Regulation

The problem of child pornography on the Internet has long bedeviled Congress. But the legislature has floundered between the First Amendment's protection of speech and the self-evident evils involved in child porn's production and consumption, leaving a trail of laws invalidated by the High Court. The most recent legislative iteration ' the PROTECT Act, upheld on May 19 by the Supreme Court in United States v. Williams ' raises new and intriguing questions about the relation of sexual and political speech.

Analysis of recent rulings.

Commentary on the latest cases.

In its June 3, 2008, decision in Pultz v. Economakis, the New York State Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that there is no limit on the number of rent-stabilized units an owner can attempt to recover for owner occupancy. The ruling was a major victory for rent stabilized landlords, and a sharp rebuke to tenant advocates who claimed that multiple recovery for owner occupancy violated the letter and spirit of the Rent Stabilization Law. Indeed, the case continues a recent trend of favorable Court of Appeals decisions for landlords.

The latest news from the franchising world.

A franchisor of tax preparation franchises was entitled to a 24-month injunction beginning from the time of the former franchisee's compliance with a non-competition covenant. Jackson Hewitt Inc. v. Childress, Bus. Franchise Guide (CCH) ' 13,849 (D. N.J., Jan. 22, 2008). The permanent injunction was ordered when the court granted the plaintiff franchisor's motion for summary judgment.

Perhaps you've heard: On Jan. 23, 2007, the Federal Trade Commission adopted the comprehensively revised FTC Franchise Rule ('The Amended Rule') and released the 'Statement of Basis and Purpose' ('SBP'), which clarified the Amended Rule's requirements and prohibitions. Compliance with the Amended Rule has been optional since July 1, 2007, and became mandatory on July 1, 2008.

On April 5, 2007, the Court of Appeals voided a decade-old court-ordered stipulation that had settled a contested litigation over a rent-stabilized apartment. The landlord in Riverside Syndicate Inc. v. Munroe, et al. 10 N.Y.3d 18, was allowed to renege on a settlement on the theory that the stipulation violated public policy and unlawfully waived the tenant's rights. The ramifications of this ruling are extraordinary. A party to a court ordered settlement can reap the benefits for as long as is opportune (the court ruled that there is no applicable statute of limitations).