Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Many companies that have had disputes with developers have been surprised to discover that the agreements signed, often without input from legal, failed to hold developers to measurable standards, give the company ongoing interest in deliverables, or provide meaningful remedies to problems that arise.
Company legal counsel and information technology (IT) professionals can take steps to protect the company. Before a vendor is even selected, the company should develop needs and privacy impact assessments to guide procurement in a manner that is consistent with business goals and its legal compliance obligations. These may include accessibility alternatives for the disabled, notice and choice for sharing certain app or device data with third parties, including for interest-based advertising, and other requirements. A request for proposal (RFP) process based on the assessments can help in the selection of a vendor, development of specifications and deliverables, and clarify which party is responsible for what. It is crucial, then, to carefully scrutinize and negotiate the boilerplate of the developer's agreement and its ancillary documentation in order to assure that the company's expectations are reflected and can be enforced.
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
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.