LJN Newsletters

  • Trademark Dilution: When 'Minimally Similar' May Be Similar Enough

    In Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe's Borough Coffee, Inc., the Second Circuit rejected the district court's determination — based on pre-TDRA case law — that trademark owners must show "substantial similarity" between the trademarks at issue in order to prevail on a dilution by blurring claim under the TDRA. Citing the language of the TDRA, the appellate court found that the new statute required only "similarity," and that even "minimal similarity" could, in the proper case, suffice to support a claim.

    February 24, 2010Michael A. Bucci

  • Expansion of Right of Publicity Continues To Create Tensions with First Amendment

    Broadly defined, the right of publicity is a person's right to control the commercial use of his or her identity. It has been over half a century since the term "right of publicity" was first coined by Judge Jerome Frank in 1953. Since that time, courts have been struggling to define the scope of the right of publicity protection, and to resolve the inherent conflicts between the right of publicity and the freedom of expression embodied in the First Amendment.

    February 24, 2010William Sloan Coats and Jennifer P. Gossain

  • Law Firms' Access to Client Reviews

    Outside counsel can now see what their in-house clients think of their job performance, according to the Association of Corporate Counsel's new law firm rating system.

    February 24, 2010Amy Miller

  • Negotiating Cloud Computing Agreements

    Though given different names, cloud computing has been around for some time, and the legal lessons learned from experience with traditional software licensing and outsourcing agreements can and should be applied to cloud agreements, but there are new issues which will need new solutions.

    February 24, 2010Michael P. Bennett

  • Alternative Fees

    The diversity of AFA approaches and objectives can divide consumers and providers of legal services, and magnify the law firm-client communication challenges presented by movement away from an entrenched business model.

    February 24, 2010John F. Brown Jr.

  • The Timing and Substance of M&A Disclosures

    Two recent decisions provide useful guidance concerning both the timing and substance of disclosures in the context of M&A activity.

    February 24, 2010Robert S. Reder, Peter B. Heller and Nicholas A. Venditto

  • Squaring Off: The Right of Publicity v. The First Amendment

    Recently, two incidents involving one of the world's most famous couples, President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama, once again brought the focus onto right of publicity issues, as well as potential First Amendment defenses to right of publicity claims.

    February 24, 2010William Sloan Coats and Jennifer P. Gossain

  • Braving Tempestuous Times: Hell-or-High-Water Obligations Maintain Their Viability Despite Leasing Scams and a Troubled Economy

    Part One of this Article discussed the impact of some of the recent NorVergence cases on the viability of hell-or-high-water obligations for third-party financing of lease obligations. This second installment discusses the effect of several other cases on the financing of hell-or-high-water lease obligations and accounts receivable obligations in a decade marked by credit crisis and financial fraud, and provides some practical strategies to assure wary funding sources that hell-or-high-water obligations will remain a viable route for navigating treacherous economic seas.

    February 24, 2010Raymond W. Dusch

  • Rule B: Good Riddance to Maritime Pre-judgment Attachments of EFTs

    While those who made a living prosecuting (and defending) Rule B attachments have to be disappointed by The Shipping Corporation of India, Ltd., v. Jaldhi Oversees Pte. Ltd., the commercial bar generally and participants in international trade, including generally equipment lessors (e.g., marine cargo container lessors), are grateful for the decision.

    February 24, 2010James F. Fotenos

  • Taxpayer Suffers SILO (Pre-tax) Loss in Wells Fargo

    In Wells Fargo & Company v. United States, a court considered for the first time SILOs involving domestic municipal transit agency lessees. While one would have thought that the domestic and federally approved nature of the transactions would have some influence on the decision, they did not.

    February 24, 2010Philip H. Spector