Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In-depth analysis of recent rulings.
This is the fourth in a series of articles discussing how in-house counsel can better manage litigation matters.
Technology has advanced the workplace well beyond many general workplace practices employers have in place, and outpaced some workplace laws, including provisions of the Federal wage and hour laws.
Features
Everything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-read format.
Texas Bar 18th Annual Entertainment Law Institute: Legal and Business Aspects of Film, Music, Sports and Digital Media, Austin, Oct. 2-3. For further information: 800-204-2222 Ext. 1574 or 512-427-1574; www.TexasBarCLE.com. American Bar Association Annual Forum on the Entertainment and Sports Industries 2008 Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, Oct. 16-18. For further information: 312-988-5658; www.abanet.org/forums/entsports.…
Features
Previous installments of this article discussed errors and omissions insurance coverage and clearance guidelines for vetting dramatic works. This final segment will wrap up the clearance guidelines discussion, including music and film clips.
Features
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has issued proposed and temporary regulations specifying the time and manner for electing to treat the sale or exchange of "self-created" musical compositions or copyrights as the sale or the exchange of a capital asset resulting in a potential capital gain.
In yet another example of the lunacy of the tax laws as they apply to compensation for personal services, it is possible that the advance payment made to talent might be subject to a 40% penalty ' 20% under Sec. 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (IRC), and 20% under the laws of those states, such as California, that have conformed to Sec. 409A. This could push the effective marginal tax rate on the advance to over 80%. Needless to say, this result is disastrous, and extreme care must be taken not to run afoul of the rules.
Features
Attorneys representing property owners are often requested to document arrangements for very short-term and temporary usage of property. "I don't want a lease; just a license agreement will be fine," is the frequent form of the request. Assuming that the client's request is not merely an attempt to keep the legal fees down, is such a request one that makes sense from an owner's point of view? More important, can a careful attorney respond positively?