Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Earnings Claims and the Amended FTC Disclosure Rule: Lamenting a Lost Opportunity
Let's not be overly critical of the Amended FTC Disclosure Rule, which was promulgated in January 2007 after being 10 years in the development stage. As Stephen Toporoff of the Federal Trade Commission ('FTC') has convinced me in recent discussions, amending a federal regulation is an arduous task. In this instance, it required an extensive amount of background research on the history of the original Disclosure Rule, several hearings, careful review of the hundreds of comments, careful examination of the UFOC Guidelines and their origins and assumptions, comparing them with the original Disclosure Rule's format, and testing in many cases the care and thought that went behind the original language of the UFOC Guidelines. The Amended Disclosure Rule was no shot from the hip. In light of this background information, and considering simply the politics of federal agencies, it is not very surprising that it took a decade for the FTC to issue the Amended Disclosure Rule.
But given the existence of the UFOC Guidelines as a pre-existing roadmap for disclosure and the almost 30-year track record of franchise disclosure and sales regulation, the substantive changes made to the Amended Disclosure Rule, as they affect the type and quality of disclosure given to franchise prospects, were, overall, not earth-shattering. The disclosure documents we will be seeing later this year will in most respects be identical to what we have seen since the UFOC Guidelines were last amended in 1993. There are a couple of notable exceptions, such as the expanded litigation disclosures required under Item 3, and the disclosure of information about franchisee associations, which will appear in Item 20. In my mind, the most notable accomplishments of the Amended Disclosure Rule will be: 1) the clarification that it is generally not applicable to international transactions; and 2) bringing the mechanics of the disclosure process into the 21st century. Neither of these relates to the substantive disclosure given to franchisees.
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.
Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
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.
Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.
When Is a Repair Structural or Nonstructural Under a Commercial Lease?
A common question that commercial landlords and tenants face is which of them is responsible for a repair to the subject premises. These disputes often center on whether the repair is "structural" or "nonstructural."