Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Imagine you want to build a new house and have interviewed three contractors to obtain bids for the job. One bid $100,000, another bid $200,000, and the third bid $500,000. How would you decide between them? The answer is you couldn't make an apples-to-apples comparison unless the contractors were basing their bids on a single set of architectural plans specifying size, materials and other construction details.
Yet, when many law firms decide to build a new Web site, they solicit bids from vendors without first developing specifications detailing the desired features and functionality for the site. As a result, such firms receive disparate bids without an adequate basis for comparison. And in many such cases, a firm ends up selecting one of the lower bidders only to experience frustration when disputes arise with the selected vendor over increased costs and delays as the scope of work changes over the course of the project.
What law firms embarking on a Web site development project need to understand is that building a new Web site is similar to building a new house. Just as the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, the quality of the kitchen countertops, and the absence or presence of an in-ground swimming pool, need to be determined upfront to accurately estimate the cost of construction, so too the number of sections on the Web site (e.g., attorney bios, practice area descriptions, publications), and the nature and complexity of the site's navigation, design and database need to be specified upfront to obtain accurate bids.
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?