Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the Spotlight: Secure Your Premises and Keep Employees Safe
How does a public place of business create a secure workplace without feeling like a prison in lockdown? There are several approaches to security. The first thing to consider is the area you want to protect. For example, installing safety film on windows helps to protect against injuries in the event that the glass shatters. In addition to the obvious threat of doors/entrances, the mailroom is an important point of access (remember the anthrax?). If you think your business may be a target, you could consider scanning the mail and having a separate air handler in the mailroom to contain any incident.
Access control for doorways can be handled simply and effectively. A metal detector and x-ray machine can uncover firearms. A coded mechanical lock controls access, but still makes entry easy and safe. Proximity cards provide hands-free entry; chip-embedded smart cards allow different levels of access where needed. Sometimes the mere presence of surveillance cameras, an expected part of the security picture, is enough to deter crime. Besides alerting the security team, cameras can also send the information to an offsite server. This feature is helpful if the breach is an inside job, and people know where video files are logged and how long they are kept.
Access control is a crucial part of a facility security system. Guard booths serve both to protect personnel and deter intruders. The presence of a turnstile controls the flow of foot traffic into an area and deters the theft of large objects.
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.