Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


<b>Online Exclusive:</b> President Bush Says He Can Ignore New Homeland Security Privacy Rules
October 09, 2006
President Bush challenged Congress again last week through a 'presidential signing statement' issued when he signed the FY 2007 spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security ('DHS'). A pair of privacy-related laws was among the 16 specific aspects of the bill that Bush challenged in his statement.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Accountants Exempt from Privacy Rules
October 04, 2006
Accountants will soon be exempt from federal law that requires financial services companies to send all clients an annual notice that informs them of the company's privacy policy and gives them a chance to opt-out of the sharing of their personal information with unaffiliated parties.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Medical Records Privacy Practices Come Under Scrutiny, While Supreme Court Rejects Appeal of Medical Records Case
October 04, 2006
Two unrelated events show that privacy of medical records is far from resolved, and the issue is likely to arise in both the courts and medical establishment in the next several years.
Going Global? Don't Overlook Public Policy
October 03, 2006
Transnational companies need a coherent, forward-looking 'foreign policy,' but most don't have one. Although governmental decisions significantly affect global business success, many corporations and legal staffs are only involved in defensive, short-term or narrowly self-interested 'government relations.'
Foreign Law Firms Defend the Broad Scope of Their Practice in China
October 03, 2006
Foreign law firms operating in China's largest city have been on edge since April, when the Shanghai Bar Association (SBA) issued a blistering memo that accused them of illegally practicing Chinese law. The memo also called for the Chinese government to regulate and 'purify' the foreigners.
China's New M&A Regulation and Its Impacts on Foreign Business
October 03, 2006
On Aug. 8, 2006, China released a new rule of 'Provisions on Acquisition of Domestic Enterprises By Foreign Investors' (New Regulation). The New Regulation took effect on Sept. 8, 2006, and invalidated the 'Interim Provisions on Acquisition of Domestic Enterprises By Foreign Investors' (Old Regulation) issued on March 7, 2003. The New Regulation has drawn speculations that China is changing its policy toward foreign investors' acquisitions of its domestic companies and tightening its restrictions on foreign investments. <br>This article presents the background that gave rise to this new regulatory scheme and provides a comparative analysis of the two regulations, with a particular focus on how foreign companies doing business in China will be impacted.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Congress Unable to Finalize Warrantless Surveillance Legislation
October 03, 2006
Despite the overwhelming congressional interest in defining the scope of presidential power as it relates to warrantless surveillance of suspected terrorists, members of the Senate were unable to pass legislation in the last week of activity before the November elections recess.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Report Says Advanced Driver's License IDs Will Cost States $11 Billion over 5 Years
October 03, 2006
The National Conference of State Legislatures ('NCSL'), the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, and the National Governors Association released a report last week that estimates that the newly passed Real ID Act will cost the states at least $11 billion over the first 5 years of implementation, beginning in May 2008. The estimated cost far exceeds the figure of $100 million over 5 years that was generated by an analysis done last year by the Congressional Budget Office.
IP News
September 29, 2006
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Multiple Joint Infringers of Process Claims: How Close Is Close Enough?
September 29, 2006
Typically, in an action concerning infringement of a process patent, the activities of an individual party are alleged to infringe one or more of the process patent claims. Under certain circumstances, however, the combined activities of two or more parties may constitute infringement of a process patent claim. Often, courts analyze these situations by determining if 'some connection' exists between the parties whose activities are being combined. This standard, in our view, ultimately defines more activities as infringing than is warranted. A more appropriate standard would be a 'working in concert' standard.

MOST POPULAR STORIES