Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
In 1998, Congress passed the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), broadly expanding the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) enforcement powers in the Internet arena. Since then, states and the FTC have become more active in regulating the collection, use and security of consumer's personal information generally. However, the protection of children's personal information remains a top FTC enforcement goal, and the commission has become more aggressive in enforcement of COPPA each year. Companies that fail to proactively act to ensure COPPA compliance do so at the risk of seven-figure penalties. <br>This article provides Web site operators with suggestions on how to comply with the spirit of COPPA when legal obligations are not crystal clear, as in the case when the operator of the Web site in question believes that it can make a good faith effort to be a 'general audience' Web site, but has reason to believe that the site may attract visitors under the age of 13 and is unsure how the FTC will view and treat the site.
Features
Anti-Piracy Statutes/Constitutionality<br>Copyright Infringement/Probative and Substantial Similarity<br>Copyright Infringement/Substantial Similarity<br>Trademarks/Right to Sue<br>Video-Game Laws/Constitutionality
Features
The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey preliminarily enjoined further distribution and ordered the recall of the book 'Legit Baller,' which features an allegedly unauthorized, prominent use of photographs of popular R&B singer/producer Marc Dorsey on its covers. But the court declined to order a recall of the defendant publisher's other books that included advertisements of 'Legit Baller.' <i>Dorsey v. Black Pearl Books Inc</i>.
Features
Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Features
Celebrity Images/Trade-Dress Claims<br>Copyright Infringement/Joint-Authorship Claim
Features
The Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division 1, found an arbitration clause in a management agreement unenforceable under the California Talent Agencies Act. <i>Ferrer v. Preston</i>.
Features
Estate planning is central to the post-mortem distribution and protection of an individual's assets. Celebrities have special estate-planning concerns that include intellectual-property valuations, how the valuations affect estate taxes and post-mortem administration of intellectual-property. In the following interview, conducted in Nashville by Entertainment Law & Finance Editor-in-Chief Stan Soocher, entertainment attorney Robert L. Sullivan discusses these and related estate-planning issues that affect artists. Sullivan is a partner in the Nashville office of Loeb & Loeb where his clients include songwriters, music-publishing companies, record companies and recording artists. He has 30-years of experience as an entertainment lawyer and serves as a trustee for the estate of Johnny Cash.
Features
Recent court rulings in e-discovery.
Features
Litigants and their law firms continue to be frustrated with the escalating costs of discovery during litigation, investigations and regulatory response. Fueling these costs is risk ' and the fears associated with discovery risk ranging from common concerns such as budget and schedule issues, to more severe outcomes, including sanctions, adverse inference or even stress-induced hair loss.<br>A simple way for litigants to lessen risk and gain control of these costs is through effective project planning and communication. In fact, without good communication, you're not just taking a ride down the wrong route ' you're paving the road to risk.
Features
The continuing drama relating to the demise of the Yukos Oil Company, Russia's leading oil company, has generated two U.S. bankruptcy proceedings that have raised some of the most interesting cross-border insolvency issues in the last year. Both proceedings emanate from the pitched battle between Yukos' management and equity investors, on the one hand ' who assert that the Russian government is expropriating the company for its own benefit in violation of Russian and international law ' and the Russian government and an interim insolvency receiver appointed by a Russian court (the 'Receiver'), on the other hand ' who assert that Yukos' management caused the company to commit a tax fraud of approximately USD $27.5 billion that can only be resolved in a Russian court.
