eBay 2012 Annual Report Download - page 57

August 2009 in the Seoul District Court, and trial for a group of 23 other suits began in September 2009 in the Seoul District Court. There is
some precedent in Korea for a court to grant “consolation money” for data breaches without a specific finding of harm from the breach. Such
precedents have involved payments of up to approximately $200 per user. In January 2010, one bench of the Seoul District Court ruled that IAC
had met its obligations with respect to defending the site from intrusion and, accordingly, had no liability for the breach. This ruling has been
appealed by approximately 34,000 plaintiffs to the Seoul High Court. In September 2012, a bench of the Seoul High Court announced its
decision upholding the Seoul District Court's 2010 decision for three cases involving 55 plaintiffs. The remaining cases before the Seoul High
Court are currently being heard de novo, and a decision is expected in 2013. In January 2013, the Seoul Western District Court ruled in favor of
IAC with respect to two cases filed by 2,291 plaintiffs following the January 2010 ruling.
General Matters
Other third parties have from time to time claimed, and others may claim in the future, that we have infringed their intellectual property
rights. We are subject to patent disputes, and expect that we will increasingly be subject to additional patent infringement claims involving
various aspects of our Marketplaces, Payments and GSI businesses as our services continue to expand in scope and complexity. Such claims may
be brought directly against our companies and/or against our customers (who may be entitled to contractual indemnification under their contracts
with us), and we are subject to increased exposure to such claims as a result of our recent acquisitions, particularly in cases where we are
entering into new businesses in connection with such acquisitions. We have in the past been forced to litigate such claims. We may also become
more vulnerable to third-party claims as laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Lanham Act and the Communications Decency
Act are interpreted by the courts, and as we expand the range and geographical scope of our services and become subject to laws in jurisdictions
where the underlying laws with respect to the potential liability of online intermediaries like ourselves are either unclear or less favorable. We
believe that additional lawsuits alleging that we have violated patent, copyright or trademark laws will be filed against us. Intellectual property
claims, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming and costly to defend and resolve, could require expensive changes in our methods of
doing business, or could require us to enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable terms.
From time to time, we are involved in other disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business, including suits by
our users (individually or as class actions) alleging, among other things, improper disclosure of our prices, rules or policies, that our prices, rules,
policies or customer/user agreements violate applicable law, or that we have not acted in conformity with such prices, rules, policies or
agreements. The number and significance of these disputes and inquiries are increasing as our company has grown larger, our businesses have
expanded in scope (both in terms of the range of products and services that we offer and our geographical operations) and our products and
services have increased in complexity. Any claims or regulatory actions against us, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result
in costly litigation, damage awards (including statutory damages for certain causes of action in certain jurisdictions), injunctive relief or
increased costs of doing business through adverse judgment or settlement, require us to change our business practices in expensive ways, require
significant amounts of management time, result in the diversion of significant operational resources or otherwise harm our business.
ITEM 4: MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable
54