Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Given the continued proliferation of law-related Weblogs, including blogs written by law professors and attorneys with expertise in various substantive areas of the law, one frequently finds on the Internet a robust and insightful discussion of cases pending before the courts for resolution. What should judges do if, while visiting the legal blogosphere, they encounter discussions about how pending cases ought to be decided?
Suppose a law professor with expertise in search and seizure of electronic data has a thoughtful post about a pending Fourth Amendment challenge to the search of a computer's hard drive. Or a law professor with expertise in constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech may have an insightful post concerning a defa-mation case in which the party being sued has asserted a defense under the First Amendment.
With increasing regularity, the legal blogosphere (legal blogs are often referred to as 'blawgs') generates these types of discussions of noteworthy pending cases, and it is not unusual for those discussions to include thoughtful recommendations about how a court should rule based on existing law and policy considerations. In such instances, the Internet can be regarded as a vast amicus brief through which legal experts who are otherwise unconnected to pending court cases may potentially influence their outcomes.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?