1-4. Spotlight on AOL—Common Law: AOL, LLC inadvertently disclosed the personal information of 650,000 members. These members sued, claiming violations of California law. AOL requested the court to dismiss the case, citing a forum-selection clause in its membership agreement designating Virginia courts for disputes. However, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that forum-selection clauses are unenforceable if they conflict with the strong public policy of the location where the suit is filed. Since California courts have previously found the AOL clause to be against strong public policy, the court, adhering to the principle of stare decisis, may not dismiss the suit.

In the case of the AOL privacy breach where personal information of 650,000 members was inadvertently disclosed, the members decided to take legal action against AOL, claiming that the company had violated California law. AOL, in response, attempted to have the case dismissed on the grounds that the membership agreement all users agreed to, specified that any disputes would be handled by Virginia courts—this is known as a forum-selection clause.

However, the United States Supreme Court has established that such forum-selection clauses can be considered unenforceable if they are in conflict with the strong public policies of the area in which the lawsuit was filed. This means that if the laws or judicial precedents of a particular state like California find such clauses as contrary to their fundamental principles or interests, a court could disregard the clause.

Moreover, since California courts have already found the AOL's forum-selection clause to be against such public policy, and based on the principle of stare decisis (which means to stand by things decided), the court in this instance may opt not to dismiss the lawsuit. Stare decisis is a legal doctrine that obliges courts to follow historical cases when making a ruling on a similar case. Essentially, it binds courts to follow legal precedents set by previous decisions.

Extra: Understanding the broader concepts involved in this scenario can be educational for a student:

1. Privacy Law: The situation with AOL touches on privacy law, which governs the handling, regulation, and potential misuse of personal information. This is an area of law that continually evolves with technology.

2. Forum-selection Clause: This is a part of a contract that determines in advance where any disputes related to the contract will be litigated. However, they are not always enforceable.

3. Public Policy: This refers to a principle that no law or contract should go against the overall values and interests of the public. Courts often analyze whether certain clauses in agreements go against public policy when determining their enforceability.

4. Stare Decisis: This legal principle is significant because it underpins the idea of a predictable and consistent legal system where similar cases should yield similar results unless there is a strong justification for a different ruling. It provides stability and predictability in the law.

By understanding these concepts, a student can grasp not just the specific AOL case but also the broader legal principles that might impact similar cases in the future.