A recent decision provides a guiding beacon for identifying a number of forensic errors that are frequently encountered but often overlooked. It is, therefore, eminently instructive for custody courts, attorneys, and evaluators.
What's at issue is control, obviously, and the great lengths to which some will go to maintain, it even as they benefit from the wide-open, free-flowing viral information torrent of the Internet. These copyright acquisitions are not primarily motivated by the desire to exploit the works and make money, but rather by the desire to stop the public circulation of texts and images the new owners do not like.
Remember U.S. Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart's famous line about hardcore pornography? Stewart said it was tough to define, "but I know it when I see it." The quip came to mind after a ruling last month by the U.S Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a trademark infringement case involving Internet advertising keywords. In essence, the Ninth Circuit concluded that there's no strict standard for determining infringement in the Internet age, so judges have to know it when they see it.
The Supreme Court of Michigan dismissed an eavesdropping claim by city officials who were taped backstage while demanding that a video they considered improper for young audience members not be played during a Detroit concert that featured rappers Dr. Dre, Eminem and Snoop Dogg.
This article articulates some of the common issues that a lawyer should consider under Model Rule 4.2, but the manner in which Model Rule 4.2 is applied across different jurisdictions may vary.
This edition of the Quarterly State Compliance Review looks at some enacted and pending legislation of interest to corporate lawyers. It also discusses some recent cases of interest, including decisions from Delaware and New York concerning the awarding of attorneys' fees.
Law practice management, meet legal productivity, or, as the San Diego developers have dubbed it: social practice management. Welcome to MyCase.
Retaliation claims are the most dangerous and powerful of allegations under Title VII. The Thompson v. North American Stainless LP decision has the potential to dramatically expand the scope of such claims.
Recent national rulings of interest.
Discussion and analysis of several recent rulings.
