Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
What Lies Ahead for 2006
It doesn't take great foresight or a crystal ball to recognize that law firms will face some serious challenges in 2006. Coming events have already cast their shadows. Some of the challenges have existed for several years. Others are new. What they add up to are two basic questions most law firms must answer: “Do we recognize the challenges facing us?” and “How are we going to address them?” This article discusses several of these challenges and, where possible, suggests some alternatives for meeting them.
The issue of ethics is now one of the most troubling and confusing challenges. Many states continue to issue opinions that indicate the use of technology for client development is governed by ethics rules. Some of these states are adopting more relaxed rules regarding client development, largely as a result of the ABA's Ethics 2000 initiative. At the same time, however, other states ' including Texas, South Carolina and Missouri ' have adopted changes in their rules that impose greater restrictions, particularly for personal injury lawyers. And, as of this writing, none of these diverse (dare we say “contradictory”?) rules have addressed the subject of blogs that, of course, are spreading like a prairie fire.
State ethics rules must take priority but these create even more challenges for firms that have multi-state locations. Must they follow the rules of the state in which their “headquarters office” is located or must they follow different rules in different states? Or can they “shop around” and decide to follow firm wide the more relaxed rules in one of the states in which they have offices? The answer to that question is probably “no” but who knows for sure?
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.