Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A Blow to Private Whistleblowers
In a substantial win for businesses, the U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a decision imposing strict requirements for lawsuits by private whistleblowers. Under the federal False Claims Act, once allegations of fraud are publicly disclosed, a relator (as citizen-plaintiffs are called) may bring suit on the government's behalf only if the relator is an 'original source.' In Rockwell International Corp. v. United States, 549 U.S. __, 2007 WL 895257, the Court rejected the notion that a relator need only have knowledge of background facts about alleged fraud, even if those facts preceded the fraud. Instead, the Court held that a relator must have direct and independent knowledge of the specific misconduct for which liability is actually imposed.
The Ruling Was Significant
The strong, divergent public reactions to the Court's decision in Rockwell confirm that it is a landmark ruling. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for example, immediately lauded the ruling as 'an important victory for every government contractor in the country because it prevents plaintiffs who are not true whistleblowers from digging into a company's coffers.' By contrast, the National Whistleblower Center, Washington, DC-based organization dedicated to helping whistleblowers, called it 'a disaster for the American public' that 'cut the legs off of America's most effective anti-fraud law.'
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.