Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Most real estate transactions are governed by state law and local custom, not federal law. But a massive federal law enacted shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks raises the specter that the federal government may intrude into commercial real estate transactions in ways heretofore thought unimaginable. Known as the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism ('USA Patriot Act'), the legislation has led the federal government to propose rules designed to combat money laundering and terrorist financing in these types of transactions.
Background
Title III of the USA Patriot Act amended a number of provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). 31 U.S.C. ” 5311-5355. The International Money Laundering and Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, Title III sought to amend the BSA to facilitate the prevention, detection, and prosecution of international money laundering and the financing of terrorism.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?