Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Beware The Temptations of Short-Term Thinking
I recently had a discussion with a client about the issue of firms backing away from supporting practices that were hot and now are in the doldrums but are likely to bounce back. He had been vigorously sought after as an information technology and corporate lawyer just a few years ago. Since technology is not bound to disappear from or be less important in our lives, these areas of practice can be predicted to have a sunny future.
Most practices tend to be cyclical, but firms also tend to have short memories. Despite the fact that senior lawyers and managers have seen the patterns before, they may be over-zealous in adding attorneys (usually expending sizable recruiting fees) and resources to capitalize on an area when it is hot and then back away or go as far as pulling the plug when it cools down ' even if it is an area with good future promise. This is short-term, reactionary thinking rather than taking a strategic position and investing in it for the long term. When the area turns up again, they will be caught unprepared to handle the work and will have demoralized a significant portion of their personnel. This way of operating discourages loyalty and encourages people to keep the lines open with headhunters and jump from place to place.
We have seen this repeatedly in real estate practice, in the mid-1990s with bankruptcy, and now with technology (not dot-com) practices. What approach might a firm take instead? First, each firm should have a strategic framework to operate within, and partners must commit to it, with review and adjustments at reasonable intervals. The strategic plan or framework needs to be based on market research, not partner navel-gazing. Making strategic 'investments' means that all partners cannot expect to have the same compensation they did in their best year every year. Remember that businesses are subject to the laws of supply and demand.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?