Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b>Media & Communications Corner:</b> Becoming the TV Star You Always Wanted to Be
The glamour and cache of being interviewed on CNN or CNBC as a national legal source is quite appealing to many attorneys. Broadcast journalism reaches a broad audience and for many, is seen as more exciting than print. And when other attorneys (deemed not as accomplished as themselves) appear on TV, they often wonder: How can I get there too? The answer is: preparation and some honest reflection.
Picking A Star
First, law firms, like corporations, need to decide who they want representing them in the public eye. Firm management needs to choose attorneys that will appropriately represent the rest of the firm and those attorneys need to be clear leaders in their practice area. Once those attorneys are identified, the next issue that needs to be addressed requires the most honesty. Firms need to evaluate which attorneys are best suited for broadcast. This is not a beauty contest; it is a question of who is able to present themselves well, be poised, confident, and appear unflappable. Many people who can handle a print interview well get nervous when the camera and lights turn on. Some of them will grow accustomed to it with practice; others may never be comfortable. This is something that needs to be evaluated before an attorney is thrown to the studio. Once firms have established which attorneys are best suited for broadcast, the makeover can begin. There are three main areas to address: actual physical appearance; content; and how the message is delivered.
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.