Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Professional Development: BD Is Not Just for Lawyers and Legal Marketers Anymore
Marketing and business development in law firms is no longer the exclusive domain of marketing and business development executives. Many more executives are pursuing revenue in one form or another, and those dedicated to the function should welcome this development rather than feel threatened by it. While lawyers themselves have undoubtedly gotten better at it, so too have executives of all stripes. COOs and executive directors, CFOs and pricing directors, project managers, CHROs, CIOs and directors of recruiting have all moved their own mandates toward revenue production, and the result has transformed the administrative landscape.
Lawyers Become Better Marketers
In the midst of the stock option backdating scandals of a decade ago, an executive director of an Am Law 100 firm walked into an executive committee meeting with that day's Wall Street Journal, and pointed to a front-page headline revealing an ongoing SEC investigation into a Fortune 500 company's stock option practices. He asked those sitting around the table “What are we doing about this?” Perplexed, one of the managing partners retorted, “Nothing. We're a private partnership, so this does not affect us.” It was a classic inwardly thinking reaction to a question that had nothing to do with firm management, and everything to do with a marketing opportunity to reach out to existing and prospective clients about the firm's expertise in securities litigation. A day later, the executive director called me to do a chief marketing officer search — a first for the firm.
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.