Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Rule Changes for Electronic Discovery?
Technology has not only changed the way we live, but also the manner in which companies and their employees conduct business in the modern world. Today, companies both large and small utilize computer technology in every facet of their business. No longer just desktop tools, computers are now in our pockets or purses in the form of phones, palm pilots and blackberries. Simply put, computers are the dominant tool in today's business world.
Consider for a moment the daily activities at a typical corporation: E-mails are sent and received, files are generated, and information of all forms is stored on CD ROMs, hard drives, back-up tapes and the like ' all with the click of a mouse. Today's world is paperless, and electronic document preparation and storage is fast, easy, and virtually unlimited. Accordingly, companies need to be aware that all electronically stored information is likely to be discovered in future litigation. As electronic records can be virtually permanent, the legal world has set its sights on discovering every written word and every record created. Because employees view e-mail less formally than typed letters, personal opinion ' not always accurate and often provocative ' invariably finds its way into e-mail communications. This reality is particularly true of communications between co-workers. Electronically stored information may have significant consequences for a company involved in litigation, and companies should therefore have reasonable policies for the creation, handling, storage and destruction of their electronic documents and communications.
Target: E-mail
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.