(h), allows copyright holders to obtain a judicial subpoena to unmask the identities of allegedly infringing anonymous internet users just by asking a court clerk to issue one and attaching a copy of the infringement notice.

Keep reading

Epstein Victims Sue Victoria’s Secret Owner Les Wexner for Giving Late Pedophile Over $200 Million, and Enabling His Sex Trafficking Ring

Wexner is on the crosshairs of the Epstein victims and their lawyers.

Fashion billionaire Les Wexner is long known to have been, along with Wall Street titan Leon Black, the biggest Jeffrey Epstein ‘clients’, each shelling hundreds of million dollars to the late pedophile and disgraced financier.

And now, Wexner and his Foundation are being sued by several Epstein victims who claim Wexner enabled the sex offender to create ‘an international sex trafficking ring’.

Ohio Capital Journal reported:

“’The lawsuit alleges Wexner gave Epstein $200 million or more from 1987 to 2007 ‘that Epstein used to build his sex trafficking network and commit acts of gender-motivated violence’, according to the complaint, which was recently filed in the New York Supreme Court.”

Keep reading

US State Dept Settles Free Speech Suppression Lawsuit

The US State Department has settled a lawsuit brought by The Daily Wire, The Federalist, and the State of Texas, accepting a consent decree that bars it from using, financing, or promoting technology designed to suppress or “fact-check” the constitutionally protected speech of American citizens and domestic media outlets.

The settlement also prohibits the Department from working with foreign governments or NGOs for those purposes, whether through formal agreements or informal arrangements.

We obtained a copy of the joint motion for you here.

The New Civil Liberties Alliance, which represented The Daily Wire and The Federalist, secured what amounts to a binding admission that the government had been doing exactly what it was accused of. The Department now acknowledges that its plaintiffs’ speech on COVID-19, sexual ethics, the biological nature of sex, and election integrity was constitutionally protected all along. It took three years of litigation to get the government to say that out loud.

Keep reading

Anti-Marijuana Groups File Lawsuit To Block Trump Administration’s Hemp CBD And THC Medicare Coverage Plan

A coalition of anti-marijuana organizations is suing the Trump administration over a novel initiative set to launch this week to widen the availability of CBD and THC for certain patients by covering hemp-derived products under select federal health insurance programs.

Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) and nine other drug prevention groups on Monday filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging the legality of the cannabis program—which is being facilitated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)—and seeking a temporary restraining order to immediately halt the process.

The filing names CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as defendants in the lawsuit. The lawsuit comes as CMS is set to start covering CBD and THC products as a Substance Access Beneficiary Engagement Incentive (BEI) beginning on Wednesday.

Under the BEI, patients enrolled in specific federal health insurance programs could have up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products covered each year. The CBD-focused plan will also allow a certain amount of THC in products, but the agency said earlier this month the rules are subject to change if federal hemp policy changes, as is currently expected under a law set to take effect later this year.

SAM and the other organizations—including the Cannabis Impact Prevention Coalition, Drug Free American Foundation and Save Our Society From Drugs—made several arguments in support of legal intervention to prevent the cannabidiol BEI from moving forward. Much of the complaint focuses on alleged violations of administrative rules to provide the treatment, which they point out has not received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval.

CMS didn’t publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for the cannabis BEI that would have afforded the public with a comment period to weigh in, and the agency’s initiative runs counter to a separate final rule it issued last year that “declared cannabis products ineligible for supplemental Medicare coverage for chronically ill patients,” the prohibitionist plaintiffs said.

Beyond those alleged violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the groups noted that CMS described a BEI for CBD containing a maximum THC concentration that exceeds what would constitute federally legal hemp under a policy that’s set to be implemented in November.

The filing says the program would additionally violate the Social Security Act (SSA), which “does not allow CMS to sanction the possession and use of illegal and dangerous Schedule I substances by Medicare patients without clear congressional authorization.”

“CMS’s action represents an unprecedented and unlawful assertion of binding decision-making authority that will profoundly affect the health of elderly Americans,” SAM and the other organizations said in their complaint. “CMS took this action without the guardrails imposed by the administrative process, without any reasoned explanation, in conflict with the agency’s own recent APA-compliant determination, and without statutory authority.”

Keep reading

Judge Tosses DOJ Lawsuit Challenging Minnesota’s In-State Tuition for Illegal Immigrants

A district court judge tossed out the Trump administration’s lawsuit on March 27 against Minnesota laws that allow illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates, or in some cases have tuition waived, for college and university classes, ruling that the state law doesn’t violate federal law.

Judge Katherine Menendez of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota granted the state’s motion to dismiss the Department of Justice’s lawsuit, filed on June 25, 2025, finding that in-state tuition rules didn’t discriminate against citizens.

“As Defendants point out, there are multiple ways a student could qualify for Resident Tuition without residing in Minnesota, such as attending a Minnesota high school while living in a neighboring state, or by attending a Minnesota boarding school,” Menendez wrote in the decision.

The federal government sued Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and other state officials over the state’s laws that allow foreign nationals to receive lower or free college tuition.

Minnesota law states that any student, other than a non-immigrant alien, can qualify for a resident tuition rate at state universities and colleges if they attend high school in the state for at least three years and graduate from a state high school or get a high school equivalent degree.

The law also states that illegal immigrants must give the state proof that they have complied with federal selective service registration requirements and have filed to obtain lawful immigration status in order to qualify for in-state tuition.

Keep reading

New York Sues Valve Over Loot Boxes, Calls Them Illegal Gambling

Valve, the maker of Steam and many of PC gaming’s most popular titles, is being sued by New York for its use of loot boxes. New York Attorney General Letitia James filed the lawsuit, claiming that loot box systems enable gambling habits and are particularly harmful for younger people.

The lawsuit specifically cites three games: Counter-Strike 2, Dota 2, and Team Fortress 2. It wants the video game developer to stop using loot boxes in its titles and to pay fines for previously promoting them.

A press release from Attorney General James notes that Counter-Strike 2’s loot box system resembles a slot machine, featuring a spinning wheel that reveals a virtual item. Loot boxes are common in online titles, acting as a randomized treasure chest that may provide valuable in-game items.

It explains that valuable items found in loot boxes can be sold on Valve’s Steam Community Market and other third-party stores, indicating they have real-world value. It points to reports of a virtual gun skin within Counter-Strike 2 that sold for over $1 million in 2024.

However, the likelihood of gamers finding a valuable item is low, and the lawsuit alleges that Valve intentionally makes some items harder to win than others to increase value.

“Illegal gambling can be harmful and lead to serious addiction problems, especially for our young people,” said Attorney General James. “Valve has made billions of dollars by letting children and adults alike illegally gamble for the chance to win valuable virtual prizes.”

“These features are addictive, harmful, and illegal, and my office is suing to stop Valve’s illegal conduct and protect New Yorkers.”

Keep reading

Bank of America to Pay $72.5M Settlement Over Epstein Lawsuit

Bank of America is paying $72.5 million to settle a federal lawsuit claiming it enabled sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

The lawsuit claimed Bank of America ignored “obvious red flags” while doing business with Epstein and his associates, according to the New York Post.

The bank, so the lawsuit claimed, could have brought law enforcement down upon Epstein sooner if it had adopted a see-no-evil policy. Epstein died in 2019 in a federal jail while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Bank of America is the third bank to settle a lawsuit linked to Epstein. JPMorgan Chase ponied up for $290 million. Deutsche Bank settled for $75 million.

In a statement, a Bank of America representative said, “While we stand by our prior statements made in the filings in this case, including that Bank of America did not facilitate sex-trafficking crimes, this resolution allows us to put this matter behind us and provides further closure for the plaintiffs,” according to The New York Times.

Bank of America became Epstein’s bank after JPMorgan cut ties with him.

The settlement would pay “all women who were sexually abused or trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein, or by any person who is connected to or otherwise associated with Jeffrey Epstein or any Jeffrey Epstein sex-trafficking venture, between June 30, 2008 and July 6, 2019, inclusive,” according to CNBC.

Lawyers estimate “that there are at least 60 women who were victimized by Epstein between” those dates, the filing said.

The lead plaintiff  alleged that after meeting Epstein in 2011, and through 2019, “Epstein sexually abused Jane Doe on at least 100 occasions, including but not limited to, forcibly touching her, forcibly raping her, and forcing her to engage in sexual acts with other women for his own depraved sexual gratification.”

The suit says that in May 2013, the woman, known in court papers as Jane Doe opened a bank account at Bank of America at the direction of Epstein’s accountant and an immigration attorney to defraud immigration officials.

Keep reading

Minnesota Sues Trump Administration Over ICE-Involved Shootings – Walz Says He’s Building Case with Leftist Nonprofits and the UN

The State of Minnesota has filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration in its ongoing attempt to investigate ICE and CBP agents who were involved in shootings during law enforcement activities.

The incidents include the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, two crazed leftists who attacked ICE agents, and Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, a criminal illegal alien who was wounded while attacking ICE agents in northern Minneapolis in January.

Minnesota is suing for evidence and information on the shootings, for which the FBI previously denied state investigators access.

On Thursday, Tim Walz discussed the lawsuit on MSNow, revealing that he is working with the American Civil Liberties Union, pro-immigrant groups, and even the UN to build his case, while accusing the Trump Administration of human rights abuses.

He further trashed President Trump, stating that he will continue fighting for so-called justice until “the final days of this administration and beyond.”

Keep reading

Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta, YouTube negligent in social media addiction trial

A jury in Los Angeles determined on Wednesday that Meta and Google’s YouTube were negligent and failed to warn users of the dangers associated with using their platforms, in a case that could have repercussions across the social media and the broader technology market.

The personal injury trial commenced in late January in Los Angeles Superior Court. A young woman identified as K.G.M., or Kaley, alleged that she became addicted to apps like Instagram and YouTube as a child. Deliberations began Friday, March 13.

Jurors ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiff, who claimed that Meta and YouTube’s negligence played a “substantial factor” in causing mental health-related harms. Compensatory damages were assessed at $3 million, with Meta on the hook for 70% and YouTube the remaining 30%. The next phase of the trial will determine punitive damages.

“We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement.

It’s one of several trials taking place this year that experts have characterized as the social media industry’s “Big Tobacco” moment, comparing it the 1990s, when tobacco companies were forced to pay billions of dollars for lying to the public about the safety and potential harms of their products.

On Tuesday, jurors in Santa Fe, New Mexico found that Meta willfully violated the state’s unfair practices after Attorney General Raúl Torrez alleged that the company failed to properly safeguard its apps from online predators targeting children. Meta was ordered to pay $375 million in damages based on the number of violations. The company said that it would appeal the case.

The New Mexico case is separate from other social media lawsuits that state attorneys general have brought against companies including Meta and TikTok.

During the six-week trial in L.A., jury members were tasked with determining whether Meta and YouTube implemented certain design features in their apps like recommendation algorithms and auto-play that contributed to K.G.M.’s crippling, mental distress. The 20-year-old woman alleged that she suffered from severe body dysmorphia, depression and suicidal thoughts due to her near-constant use of the apps and the constant notifications that made it difficult for her to stop.

Keep reading

Bayer’s Monsanto sues mRNA COVID-19 vaccine makers

Bayer’s agrochemicals unit Monsanto has filed lawsuits in the US against the manufacturers of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, claiming that they used its patent-protected technology in their products.

One lawsuit – filed in a federal court in Delaware – asserts that Pfizer/BioNTech’s Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax vaccines, which generated tens of billions of dollars in revenues during the pandemic, used technology developed by Monsanto in the 1980s designed to eliminate ‘problem’ coding sequences in the building blocks of cells “to improve mRNA stability and the amount or quality of protein produced” in crops.

The technology was awarded a US patent in 2010 (No. 7,741,118) and is not due to expire until June 2027. According to the suit, Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna used it to stabilise their mRNA vaccines.

“To develop effective mRNA medicines, defendants needed to stabilise the mRNA molecule and optimise its protein expression,” it claims, adding that they “optimised and manufactured their infringing mRNA vaccine products starting with a DNA template” and using Monsanto’s patented process.

Meanwhile, Reuters has also reported that Bayer independently filed a similar lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson in a New Jersey federal court, contending that a DNA-based process the company used in manufacturing its adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccine also infringes the patent.

The shot – known as the Janssen vaccine – won emergency authorisations in the US and other markets and made blockbuster sales in the pandemic before its use diminished due to concerns about rare clotting side effects. It was withdrawn from sale in the US in 2023.

While sales are well down on their peak, Comirnaty brought in worldwide revenues of more than $3.3 billion for Pfizer and BioNTech last year, with Moderna earning $3.2 billion from Spikevax.

Bayer has said it does not intend to do anything that would restrict the commercial use of the COVID-19 vaccines – although, that is already being achieved due to changing immunisation policies in the US under the Trump administration – but is seeking damages “in an amount adequate to compensate” for the infringement of its intellectual property and royalties on sales.

Keep reading