Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


In the Spotlight: Landlords Should Not Overlook the Importance of Estoppel Certificate Provisions
August 01, 2003
Estoppel Certificate Provisions are usually given little, if any, attention during lease negotiations.As long as a lease contains basic language requiring a tenant to provide an estoppel certificate from time to time, most parties to a lease negotiation simply gloss over the provision and move on to weightier issues. In certain situations, particularly where a tenant is the major, if not the only, tenant of a particular real estate project, a landlord seeking to sell or refinance its asset needs to be in the position of requiring the tenant to timely deliver an estoppel that will pass muster with its lender or purchaser (and such purchaser's lender).
The Leasing Hotline
August 01, 2003
Highlights of the latest commercial leasing cases from around the country.
Business Crimes Hotline
August 01, 2003
Recent cases of importance to your practice.
In The Courts
August 01, 2003
Analysis of recent cases that affect your practice.
Avoiding Criminal Tax Prosecution of the Client with Foreign Accounts
August 01, 2003
Your client Jane Doe, the distraught business executive who hopes you can assist her in avoiding a criminal tax prosecution arising from her offshore bank accounts, calls you to inquire about the status of her case.
When Image Is Everything: PR Firms in White Collar Cases
August 01, 2003
You are a public figure whose ability to earn a living depends upon your reputation for integrity and talent. Almost without warning, you become caught up in a highly publicized business scandal that threatens your livelihood and public image. The media's fascination with the details of the scandal has caused a public furor and led federal officials to open parallel criminal and civil investigations. You hear rumors that a Congressional committee is about to hold public hearings. You need help - and fast.
Creating Ethics and Compliance Programs That Work with Sarbanes-Oxley
August 01, 2003
Last month, we discussed how brightly the spotlight is shining on ethics and compliance programs. We explained that Sarbanes-Oxley has a provision that provides Federal protection for employees of SEC registrants who report wrongdoing to the government and/or law enforcement. The Act has created a situation in which anyone who reports wrongdoing to the government and/or law enforcement is protected from employer retaliation under Federal Statute. And we urged that companies assess the effectiveness of their ethics and compliance efforts.
The Value of 'Research Tool' Patents in View of <i>Integra v. Merck</i>
August 01, 2003
On June 6, 2003, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit seemingly breathed new life into research tool patents when it held that the use of patented peptides for drug discovery was not exempt from infringement under the "safe harbor" provision of 35 U.S.C. '271(e)(1). <i>Integra Lifesciences, Ltd. v. Merck KGaA,</i> 331 F.3d 860 (Fed. Cir. 2003). In an earlier case, <i>Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Inc.,</i> No. 95 Civ. 8833, 2001 WL 1512597 (S.D.N.Y 2001), a district court had ruled that the use of patented intermediates for drug screening was non-infringing, thereby implicating that the use of other research tool patents for drug discovery was likewise sheltered from infringement liability under '271(e)(1).
Bankruptcy: What Happens to the Royalty Payments?
August 01, 2003
In a decision interpreting for the first time certain provisions in the Bankruptcy Code, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that royalty payments belonged to the estate of the bankrupt debtor/licensor rather than to the new owner by assignment of the underlying intellectual property covered by the licenses. <i>In re CellNet Data Systems, Inc.,</i> 327 F.3d 242 (3d Cir. 2003). The Third Circuit held that the debtor/licensor was permitted to sever the right to receive the remaining royalty payments due on the license from the transfer of the underlying intellectual property rights.
Look, But Don't Touch: The Consequences of Removing, Modifying or Destructing Visual Art in Buildings
August 01, 2003
Unknowing building owners can incur substantial liability when incorporating certain artistic works within their buildings. The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA), 17 U.S.C. 106A, limits the ability of a building owner to alter, move, or remove a "work of visual art." This article will provide an overview of this statute and its interpretation and application by various courts.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Law Firms and the Rise of Hospitality
    The law firm office cannot remain unchanged, as if frozen in time set to some date prior to the onset of pandemic, when the terms and meaning have all changed. In fact, the office must now provide benefits or an experience the lawyers and staff cannot get at home.
    Read More ›
  • Lack of Logo Placement At Center of Ruling Over Meat Loaf Album Packaging
    To build visibility for its brand, a record label or production company will want its logo included on products containing its master recordings manufactured and distributed by third parties. This will be addressed in the agreement between the label or production company and manufacturer/distributor. The failure to include the logo may raise a host of issues, from the breadth of the logo-placement obligation ' such as whether it includes Internet downloads ' to the proper theory on which to base any damages and just which album-sales figures are subject to evidentiary discovery. A recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ' in a long-running dispute between Cleveland International Records and Sony Music Entertainment ' illustrated how these issues may be argued and decided.
    Read More ›