Last week, the District Court in Montana, ruled (here) in the case of in Mortensen v. Bresnan Communication, concerning a class action suit against Bresnan for inserting personalized ads, using equipment from the late NebuAd. See analysis of the ruling by Jonathan Klinger - "NebuAd, The Public Interest and Enforceable Agreements" - here and Eric Goldman (picture) - "Deep Packet Inspection (NebuAd) Litigation: Court Dismisses ECPA Claim but CFAA Claim Continues" - here.
To summarize (from Jonathan's post): "..the ISP raised a claim that its users are subject to an agreement that allowed it to inspect their traffic, and therefore the Electronic Communication Privacy Act claim (ECPA) should be denied. The court accepted most of the ISP’s claims and ruled that apart from the question of whether injecting the cookie was consensual, the remainder of the lawsuit should be denied".
Behavioral advertizing gets some attention recently, and we may experience a comeback, assuming that the business model will still show an opportunity even if done on an "opt-in" basis.
See also:
- [WSJ] Carrier Ad-Insertion Returns! - here
- Sandvine Spins-off Simplicita as Xerocole - here
- Japan - ISPs May Use DPI for Behavioral Advertising - here
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment