Aba section of Intellectual Property Law

H.B. 2215 became effective on January 1, 2008 and is titled “Arkansas Consumer Report Security Freeze Act.” Under this Act, a resident of the state that has been the victim of identity theft and who has submitted a copy of a valid investigative report, an incident report, or a complaint with a law enforcement agency about the unlawful use of the victim’s identifying information by another person may request a security freeze. The consumer may request the security freeze by sending the written request by certified mail with proper identification and any applicable fee. Fees for each security freeze, removal of a security freeze, or temporary lifting of a security freeze may not exceed $10. Consumer reporting agencies may advise a third party that a security freeze is in effect with respect to a consumer report. A third party may treat an application for credit or any other use as incomplete if a security freeze is in place and access to a consumer report is not allowed. The security freeze will remain in place until removal by the consumer or discovery that the consumer report was frozen due to a material misrepresentation of the consumer.

Title 28 of the District of Columbia Official Code was amended by adding the “Consumer Security Freeze Act of 2006.” The Act became effective July 1, 2007. Under the Act, a credit reporting agency will put a freeze on a consumer’s credit report no later than three days after receiving a request by certified mail. In addition, by January 1, 2009, the credit reporting agency will make available the ability to request a security freeze over the Internet and will accept requests received by either telephone or regular mail. On or before September 1, 2008, the credit reporting agency must be able to allow access to the consumer’s credit report by a specific party or for a specific period of time within 15 minutes of receiving such request unless the consumer fails to provide the proper identity, password and identity of designated third party, or the consumer reporting agency is unable to lift the security freeze because of an Act of God, unauthorized acts by a third party, operational interruption, governmental action, regulatory scheduled maintenance, or commercially reasonable maintenance. The Act allows a credit reporting agency to inform a third party that a security freeze is in place on a consumer’s credit report and the third party may treat an application as incomplete if the consumer does not allow access to their credit report. A security freeze is in place until a consumer asks for its permanent removal in writing. The removal shall occur within 3 days of the credit reporting agency receiving such removal request. The Act permits the credit reporting agency to charge a fee of $10 for the initial application and first personal identification number or password unless the consumer is a victim of identify theft, then the agency may only charge for subsequent instances of loss and reissuance of new identification numbers. After a one-time reissue of the password, the agency may charge $10 for subsequent instances of loss and reissuance of the identification number or password.

Indiana’s SB 403 is titled “Security Freeze for Consumer Reports” and became effective on September 1, 2007. Under the Act, by January 1, 2009 consumer reporting agencies must develop a secure electronic mail connection by which consumers can request a security freeze, a new personal identification number or password, or a temporary lift of a security freeze. Also by January 1, 2009, consumer reporting agencies must have a secure process by which the agency will release a consumer report subject to a security freeze, temporarily lift a security freeze, or remove a security freeze within 15 minutes of receiving such a request. The Act provides a list of people, including law enforcement agencies and licensed insurers, to which a consumer report under a security freeze can be released. Consumer reporting agencies are prohibited from charging a fee for requests to place a security freeze, release a consumer report to a specified person, temporarily lift a security freeze, remove a security freeze, or issue a personal identification number or password associated with the preceding requests.

Maryland’s S.B. 52 was approved by the governor on May 8, 2007 and is effective January 1, 2008. Under the Act, consumers must be able to make a request for a security freeze by certified mail, by telephone after January 1, 2010, and by secure internet connection, should the consumer reporting agency choose to make it available. The Act clarifies that it does not apply to consumer reporting agencies that act only as a reseller of credit information and do not maintain permanent databases of credit information from which new consumer reports are produced. After January 1, 2009, requests to temporarily lift a security freeze must occur within 15 minutes if received by telephone, electronic mail, or secure website connection. The Act acknowledges that third parties may treat an application as incomplete if a party requests access to a consumer’s consumer report and a freeze is in place. Fees of up to $5 may only be charged for each placement, temporary lift, or removal of a security freeze and fees may not be applied to those consumers that have obtained a report of alleged identity fraud.

H.B. 4144, H.B. 4018, and S.B. 2236 were consolidated to create an Act relative to security freezes and notification of data breaches. The Act became effective on February 3, 2008. Under the Act a consumer may request a security freeze by regular, overnight, or certified mail. Consumer reporting agencies must comply with a request to lift a freeze for a particular party or for a certain period of time within three days of receiving the request. The Act allows a consumer reporting agency to charge a reasonable fee, not to exceed $5, to a consumer that elects to freeze, lift, or remove a freeze to their consumer report. This fee may not be charged to victims of identity theft or their spouses provided the victim has submitted a valid police report related to the identity theft.

S.B. 3034 was signed into law and became effective on July 1, 2007. The security freeze is available to consumers with a valid copy of a police report that the consumer filed regarding the unlawful use of their personal information. The request must be by certified mail and must include proper identification. A consumer reporting agency may charge a reasonable fee, not to exceed $10, to place a security freeze on a file. A consumer may request by telephone or mail to have a security freeze removed or temporarily lifted for a properly designated period or a properly identified requester, which will occur within three business days after the request. Fees may not be charged for the removal or temporary lift of a security freeze. A consumer reporting agency shall honor a security freeze placed by another consumer reporting agency.

S.B. 116 became effective law in Montana on July 1, 2007. A consumer may place a security freeze on their consumer report by requesting such a freeze in writing by regular or certified mail. A consumer reporting agency will place the freeze within 5 business days of receiving such request unless the consumer making the request is a victim of identity theft in which case the freeze will be placed within 24 hours of receiving the request. A consumer reporting agency may not imply to a third party that the placing of a freeze reflects negatively on a consumer’s credit score or history. A consumer may request a temporary lift in a security freeze by regular or certified mail, telephone, or secure electronic connection. By January 1, 2009, the consumer reporting agency must honor a request for a temporary lift of a security freeze within 15 minutes of receiving such request. A reasonable fee, not to exceed $3, may be charged to a consumer that is not the victim of identity theft for the placing or temporarily removal of a security freeze. A reasonable fee of up to $5 may be charged for the reissue of a consumer identification number or password.

L.B. 674 was approved by the Governor on May 24, 2007 and the Credit Report Protection Act became effective law on September 1, 2007. Under the Act a consumer may request a security freeze by certified mail. A consumer reporting agency must develop procedures involving the telephone, the Internet, or other electronic media to receive and process a request for a temporary lift of a security freeze in an expedited manner. By January 1, 2009, the temporary lift must occur within 15 minutes of receiving the request. The consumer reporting agency may charge a fee of $15 for placing a security freeze unless the consumer requesting the freeze is a minor or a victim of identity theft and provides a copy of an official police report documenting the theft.

The Credit Report Security Act became effective law on July 1, 2007. A consumer may make a request for a security freeze by certified or regular mail, or by telephone or secure electronic means, if such methods are made available by the consumer reporting agency. By September 1, 2008, a consumer will be able to request a temporary lift to a security freeze by telephone or secure electronic method in addition to certified or regular mail. Also by September 1, 2008, the temporary lift in the security freeze must occur within 15 minutes of the request rather than the current three business days. The consumer reporting agency may charge a fee of no more than $10 for the placement of a security freeze, and no more than $5 for the release of a credit report or the removal of a security freeze. Fees shall not be charged to victims of identity theft or consumers sixty-five years of age or older.

H.B. 1417 became effective law in North Dakota on July 1, 2007. Under the Act, a consumer may request a security freeze by mail, telephone, or secure electronic mail connection, if the consumer reporting agency has made such electronic method available. As of August 1, 2009, the consumer reporting agency must place the security freeze within 24 hours, rather than the standard three days, from receiving the request of a victim of identity theft. The consumer reporting agency will temporarily lift a security freeze within three business days of receiving the request. The Act outlined a goal of processing a request for a temporary lift within 15 minutes of receiving such request. The consumer reporting agency may work to meet this goal by developing procedures to receive requests by telephone, fax, internet, or other electronic media. The consumer reporting agency may change a fee of up to $5 for placing or temporarily lifting a security freeze unless the consumer is a victim of identity theft and provides a valid copy of a police report. Other than for the first reissue of a consumer password or identification number, a consumer may also be charged a $5 fee for subsequent reissues of such password or identification number.

S.B. 583, known as the Oregon Consumer Identity Theft Protection Act, became effective law in Oregon on October 1, 2007. Under the Act, a consumer may request a freeze by mail or by secure electronic request at a website, should the consumer reporting agency make such a method available. A consumer reporting agency shall temporarily lift a security freeze within three business days of receiving such a request from a consumer. A permanent removal of a security freeze shall also occur within three days of receiving such a request. The Act requires a report provided by the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services by December 31, 2008 on the minimum amount of time necessary, given current technology, to place, temporarily lift, or remove a security freeze. Other than to victims of identity theft, a fee of up to $10 may be charged to consumers for each freeze, temporary lift of a freeze, removal of a freeze, or replacing of lost personal identification number or password.

P.L. 1700, known as The Credit Security Act of 2007, became effective on January 1, 2008. A consumer may make a request for a security freeze by certified mail and after January 31, 2009, that request may also be made by an electronic method. Consumers may request a temporary lift of a security freeze, and consumer reporting agencies must develop procedures to allow this request by telephone, the Internet, or other electronic method. The temporary lift must occur within 15 minutes of the request. Consumer reporting agencies may charge $7.50 for the placement of a security freeze and $5 for the removal of a security freeze or the replacement of a personal identification number or password but may not charge for the temporary lifting of a security freeze. Victims of identity theft with a police report or other document detailing the theft may not be charged a fee.

S.B. 428 was passed on March 10, 2007 and became effective on July 2, 2007. Under the Act, a consumer may request a security freeze by certified or overnight mail. By January 31, 2009, consumer reporting agencies must allow requests by a secure electronic method. If a consumer requests a temporary lift to the security freeze, the consumer reporting agency must lift the freeze within three days of receiving that request. By September 1, 2008, that temporary lift shall occur within 15 minutes of receiving such request. The consumer may be charged a fee of up to $5 for the placement, removal, or temporary removal of a security freeze unless the consumer is a victim of identity theft and has a copy of a valid police report. A $5 fee may also be charged for reissue of a personal identification number or password.

Wyoming’s security freeze law became effective on July 1, 2007. Under the Act, a consumer may request a security freeze on his consumer report by certified mail. A consumer may request a temporary lift in a security freeze by either mail, an electronic method chosen by the agency, or telephone. After September 1, 2008, the consumer reporting agency will temporarily lift a security freeze within 15 minutes of receiving such request by electronic method or telephone, otherwise they will temporarily lift the security freeze within three business days of receiving such request. Except for victims of identity theft that have a valid copy of a police report, the consumer reporting agency may charge a fee of up to $10 for each placement, temporary lift, or removal of a security freeze.

Mary Ann C. Ball

David Alan Bateman

Lee Berger

Yar R. Chaikovsky

Stephen Chow

Vincent Cogan

Jeffrey T. Cox

Jeff C. Dodd

Kenneth Kyle Dort

Steven Michael Emmert

Eric Neil Everett

R. Mark Field

Jennifer Fisher

Renard C. Francois

Christina Frangiosa

Terrance Joseph Frolich

Jason E. Goldberg

David A. Johnson

Melissa L. Klipp

Kenneth Albert Kopf

Louis J. Levy

Randy Lowell

Elizabeth Stacy McClure

Vicki Menard

Jennifer Miller

Michael A. Parks

Woodrow Pollack

J. Mark Smith

Michael T. Stewart

Mohammad a. Syed

Peter S. Trotter

Mark E. Ashton

Guillermo Aviles-Mendoza

Richard Anthony Brunner

Don Lloyd Cook II

Ronald S. Courtney

Behnam Dayanim

Robert Emond

Jonathan I Ezor

Dorothy L. Foley

Michael Hagemann

Steven Mancinelli

Joanne Nelson

Robert H. Newman

Seth M. Reiss

Alan N. Walter

Matthew Asbell

David E. Blau

Kiva Bostwick

Michael Buhrley

Aubin Chang

Yi-Hung Chung

Douglas Clough

Wendy Happ

Elizabeth Jean-Pierre

Michael Landres

Jason Luros

Brian Perrault

Amy Petri

Brian Pyne

Craig Sorensen

Kurth Stecher

Dondi West

Committee Vote
For	Against	Explicitly Abstain	Not Heard From
73*	0	0	71

the report’s attachments but did vote in favor of the report overall.

1. 
   Introduction - Scope and impact of virtual worlds generally
   
   1. 
      Define scope of "virtual worlds"
      
   2. 
      Social impact
      
   3. 
      Economic impact - known and projected
      
   4. 
      Other impacts?
      
   5. 
      Describe scope of this work and outline remainder of work
      
2. 
   Implications of virtual worlds in copyright law
   
   1. 
      Introduction
      
   2. 
      Copyright issues identified in virtual world context
      
      1. 
         In cases
         
      2. 
         In news stories
         
      3. 
         In scholarly materials
         
      4. 
         Sua sponte (by monograph editors)
         
   3. 
      Analysis
      
      1. 
         Apply traditional analyses
         
      2. 
         Identify problems with traditional analyses
         
   4. 
      Conclusions
      
      1. 
         Discuss possible solutions to problems
         
3. 
   Implications of virtual worlds in trademark law
   
   1. 
      Introduction
      
   2. 
      Trademark issues identified in virtual world context
      
      1. 
         In cases
         
      2. 
         In news stories
         
      3. 
         In scholarly materials
         
      4. 
         Sua sponte (by monograph editors)
         
   3. 
      Analysis
      
      1. 
         Apply traditional analyses
         
      2. 
         Identify problems with traditional analyses
         
   4. 
      Conclusions
      
      1. 
         Discuss possible solutions to problems
         
4. 
   Implications of virtual worlds in patent law
   
   1. 
      Introduction
      
   2. 
      Patent issues identified in virtual world context
      
      1. 
         In cases
         
      2. 
         In news stories
         
      3. 
         In scholarly materials
         
      4. 
         Sua sponte (by monograph editors)
         
   3. 
      Analysis
      
      1. 
         Apply traditional analyses
         
      2. 
         Identify problems with traditional analyses
         
   4. 
      Conclusions
      
      1. 
         Discuss possible solutions to problems
         
5. 
   Implications of virtual worlds in trade secret and other forms of intellectual property, if any 
   
   1. 
      Introduction
      
   2. 
      Trade secret and other issues identified in virtual world context
      
      1. 
         In cases
         
      2. 
         In news stories
         
      3. 
         In scholarly materials
         
      4. 
         Sua sponte (by monograph editors)
         
   3. 
      Analysis
      
      1. 
         Apply traditional analyses
         
      2. 
         Identify problems with traditional analyses
         
   4. 
      Conclusions
      
      1. 
         Discuss possible solutions to problems
         
6. 
   Implications of virtual worlds in international IP law
   
   1. 
      Introduction
      
   2. 
      International IP law issues identified in virtual world context
      
      1. 
         In cases
         
      2. 
         In news stories
         
      3. 
         In scholarly materials
         
      4. 
         Sua sponte (by monograph editors)
         
   3. 
      Analysis
      
      1. 
         Apply traditional analyses
         
      2. 
         Identify problems with traditional analyses
         
   4. 
      Conclusions
      
      1. 
         Discuss possible solutions to problems
         
7. 
   Terms of use and end-user license agreements - private law in virtual worlds
   
   1. 
      Purposes/scope of TOUs and EULAs
      
   2. 
      Bearing on intellectual property issues
      
   3. 
      Usefulness of TOUs and EULAs in resolving unsettled IP issues in virtual worlds
      
      1. 
         Examples in use
         
      2. 
         Problems with ones in use
         
      3. 
         Provisions that may prove useful
         
   4. 
      Limitations on TOUs and EULAs stemming from court decisions
      
8. 
   Conclusion
   
   1. 
      Overview of analysis results
      
   2. 
      Identification of key issues
      
   3. 
      Comments about the trajectory of things?
      

CLE Sub-Committee Co-Chairs:

Catherine F. Intravia
Shipman & Goodwin LLP
One Constitution Plaza
Hartford, CT 06103-1919
Tel: (860) 251-5805
E-Mail: cintravia@goodwin.com

Stephen J. Davidson

2) Title of Program:

GAMING AND VIRTUAL WORLDS – THE NEW LEGAL FRONTIER
3) Brief outline or descriptive paragraph of the Proposed Program including topics to be covered:

Second Life, World of Warcraft, and MTV’s virtual worlds – all examples of a powerfully immersive 3D Internet experience in which participants can act, interact, and transact with one another in profoundly realistic ways that have real world consequences. With literally millions of active participants from around the globe, virtual worlds are emerging as an important and increasingly valuable venue for social and commercial activity. They are also raising questions about what laws govern conduct in this new space, who has jurisdiction over behavior there, and which courts have the power to control behavior and resolve disputes that arise in the virtual realm.

For example, how do we address the protection and infringement of intellectual property, including personal identities and right of publicity, in virtual worlds? De we really need an entirely new legal regime and “in world” courts as some commentators suggest, or are the laws, regulations and legal precedents developed over the past ten years for other Internet venues applicable to this new paradigm as well?

Like the Internet of the mid-1990s, virtual worlds have begun to attract a variety of business interests, ranging from individual entrepreneurs to multinational corporations with a shared belief in their vast commercial potential. In addition to specialized business and intellectual property advice, companies need thoughtful guidelines to assist their employees in knowing what types of behavior is permitted and expected of them when venturing into the realm of the metaverse. Designed to be of interest to in-house counsel, private lawyers, academics and government attorneys, this briefing will address:

• 
  Introduction to virtual worlds
  
• 
  Virtual world legal issues
  
• 
  Virtual world business models
  
• 
  IP Issues in computer gaming (patent clearance, music licensing, etc.)
  

Stephen Davidson, Ross Dannenberg & Catherine Intravia

5) Number of speakers: 5

6) Speaker names:

Andy Zaffron (Sony), Steve Mortinger; Stephen Davidson; Ross Dannenberg and Sean Kane

7) Program Length : 90 minutes

8) Audience: Designed to be of interest to in-house counsel, private lawyers, academics and government attorneys

9) Brief Explanation of why the program would attract attendees :

With literally millions of active participants from around the globe, gaming and virtual worlds are emerging as an important and increasingly valuable venue for social and commercial activity. They are also raising questions about what laws govern conduct in this new space, who has jurisdiction over behavior there, and which courts have the power to control behavior and resolve disputes that arise in the virtual realm.

10) Ethics credit? (no ethics)