Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
I've written in the past about free Web tools, and unsurprisingly, Google continues to top the charts. Sometimes, however, you want tools that are more comprehensive and can be tailored to your needs.
Features
Pharmaceutical companies scored a major victory on June 18 when a divided U.S. Supreme Court held that the industry's sales representatives are not eligible for overtime pay.
Features
The next stop for the Proposition 8 case is the Supreme Court.The order denying rehearing leaves in place the court's February 2-1 ruling striking down the ban on equal protection grounds. The majority said the voter-enacted initiative served no purpose other than 'to lessen the status and human dignity' of gays.
The order denying rehearing leaves in place the court's February 2-1 ruling striking down the ban on equal protection grounds. The majority said the voter-enacted initiative served no purpose other than 'to lessen the status and human dignity' of gays.
Setting the stage for a U.S. Supreme Court battle, a federal appellate court on May 31 held that the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutionally denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married under state laws.
Setting the stage for a U.S. Supreme Court battle, a federal appellate court on May 31 held that the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutionally denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married under state laws.
Features
A person can't be sued for allegedly helping to cause an accident by texting a driver, a New Jersey judge holds in a widely watched case.
Features
Legislation to allow online gambling in New Jersey continues to make progress, despite concerns over its constitutionality.
Features
Google Inc. took home a defense verdict on May 23 in its smartphone fight with Oracle Corp. after a jury rejected all claims of patent infringement.
Features
In <i>United States v. Nosal</i>, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, <i>en banc</i>, held that the prohibition against "exceed[ing] authorized access" to a computer under the CFAA does not apply when an employee has been granted access to the company computer infrastructure but uses that access, against company policy and the obvious interests of the company, to copy valuable, confidential information in order to take business from the company. For various reasons, articulated well in the dissent by Judge Barry Silverman (joined by only one other judge), the Ninth Circuit is wrong.
