Oregon Law News, September 2026 (S3:E5)
Summary
This episode reviews five recent Oregon legal developments, starting with a Court of Appeals decision sanctioning an attorney for submitting AI-hallucinated case citations. The hosts also analyze an FTC case involving a $13 million consumer scam and the federal government’s right to collect restitution through shell entities. Additionally, they discuss a Ninth Circuit ruling on whether an AI web browser violates the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, alongside cases involving attorney malpractice and intellectual property disputes.
Topics discussed
Introduction, hosts, and sponsors
Episode overview and case list
Discussion on attorney culpability scales
Ringo v. Watson: Procedural history and AI use
Ringo v. Watson: Court's view on AI diligence
Ringo v. Watson: Rejection of 'hallucination' defense
Ringo v. Watson: Sanctions and practical takeaways
FTC v. Hoskins: The $13M scam scheme
FTC v. Hoskins: Collection issues and LLC structure
FTC v. Hoskins: Federal preemption of state law
FTC v. Hoskins: Dissenting opinion analysis
Amazon v. Perplexity: Background on AI agents
Amazon v. Perplexity: How Comet interacts with Amazon
Amazon v. Perplexity: CFAA liability and attribution
Amazon v. Perplexity: Rule of lenity and hacking definition
Amazon v. Perplexity: User agent strings and future implications
VIP Products v. Jack Daniel's: The Bad Spaniels parody
VIP Products v. Jack Daniel's: Litigation history and dilution
VIP Products v. Jack Daniel's: Ninth Circuit final ruling
VIP Products v. Jack Daniel's: Potential Supreme Court appeal
Koi Design v. Marron: Attorney malpractice background
Koi Design v. Marron: Duty of care and supervision
Listen ad-free on Castria