Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

<b>Decision of Note:</b> Rapper Isn't Public Figure

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

The Court of Appeals of Georgia, Fourth Division, found that a local rap artist wasn't a public figure for purposes of a defamation suit over comments made about him on a local radio station.

Features

Courthouse Steps

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Features

Bit Parts

Stan Soocher

Recent developments in entertainment law.

Features

Ringtones Breed Tension Within Music Industry

Eriq Gardner

By 2004, mastertones were the hot new thing. They had replaced polyphonic ringtones (multipitched tunes), which had replaced monophonic ringtones. Mastertones were compressed snippets of studio-recorded music. In order to offer them to the public, ringtone content aggregators needed to obtain both publishing clearance and permission from those who held the rights to the recordings. That meant negotiating with record companies.

Features

<b>Anatomy of a Practice:</b> Washington, DC's Jenner & Block Builds Music and Movie Client Base

Hilary Lewis

Three years ago, the closest most lawyers at Jenner &amp; Block came to the entertainment industry were the compact discs its partners bought or the movies its associates rented. But now, Jenner &amp; Block has been tapped to solidify the industry's role on the Web, edging out law firms with longer histories representing publishing and production companies. Add that to Jenner &amp; Block's recent victory as lead Supreme Court counsel in <i>MGM Studios v. Grokster</i>, and the firm is quickly shaping up as a prominent player in the expanding industry.

Case Briefs

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.

Features

Why Purchasing D&O Insurance Is No Longer Enough

Donald W. Kiel & Faisal M. Zubairi

The media is rife with references to high-profile corporate scandals. Although the fate of those responsible for corporate misconduct is well publicized, the innocent corporate officials impacted by such scandals are rarely mentioned. In an effort to protect directors and officers, corporations allocate significant capital to buying directors' and officers' ("D&amp;O") liability insurance. However, in today's environment of increasing numbers of corporate scandals, even innocent directors and officers sometimes find themselves stripped of the very protection such policies are meant to afford by insurance companies seeking to avoid large exposures. Allegations of corporate fraud have lead insurance companies to invoke exclusionary provisions and increasingly to seek the remedy of rescission. Although procuring D&amp;O insurance coverage reflects a corporation's realization of and appreciation for the risk faced by directors and officers, corporations must ensure that the policies they purchase actually provide the protection sought. This article examines recent trends in court decisions regarding D&amp;O insurance in cases of corporate fraud and suggests methods by which corporations can attempt to maximize the protection provided by their D&amp;O policies, particularly for innocent corporate officials.

Ill Wind: Selected Insurance Issues After Hurricane Katrina

Seth A. Tucker & Ann-Kelley Kemper

By virtually any measure, Hurricane Katrina ranks as one of the worst natural disasters in American history. It will surely be months if not years before the full toll of the storm and its aftermath, including long-term effects on the Gulf Coast, are known. It is equally sure that Hurricane Katrina will spawn an array of disputes concerning insurance coverage for losses or damage caused by the storm. Indeed, barely 2 weeks after the hurricane hit land, at least two major insurance coverage lawsuits, one in Mississippi and one in Louisiana, had already been filed.

The Leasing Hotline

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Highlights of the latest commercial leasing cases from around the country.

In the Spotlight: Be on the Lookout for More 'Icebergs'

Jack Garson

Landlords frequently run into unexpected problems &mdash; which I call "icebergs" &mdash; with their tenants, some of which were discussed in last month's Spotlight, <i>ie</i>, hazmat remediation. Here are a few more icebergs to watch out for.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.
    Read More ›
  • In the Spotlight
    On May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug &amp; Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.
    Read More ›