Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
FL Appeal Court's Memorabilia Trade Secrets Decision
Here's how attorneys unraveled the truth behind an entertainment-and-sports memorabilia trade secrets case that saw the lawyers uncover crucial details during discovery. Trade secrets cases are difficult to prove, but details in a ruling from Florida's Third District Court of Appeal suggest the efforts of Isicoff Ragatz attorneys paid off for their appellee clients. Forbes v. Millionaire Gallery Inc., 3D19-1630.
The ruling came in a case where appellant Richard Forbes, a former employee of Millionaire Gallery Inc., allegedly took 300 photos from the company and used them for marketing and sales "placeholders" on his own website. Forbes' company Signature Royale also displayed on its website scanned images of items owned by Millionaire Gallery, according to the appellate ruling. And Signature Royale allegedly sent email blasts to individuals on Millionaire Gallery's customer contact list. Another telling detail: Millionaire Gallery's litigators — Isicoff Ragatz partners Eric D. Isicoff, Teresa Ragatz and Christopher Yannuzzi in Miami — also discovered that Forbes' company had made 82% of its sales to Millionaire's clients.
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
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
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.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
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 DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
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.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
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.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
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.