Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In most law schools, “Evidence” is a required course. After completing it, every student can outline the basic requirements of admissibility; namely, the proffered material must be: relevant, fair and accurate, not violate public policy, and meet basic foundational requirements. Years later when actually trying a case, many of these former law students are shocked to learn that there is another variable affecting admissibility ' a variable never discussed in any Evidence text that I have ever seen. Specifically, a judge's willingness to let a lawyer use a particular piece of evidence is sometimes affected by the technology the lawyer chooses to display material in court.
In order to examine this assertion, we need to start by creating what I call the “technology continuum.” As shown in the illustration below, this continuum very roughly ranks the various methods of displaying trial material in increasing relative order of sophistication or technology. At the bottom of this continuum are “spontaneously” produced graphics (such as drawings on newsprint paper or on blackboards); moving up, there are commercially pre-prepared exhibit boards; up a bit more are exhibits displayed electronically; higher still are models and two-dimensional animations; finally, at the top are three-dimensional animations or whatever else is state-of-the-art at the time you read this article.
[IMGCAP(1)]
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?