Ringtones funneled $3.5 billion into music-industry coffers last year, and insiders say they may account for 25% of music sales by the end of 2006, thanks to millions of consumers paying $3 for 25-second versions of songs ' when a full-length version of a hit can be purchased for just 99 cents on a digital music store such as Apple Computer's iTunes. <br>Even more mind-boggling is the disarray this suddenly popular technology has caused, as lawyers for music publishers, record labels, performance-rights organizations, re-cording artists, ringtone vendors and others in the music industry struggle to determine how laws that govern the sales of its products apply to ringtones. Recording companies and publishers have always argued about money, and now they have intellectual-property ambiguities and a gigantic new revenue stream to fight over. Publishers, historically the industry's stepchild, may have the upper hand this time.

Features

Given the ever-increasing expense of filmmaking in the United States, and particularly in California, many filmmakers have looked for alternatives to the traditional Hollywood-based production. While this trend originally was for smaller-budget and independent films, more and more producers and large studios have sought alternate locations in which to film. While certain U.S. states like Hawaii, New Mexico and New York provide tax incentives and other ancillary location benefits, these states haven't generally been as successful in luring so called "runaway production" as have countries with incentives that may be available.

Features

When faced with a transaction in which the arbitration of potential future disputes would offer advantages over court litigation or other forms of dispute resolution, a critical first step is to create a workable, enforceable arbitration agreement. In most instances, this agreement will be the "arbitration clause" included in the contract. A poorly drafted arbitration clause can create time-consuming and costly delays to the arbitration process. Arbitration agreements must be drafted carefully, and expert advice should be sought on all but the most straightforward two-party, single-contract cases.

In its zeal to eradicate perceived abuses and further clip the wings of executives who, based on press reports, took great pleasure in using the company's airplane for personal purposes, Congress amended section 274(e)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code). Effective on the date of enactment (Oct. 22, 2004), these amendments effectively reversed the decisions of the Tax Court and Eighth Circuit in <i>Sutherland Lumber-Southwest, Inc. v. Commissioner</i>, and prompted the IRS to issue guidance containing a myriad of rule changes and hinting at others, leaving tax practitioners scratching their heads and companies running for cover.

Features

In a decision that caught many employers by surprise, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently held in <i>Taylor v. Progress Energy, Inc.</i> that claims arising under the Family and Medical Leave Act(FMLA), including post-dispute claims, cannot be waived or settled via private agreement between an employee and employer. The only other Court of Appeals ever to consider this issue in the dozen years since the FMLA was enacted reached an opposite result. In light of <i>Taylor</i>, employers inside and outside of the Fourth Circuit must now review the language of their general release agreements and evaluate what, if any, changes are needed.

Features

Whistleblower suits by in-house counsel not barred by privilegeThe Fifth Circuit has ruled that employers cannot claim attorney-client privilege to exclude…

With the expanded use of patents to protect business innovation, high-stakes patent litigation has become an unwelcome byproduct of business success. Increasingly, such litigation involves numerous patents on different technologies asserted by each side in several forums around the world. The resulting "mega-case" presents a strategic and logistical challenge that tests the skills of the best patent litigators. Unless those challenges are met efficiently, the costs of the mega-case can quickly spiral out of control.

The most important question in every patent case is "what do the claims mean?" The district court answers this question in its claim construction ruling. Presently, every aspect of a district court's claim construction is reviewed <i>de novo</i> by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. <br>The problem of <i>de novo</i> review is tied to the nature of patent claims themselves. Patent claims, the series of numbered paragraphs at the conclusion of the patent, define the scope of the patent owner's rights. Yet, because of the technical nature of inventions, the determination of the scope of rights is not easily made.