Regulation

Features

As the dust settled following the close of Landrush, however, the last (and potentially most contentious) leg of the launch commenced. General availability began on Dec. 6, and .XXX domains are being allocated on a first come basis. Now is the time for trademark, domain name and brand owners to purchase .XXX domains to proactively race to stake a claim in their brand if only as a defensive measure to prevent other domain owners from registering/using their name in a .XXX context. It's a showdown at the .XXX corral.

Features

The FDA has recently updated its Guidance for Industry: Financial Disclosure of Clinical Investigators for the first time since 2001. This article briefly examines the key changes and their practical implications in product liability cases.

Features

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced in a press release on Dec. 23, 2011, that it has postponed the original Jan. 31, 2012, deadline requiring employers to post the NLRB Notice informing employees of certain rights to April 30, 2012.

Features

Under the provisions of the FTCA, an action may not be instituted upon a claim against the United States for money damages caused by the negligent act of any federal employee acting within the scope of his employment, unless the claimant first presents the claim to the appropriate federal agency and the claim is finally denied by the agency in writing and sent by certified or registered mail. If the agency fails to make a final disposition of the claim within six months after it is filed, the claimant may deem the claim denied.

Features

New York courts continue to hold that <i>caveat emptor</i> ' let the buyer beware ' represents the general rule applicable to real property transactions. Two recent appellate cases, however, illustrate continuing uncertainty about the remaining scope of the <i>caveat emptor</i> doctrine, while Real Property Law sections 462 and 465 limit the doctrine's significance in many residential transactions.

Features

The Ninth Circuit has now concluded that the ACPA does not apply to a domain name that is first registered prior to the time the trademark at issue becomes distinctive, even if the domain name is later re-registered by a new owner. However, the Ninth Circuit also held that the ACPA can apply to new domain names registered by the new owner after the mark acquires distinctiveness.

Features

The aspect of the Internet euphemistically described as "the cloud" has created a seemingly bountiful opportunity for the unscrupulous to acquire the means to attack innocent and vulnerable victims remotely and anonymously. And unlike the fictional portrayal of the apocalyptical children's tale of Chicken Little and his "The sky is falling!" warning, the current digital version is hardly a flight of fantasy.

Features

What happens when a U.S. company's trademark is misused on the Internet outside of the United States? Short of litigating in that country, is all hope lost in addressing the problem? With the Internet and its global reach, even minor abuses are easily found and can cause real problems for a brand owner. Given the obvious jurisdictional roadblocks that exist in litigating in the U.S. against a foreign person or entity, there are some practical tactics that could prove useful in addressing and preventing this type of problematic behavior.