Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Consider this hypothetical: Mary, a partner with P.J. Goldmorg & Co., a prominent Wall Street Investment Banking Firm, meets George, the CEO of a small biotech company, at a conference. George, who is not a client of P.J. Goldmorg's, mentions during conference that his company is considering going public. The two exchange business cards and go on their way. When Mary gets back to her office she sends George a short e-mail that says only the following: “George, it was a pleasure meeting you at the conference. Our firm provides an array of financial advisory services and I think we could be of tremendous value to you in preparing for your public offering. Attached is some material describing our practice. I look forward to hearing you soon. Mary” As soon as she hits “send,” Mary has just violated the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM Act).
Not possible, you think. How could such a simple (and very common) business related e-mail violate a law that, at least by its title, deals with only “spam.” Despite its clever name, the recently enacted CAN-SPAM Act, which became effective on Jan. 1, 2004, does not in fact prohibit “spam.” What the law does do is regulate “commercial e-mail,” which is defined broadly to include even the type of e-mail that Mary sent to George. Accordingly, the legal department of every business that uses e-mail should be advising its employees to take immediate steps to comply with the Act, as violations carry stiff penalties.
Overview of the Act
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?