Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
The murkiness around patent eligibility is one reason innovators have been turning more toward trade secret law to protect their inventions.
Features
The question has been frequently debated in the legal community: What is the difference between an attorney providing business consulting services or acting as legal counsel? The California Court of Appeal recently issued an opinion on the concern in the context of the entertainment industry. Though issued "unpublished," the decision offers insight and guidance on the business consultant/legal counsel dichotomy debate.
Features
How can one launching a new trademark mitigate the risk of rejection or infringement on the basis of likelihood of confusion with an existing mark? The primary strategy is trademark searching.
Features
This article focuses on a recent federal court decision, to explain how the well-developed law provides plaintiffs asserting a wide range of claims with the ability to proceed while protecting ISPs and, correspondingly, how it ultimately means that defendants who otherwise could remain anonymous may have to defend themselves in court.
Features
A new antitrust complaint over ticketing fees has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Live Nation Entertainment Inc. and Ticketmaster. The plaintiffs in the newly filed suit are challenging Ticketmaster's new arbitration agreement by claiming its protocols for mass arbitrations, laid out in the rules and procedures posted to its website, require "a novel and one-sided process that is tailored to disadvantage consumers."
Features
This installment of our appellate practice series reviews recent cases addressing the appellate jurisdiction of district courts and the courts of appeals, referred to as the "finality" doctrine.
Columns & Departments
Evolusion Concepts, Inc. v. HOC Events, Inc. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc.
Features
The Delaware District Bankruptcy Court ruled that claims arising from pre-petition antitrust cases filed against the debtor could constitute post-petition claims entitled to administrative priority status. The court held that the public policy that favors a "fresh start" for debtors would not preclude damages from post-petition sales of products in violation of federal antitrust laws from receiving administrative expense priority.
Features
In a recent case, the Tenth Circuit joined other circuits in holding that government closure orders due to the COVID-19 pandemic do not trigger insurance coverage for loss of business income, reasoning that the temporary inability to use property caused by COVID shutdown orders doesn't involve a covered physical loss of property.