Legal Opinion
Habush v. Cannon
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided February 21, 2013No. 2011AP1769PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLundsten, P.J.
¶ 1. This appeal concerns the right of privacy, as codified in Wis. Stat. § 995.50(2)(b),1 *712and the practice of using a person's name as a "keyword" search term in an Internet search engine. Here, the law firm Cannon & Dunphy bid on the search terms "Habush" and "Rottier" through Google, Yahoo!, and Bing search engines. Cannon & Dunphy, by successfully bidding on the names Habush and Rottier, assured that, when a person entered either name as a search term into one of these search engines, a link to Cannon & Dunphy's website would appear as a "sponsored link" above the "organic" link to the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Rescuecom Corp. v. Google Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
- Vanna White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., a New York Corporation, and David Deutsch Associates, Inc., a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Lothar Motschenbacher v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, a Corporation, and William Esty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
- Flores v. Mosler Safe Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Spahn v. Julian Messner, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1966
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re Opinion No. 735 of the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional EthicsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2025
- Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America v. Cannon & Dunphy, S.C.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2014