Deletion of TheFlyOnTheWall.com

Comment: with respect to the web site, completely nonnotable, not covered by third-party sources except with respect to the misappropriation case (which makes up the entirety of the article).  With respect to the court case itself, ''Barclays Capital Inc. v. Theflyonthewall.com, Inc.'', there's at least an argument that it may become notable, but for now it is not.  It's just getting the same news coverage that any appellate case gets, and |Wikipedia is not for news reports.  If we had an article on hot news misappropriation, it would be worth a ''mention'' there, along with International News Service v. Associated Press (where "hot news" currently redirects) and National Basketball Association v. Motorola, Inc., the leading cases in this area.  But this case is not achieved any notability.  It's ''possible'', now that it has been reversed on appeal, that the appellate case may get some attention of the commentators, but it hasn't yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)