Atricle Dump - Internet and Businesses Online

Everything You Need To Know About S.E.O. But Where Afraid To Believe
Maybe you own your own business, or perhaps you're a critical cog in the corporate machinery responsible for marketing your company, brand, product or service. If that describes you, here's eighteen things you need to know about Web-marketing but were afraid to believe.1. Time To Be Heard.Your mother told you 'children should be seen and not heard,' but you're not a kid anymore. So why are you listening to all those guys telling you not to use audio on your website. If you want to deliver a lot of content that people will remember, try letting your website do the talking.2. There's Nothing Like the Real Thing.In a world of virtual everything there's nothing like the real thing. The sound and image of real people delivering your marketing message makes it a believable, memorable presentation.3. Unlock the Conventional Wisdom Straightjacket.Driving traffic to your site is great, if those visitors stay long enough to find out why they should be doing business with you. If your website traffic is leaving as fast as it's arriving, maybe search engine optimization isn't the answer you've been looking for.4. Linking Your Way To Obscurity.You know the reciprocal linking strategy everyone is talking about as a way to generate leads? Did you ever consider that each link to another website is an invitation to leave your site? Is that really what you want - to invite people to leave? I think not!5. Your Company's Voice Is It's Personality.Give your company a professional voice, with a finely crafted script delivered by a professional voice-over announcer that presents a compelling, memorable marketing message and a unique brand personality. Or do it yourself and sound like an amateur. The choice is yours.6. Addressing Ass-backwards Priorities.If your website design firm is twisting your marketing message out of shape to conform to the te

espond to allegations of trademark infringement and to ensure that clients resolve those claims. Among other things, a savvy web host will make sure that its client agreement obligates the client to resolve those claims and indemnify the web host for any liability it might have for the client's failure to do so.''

Web.com's representative concluded, commenting on the issue of publication liability, stating that ''Another type of potential content problem for web hosts involves liability for defamation. Defamation is a cause of action (or potential lawsuit) that arises when a party publishes a false statement, knowing that it is false, and that publication injures another person. For example, if a client posted on its website the statement: "Company X's products cause cancer" and if the client knew that statement were false, the client could be liable for defamation to Company X. If the client honestly believed the statement to be true, however, the client would generally not be liable. Defamation liability would make the web hosting industry impossible if it weren't for the Communications Decency Act passed by Congress in the late 1990s. Under the Communications Decency Act (or "CDA"), web hosts and other "Internet service providers" are not liable for the publications (or statements) of their clients so long as they are not contributors to those statements.''

IBM v. Amazon.com

Amazon.com is involved in patent litigation with IBM, in two separate lawsuits. Five patents are alleged to have been violated, as far as the 1980s, all regarding cataloging and data referencing, including alteration of online content. It has been reported in press releases issued by IBM, that ongoing negotiations since 2002 have failed, that hundreds of other companies have licensed the same patents, and that IBM has attempted to negotiate licensing deals with Amazon. Since Amazon.com is largely based upon web technologies and the ability to quickly process transactions over the Internet, it would seem that if it were a mere matter

Advertising Specialty Vendors
Advertising specialty vendors are the ones that sell to resellers who in turn sell to their clients. An advertising specialty vendor can be a very cheap option for someone looking for advertising specialty products.Each of these vendors has a catalog that details each and every item with illustrations and pricing. Most of them generally just do the printing work for resellers, who buy the various goods for advertising.There are many advertising specialty vendors all over the country, and in each state. A quick search on the local directories or the Internet will generate information about them. One good source of authentic vendors is the directory that is published by the ASI (Advertising Specialty Institute), which does the task of maintaining a list of vendors, state-wise, and assigns memberships to vendors.The equipment required for sophisticated specialty printing is usually expensive and not all vendors can afford it. The smaller vendors often subcontract their orders to specialized printing service providers who have the equipment and expertise. Often, it might be economical to approach the large printing service providers directly if your order quantity is large.Like other things, a back check of the vendor will go a long way. A vendor who has a good track record and a repository of work done for various resellers and other clients is a good one to work with. Not only will he provide you professional service, but the experience is bound to be hassle free, with assured and on-time delivery.To find out more about vendors, you can check out their websites. Most such websites are bound to have an "About us" section, which will give you the details regarding what the company does, including their turn-around time. A few of them will also have important testimonials from clients, which might give you an idea of how they function.

With Internet-based intellectual property lawsuits on the rise, the question has become: how will Internet law keep up with the freedom of speech issues - and, to what degree will these laws affect the web hosting industry as a whole? The ramifications of some recent Internet litigation, and its impact on the web hosting industry are presented and examined below.

Patent Litigation

Recently, a Canadian firm has claimed infringement upon a patent it owns, with regard to Resource Description Framework (RDF), a software based upon Extensible Markup Language (XML). Using this technology, programmers can write software to access web resources, such as web page content, music files and digital photos. Vancouver-based UFIL Unified Data Technologies, holds U.S. patent 5,684,985, a '''method and apparatus utilizing bond identifiers executed upon accessing of an endo-dynamic information node,'' awarded in November 1997. According to the Patent Enforcement and Royalties Ltd. (PEARL)'s web site, as many as 45 companies may be infringing upon the patents. It is believed that the patent may also infringe on the RDF Site Summary standard (web content that's written in something other than HTML). For example, RSS (originally developed by Netscape Communications, now owned by AOL Time Warner), allows web sites to exchange information and content.

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which evaluates and recommends standards for web technologies, has endorsed the RDF standard. PEARL has been engaged to work with UFIL, to enforce the claims, since 1999. According to information released by the W3C, Daniel Weitzner, Technology and Society Domain Leader, indicated that the Consortium had not been approached directly regarding the patent issue. Mr. Weitzner stated, ''We consider it to be quite important that fundamental technology specifications such as RDF should be able to be implemented on a royalty-free basis. If anything comes to our attention that suggests that's not possible, we'll pay attention to legitimate property rights out there, but at the same time, RDF was developed in the open by a very broad range of the web community.''

Freedom of Speech Issues

An amicus brief was recently filed by Yahoo!, Inc., in its lawsuit against LaLigue contre le Racisme et l' Antisemitisme, Case No. 01-17424 (9th Cir.). Later this year, a federal appellate court will decide whether or not French anti-discrimination law can restrict freedom of speech on U.S.-based web sites that are accessible in France.

In 2000, a Paris court ruled that the Yahoo! web site violated French law, due to the fact that its users offered certain Nazi artifacts for sale. In order to force compliance with the order, French plaintiffs must seek enforcement from a U.S. court. In response, Yahoo! sought a declaratory ruling and a federal district court held that enforcing the French order would violate the First Amendment. The matter is now on appeal. The Yahoo! case presents the question of whether the Internet should be governed by myriad local censorship laws from around the world. U.S. courts have held uniformly that the Internet should receive the highest degree of First Amendment protection.

Web.com's Patent and Intellectual Property with Web Hosting Company, Hostopia

In July, 2006, Atlanta-based web hosting, managed email, ecommerce, and online business applications giant, Web.com, entered into a non-exclusive license agreement with web hosting firm, Hostopia.com Inc., granting Hostopia the rights to two of Web.com's patents over five years, on a non-transferable basis. Web.com's portfolio of 19 registered, and numerous pending, U.S. patents relates to several core technologies that are vital to the web hosting industry.

The licensed patents broadly cover methods for website building and web hosting control panels. According to the agreement, Hostopia will pay Web.com a royalty equal to 10% of their gross U.S. retail revenues for five years. In addition, the companies have entered a cross-license agreement in which Web.com was granted rights to thousands of HTML and FLASH website templates and a license to additional intellectual property in the future at no additional cost. The companies have also agreed to a mutual covenant not to sue for patent infringement.

Spokespersons for Web.com had this to say, concerning the licensing agreement with Hostopia:

''Web.com has a portfolio of 19 registered patents with several additional pending patents. Web.com's patents touch on a number of key technologies that are vital to the web hosting and Software-as-a-Services industries. Web.com's first patent license transaction was a milestone for the Company as it validated Web.com's belief in the value of its patents. Hostopia paid Web.com an amount that was roughly equal to 10% of Hostopia's U.S. retail revenues over five years. Web.com intends to use its patent rights as a means of extending its brand and its technology so as to create value for its shareholders and to protect its innovations.''

With regard to the legalities of Internet content, Web.com's representative stated: ''Copyright Website owners and other authors (like bloggers, for example) own the content they create under general principles of copyright law. Copyright law grants the author of any "work" the exclusive right to copy and reproduce that work. Copyright law extends not only to the written word, but also to music, dramatic works (like plays and moves), art, sculpture any other forms of creative expression that are fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Conflicts easily arise on the web because web technology makes it so easy for web users to copy and download content, including music, video, pictures and text. While the author of an article may not object to a web user who links to a copy written article, the author will object if someone copies his article and re-publishes it as if it were a new article. Generally, web hosts are not responsible if one of their clients violates a copyright holder's rights by illegally copying content onto the client's website. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act creates a "safe harbor" from liability for web hosts that follow a specific process in responding to notices from copyright holders alleging copyright infringement from content on a client's website. Among other requirements, the web host must suspend a client's website after the host receives a formal notice that meets the statutory requirement. The host may resurrect the client's site, however, if the client responds with a sworn statement denying any infringement so long as the client's denial also satisfies the statute. So long as the host follows the specific requirements of the statute, the host is not liable even if a court ultimately determines that its client was violating another party's copyright.''

As to content - trademark conflicts, Web.com's spokesperson went on to reiterate: ''Involvement trademark disputes are more difficult for hosts to manage, however. Unlike copyright law -- which protects the author of an original work -- trademark law protects the brand name of a seller of goods or services. A potential copyright infringement is often easy to see if the infringing site blatantly copies words or images that are protected by copyright. Trademark infringement is trickier to spot, however, as a trademark right in most cases will only extend to the "scope of use" covered by the holder's goods or services. For example if Company A sells "BrandName" widgets, it may have trademark rights to "BrandName". But, Company A's rights, in most cases, will not prevent Company B from using BrandName to sell goods or services that are different from those sold by Company A. The challenge for web hosts arises when a client website advertises BrandName goods or services but a third party claims trademark rights to "BrandName". How can the host know if the third party's rights are superior? How can the host tell if the client's products are within the third party's "scope of use."

To avoid liability for participating in a client's possible trademark infringement, savvy web hosts will develop processes to follow to respond to allegations of trademark infringement and to ensure that clients resolve those claims. Among other things, a savvy web host will make sure that its client agreement obligates the client to resolve those claims and indemnify the web host for any liability it might have for the client's failure to do so.''

IBM v. Amazon.com

Affiliate Revenue Seeking and Keeping Peace in the Fam Damily
When dealing with affiliate companies for revenue on your websites it makes sense to keep an eye on what they are peddling and very carefully consider the types of revenue you use. Some websites are choosing to use highlighted word hyperlinks to affiliates. Others decry this type of advertising because it looks cheesy. Nevertheless if it indeed makes money then folks will try it. Those that have are split, some say it derives a lot of revenue others say it is pure evil; interesting debates on this topic indeed.From only a personal perspective these highlighted words in the regular text of a website somewhat scare me as user. Why? Well, because I have no idea where the link is going to and it could be going to a website that automatically loads on Spyware or Adware to your computer. So when I see these, I will scan the article if interesting and back out of the website all together or even close the browser and start over.Many very well known Websites in the "public science realm" do this and some of those sites I no longer visit. It would seem if it tends to detract readership then it also will lessen a website's use and therefore over all hurt the site, even though occasionally someone will click on the highlighted words link. Originally some websites used this to go to a definition of a word or one could click on the word to go to a listing of all the articles on the subject, but now most go to affiliate websites for Ads, that is unfortunate.While on Wikipedia.com those highlighted words go to more depth in the subject of that word. So, it can be confusing and a way of trickery of the new users understanding. I find that troubling. This is an interesting subject however. And something perhaps you need to think on when considering possibilities for affiliate revenues. Consider this in 2006.

t the same time, RDF was developed in the open by a very broad range of the web community.''

Freedom of Speech Issues

Web.com's Patent and Intellectual Property with Web Hosting Company, Hostopia

IBM v. Amazon.com

What is a Landing Page?
Before you begin to build a flourishing list or create a powerful sales page, you will want to start with a thorough introduction to landing pages. In contrast to distracted home pages, landing pages focus specifically on capturing leads for your ezine or making sales for a specific product – and make no attempt to give visitors a different option.Another word which is used for a landing page for the specific function of capturing leads is a “squeeze page.” A squeeze page is a page designed to get names and email addresses. However, a squeeze page is usually a smaller type of landing page, which usually has an opt-in form in sight when the page loads.So what is important to learn in an introduction to landing pages? First, it is important to recognize that all successful marketers use these. If you plan to sell a product over the Internet, you will want to use one rather than relying on sidebar opt-in forms and unclear pages that do not express a single point and a single call to action.Another important thing you will want to take away from this introduction to landing pages is that every landing page contains the same parts and is focused on one goal which is getting the visitor to become a subscriber or a buyer.These parts are as follows: an opt-in form, a brief or lengthy introduction, a picture of the list/product owner, the signature of the list owner, and a call to action.Deciding which model will work best for you can simply only be done through testing. While many boast a conversion and attribute it to the shortness of their introduction (many will be one short paragraph), others will boast a high conversion rate because they use long, detailed, and compelling copy.If there is anything you absolutely must take away from an introduction to landing pages, it is that you cannot create a landing page or squeeze page that isn't focused.

ave entered a cross-license agreement in which Web.com was granted rights to thousands of HTML and FLASH website templates and a license to additional intellectual property in the future at no additional cost. The companies have also agreed to a mutual covenant not to sue for patent infringement.

Spokespersons for Web.com had this to say, concerning the licensing agreement with Hostopia:

''Web.com has a portfolio of 19 registered patents with several additional pending patents. Web.com's patents touch on a number of key technologies that are vital to the web hosting and Software-as-a-Services industries. Web.com's first patent license transaction was a milestone for the Company as it validated Web.com's belief in the value of its patents. Hostopia paid Web.com an amount that was roughly equal to 10% of Hostopia's U.S. retail revenues over five years. Web.com intends to use its patent rights as a means of extending its brand and its technology so as to create value for its shareholders and to protect its innovations.''

With regard to the legalities of Internet content, Web.com's representative stated: ''Copyright Website owners and other authors (like bloggers, for example) own the content they create under general principles of copyright law. Copyright law grants the author of any "work" the exclusive right to copy and reproduce that work. Copyright law extends not only to the written word, but also to music, dramatic works (like plays and moves), art, sculpture any other forms of creative expression that are fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Conflicts easily arise on the web because web technology makes it so easy for web users to copy and download content, including music, video, pictures and text. While the author of an article may not object to a web user who links to a copy written article, the author will object if someone copies his article and re-publishes it as if it were a new article. Generally, web hosts are not responsible if one of their clients violates a copyright holder's rights by illegally copying content onto the client's website. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act creates a "safe harbor" from liability for web hosts that follow a specific process in responding to notices from copyright holders alleging copyright infringement from content on a client's website. Among other requirements, the web host must suspend a client's website after the host receives a formal notice that meets the statutory requirement. The host may resurrect the client's site, however, if the client responds with a sworn statement denying any infringement so long as the client's denial also satisfies the statute. So long as the host follows the specific requirements of the statute, the host is not liable even if a court ultimately determines that its client was violating another party's copyright.''

As to content - trademark conflicts, Web.com's spokesperson went on to reiterate: ''Involvement trademark disputes are more difficult for hosts to manage, however. Unlike copyright law -- which protects the author of an original work -- trademark law protects the brand name of a seller of goods or services. A potential copyright infringement is often easy to see if the infringing site blatantly copies words or images that are protected by copyright. Trademark infringement is trickier to spot, however, as a trademark right in most cases will only extend to the "scope of use" covered by the holder's goods or services. For example if Company A sells "BrandName" widgets, it may have trademark rights to "BrandName". But, Company A's rights, in most cases, will not prevent Company B from using BrandName to sell goods or services that are different from those sold by Company A. The challenge for web hosts arises when a client website advertises BrandName goods or services but a third party claims trademark rights to "BrandName". How can the host know if the third party's rights are superior? How can the host tell if the client's products are within the third party's "scope of use."

IBM v. Amazon.com

... in Pursuing the American Dream
This morning I woke up at 4:30 in the morning, as usual, poured myself a cup of coffee, as usual, and thought about what my son said to me yesterday evening. You see, he's 2 1/2 years old and talking quite well, for his age. When I came home from working all day I was greeted with the always joyous "daddy's home, daddy's home" but today, this greeting was followed by "daddy no you go to work!". It's amazing what a 2 year old can know and understand.So, as I sat and thought, several things occurred to me. #1, I hate having to go to work all day, #2 my son hates me going to work and #3 at least 1/3 of my life has been dedicated to earning money. None of this was sitting very well with me. The last realization really repulsed me! What good is a life if you spend it in an office building or beat yourself up building that office building, as in my case.All of my life I was told that in order to achieve the American dream, I have to go to work, put in my time and one day I would be set. It's what my dad was led to understand and, he's still working at 62! He had immigrated from Poland in 1977 and he worked in a factory for the next 25 years, till the last one he worked for closed up. Now he drives limo's. . . at 62, he still has to work. What confused me about this situation is that he did put in his time, 50-60 hrs at a time. Just didn't make sense.Yet there are those people who do make it. I've met many of the ones who will make it. Typically, both parents work while their 2.1 kids miss them. It'll never be said but, there is a cause for kid rebellion. I believe it is because the parents do not hear their kids nor do they meet their kid's needs. The parents are too busy, working. I believe that when kids are young, they really do miss their parents, when we go to work. It is only with ongoing justification that kids grudgingly stop needing us. I believe that kind of separation is bad for both the kid's and the parents.I did s

nt's website. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act creates a "safe harbor" from liability for web hosts that follow a specific process in responding to notices from copyright holders alleging copyright infringement from content on a client's website. Among other requirements, the web host must suspend a client's website after the host receives a formal notice that meets the statutory requirement. The host may resurrect the client's site, however, if the client responds with a sworn statement denying any infringement so long as the client's denial also satisfies the statute. So long as the host follows the specific requirements of the statute, the host is not liable even if a court ultimately determines that its client was violating another party's copyright.''

As to content - trademark conflicts, Web.com's spokesperson went on to reiterate: ''Involvement trademark disputes are more difficult for hosts to manage, however. Unlike copyright law -- which protects the author of an original work -- trademark law protects the brand name of a seller of goods or services. A potential copyright infringement is often easy to see if the infringing site blatantly copies words or images that are protected by copyright. Trademark infringement is trickier to spot, however, as a trademark right in most cases will only extend to the "scope of use" covered by the holder's goods or services. For example if Company A sells "BrandName" widgets, it may have trademark rights to "BrandName". But, Company A's rights, in most cases, will not prevent Company B from using BrandName to sell goods or services that are different from those sold by Company A. The challenge for web hosts arises when a client website advertises BrandName goods or services but a third party claims trademark rights to "BrandName". How can the host know if the third party's rights are superior? How can the host tell if the client's products are within the third party's "scope of use."

IBM v. Amazon.com

I Hate My Voice!
At least once a week one of my trainees tells me “I hate my voice.” This is usually followed by a solemn declaration that somehow all recording voices distort his or her voice in an unflattering matter.What’s going on here?Perhaps you have noticed when you hear your own voice on a voicemail or on a home video recording that it doesn’t sound like you at all. Actually, it does sound like you, just not the you that you are used to listening to.All of us hear our own voice in a distorted manner, only it’s not because we have big or small egos. We hear a distorted voice because we are hearing the sound distorted from the bones in our head. We hear our voices on the inside and the outside. The structure of our skulls messes with our own sound and muffles it in a way that it doesn’t do for someone simply hearing us through their ears from across the room (that’s not exactly using scientific lingo, but that is the science behind the theory)Often during my trainings when I play back a video recording of one of my students, he or she reacts with “that’s not how I really sound.” But he or she notices that when their colleagues are videotaped, the sound they hear when the recording is played back is exactly the same as when the colleague was giving the speech live. The student realizes that there is noting wrong with the recording device.When people tell me they hate their voice, they aren’t lying. But the real problem for most people is that they are just unfamiliar with their voice and that when they hear their voices for the first time the way other people do, the difference in perception is so great that it is shocking.It is this disconnect that they don’t like, not the actual quality of their voices that they abhor.Very few people have voices so mellifluous that they can make a million dollars a year doing voiceovers for TV commercials. The good news is that you don’t have to have a voice like that to be an

IBM v. Amazon.com

Net Neutrality

One of the most important freedom of speech aspect of the Internet, is that no one party owns or controls it. However, as telephone and digital companies continue to grow through mergers and acquisitions, Internet and related laws, and the concepts and issues that govern it, have come to the forefront, as a new and legitimate concern for all netizens.

Issues such as network (''net'') neutrality, have become contested areas of law in the United States. Internet giants, such as Google, eBay, and Amazon, fear that network owners will create a biased, two-tier Internet system, unfairly placing telco services first, in addition to the concern that network owners may seek to entirely censor or block content at their own discretion, creating partiality. The terms of the debate place neutralists (such as the Internet's largest content providers), against free-marketeers (including Telcos) who argue against such regulation, deeming it to be counter-productive and even unconstitutional.

The fact remains, that exercising the rights associated with free speech and the Internet, places a high premium on the judgment and responsibility of those who use the it, both in the information they acquire and in the information they disseminate. In order for web hosting companies to survive, it is essential that consumers realize and understand, that when they obtain information through the Internet, web hosting companies cannot monitor, verify, warrant, or vouch for the accuracy and quality of the information that is available.

Therefore, some material posted to the Internet may be subject to patent and/or copyright infringement, deemed inappropriate for certain ages, or otherwise offensive. Because web hosting companies are not in a position to monitor or censor the Internet, they cannot accept any responsibility for the consequences that may result from potentially infringing, inaccurate, offensive, inappropriate, or otherwise illegal Internet communications.

While each user is expected to exercise common sense and good judgment in connection with the services it utilizes on the Internet, web hosting companies do have terms of service rules in place, to govern such things as spamming, and maintaining open SMTP relays. It is ultimately up to the users to exercise the best judgment possible, in relying on information obtained from the Internet. When users and/or consumers disseminate information through the Internet, they also must keep in mind that web hosting companies do not review, edit, censor, or take responsibility for any information its users, clients or subscribers may create. The very same liability as other authors for copyright infringement, defamation, and other harmful speech, apply to users on the Internet.

The outcome of recent Internet patent litigation will most certainly begin to set precedents

In many of the cases, the judge and/or jury is asked to make determinations as to deep issues of technological equivalence as to fast-advancing technology at a particular point in time, which can greatly affect how we continue to do business on the Internet, and the future laws that may result of such litigation.

Many patents, have implications far beyond the alleged infringement specified. A patent found valid by a jury acquires more than the normal status of ''presumption of validity,'' in that it may be used against other parties. All future parties, whether or not they are a party to the lawsuit, are affected. Therefore, patent validity lawsuits have the power to impact much more than just the two parties involved, unlike other business litigation.

Given the fact that Internet law, as a whole, is still largely in unchartered territory, the question of what positive role government can play in a regulatory regime, remains to be seen. Coupled with the fear that new technology laws may allow governments or big business to oppress society, giving them the wherewithal to block freedom of speech rights, such as viewing published materials and other forms of censorship, the spectrum of views on Internet regulation can appear to be endless. The only thing we know for certain, is that the Internet is here to stay. As such, the core issues surrounding the essence and vastness of the Internet, such as of freedom of speech, net neutrality, patent and content infringement, will continue to be at the forefront. How Congress rules on the bills addressing net neutrality, the Communications, Consumer's Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act in the Senate, and the Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act in the House, will affect the way the public continues to utilize the Internet and ultimately, may determine the success or failure of online businesses and web hosting companies.

HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
<a href="http://www.articledump.net/article/88049/articledump-Web-Hosting-and-Emerging-Internet-Law.html">Web Hosting and Emerging Internet Law</a>

BB link (for phorums):
[url=http://www.articledump.net/article/88049/articledump-Web-Hosting-and-Emerging-Internet-Law.html]Web Hosting and Emerging Internet Law[/url]

Fund Raising is not an easy task. Lots of time and effort must be put in and the returns are often not predictable. I can help you out by giving you some GREAT, proven ideas to raise funds for your event.

Internet marketing is such an incredible field to be in right now, and there is incredible growth in internet marketing right now. But one of the things that is important, is that you choose and run with a legitimate internet marketing strategy. You see, there are so many internet strategies online right now that...

Tags

Links

Atricle Dump - Web Hosting and Emerging Internet Law

Related Articles: