In December, the RIAA announced that it would no longer look to file suit against individual file sharers and instead form relationships with ISPs that maintain the online accounts of the consumers.
The different ' sometimes even higher ' product standards required by non-American countries can adversely affect product protection here in the United States, as plaintiff's attorneys can use these discrepancies to their advantage in litigation against product manufacturers.
Although the issue of Federal Preemption has grabbed the headlines in medical device and pharmaceutical cases, those analyzing preemption's impact on plaintiff's failure-to-warn claims on other types of products that are subject to federal regulation are significant for their varied results.
The average juror may not be aware of the extent of mental-health professionals' duty to protect innocent third parties from their dangerous patients, and they may be reluctant to hold these professionals responsible. Following are some strategies that will help to get the plaintiff's point of view across to the fact finder.
Spoliation in the context of a medical malpractice case can raise many issues for lawyers representing doctors and hospitals. These issues can often be overlooked until it is too late to repair the damage done.
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.
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
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.
