Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This month in our regular issue of Marketing The Law Firm we have an article written by one of my favorite Board members Mike Hodes, the Managing Director of Hodes, Ulman, Pessin & Katz, P.A. in Maryland. Mike's article on the value of “talk radio” as a marketing strategy provides an insight into this media form and how to make it work in the world of professional services. In keeping with the theme of the “spoken word,” I am happy to have with us Steve Markman, President of Markman Speaker Management in Massachusetts, a speaker placement firm. We also have our bi-monthly column, “A Haven for Straight Talk” and our regular monthly Media & Communications column. You will note there is a clear communications theme to this issue.
We also have our quarterly Sales Supplement which features articles by Darryl Cross and Andy Havens – in my book two sales and marketing “gurus.”
I wanted to bring to everyone's attention our three Web audio conference events in March from 12 noon to 2 p.m. EST. We're all very excited here at LJN because we believe that these three events are going to be blockbusters. The first of these three programs “Revenue-Focused Leadership: Tools and Techniques for Group Leaders for Accelerating Business Development Activities” will take place on Tuesday, March 15th. This program is targeted to group leaders, marketing partners, department heads, managing partners and marketing professionals. If you are charged with leading the efforts of others to develop more business for your firm, this Web audio conference event is for you. You will hear best practices from visionary, innovative leaders in our profession. This Web audio conference event is not about theories and generalizations. It will reveal the secrets of success of some of the best revenue-focused change agents in our profession. Our panel includes: David Freeman, Esq., Founder and President, Whetstone Consulting; Jami Wintz McKeon, Partner and Chair of the Business and Corporate Litigation Practice, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP; Michael T. Reynvaan, Client Relations Partner and Executive Committee Member, Perkins Coie LLP; and Peter L. Scher, Partner and Practice Leader of Government and Global Trade Group, Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw, Washington, DC. To register, go to www.ljnonline.com/alm?practice or call 1-800-999-1916.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?