Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In an effort to keep our readership informed with up-to-the-minute information, we are adjusting our publication schedule for our competitions.
You may have noticed that the originally scheduled listing of the MLF Canadian 20 is not featured in this issue. It has been determined that we need a bit more time to compile the listing. The listing and a companion article will appear in the July issue.
Last year, the MLF 50 premiered in Marketing The Law Firm. It set the bar for all law firms of 100 attorneys or more to highlight their distinctive and successful marketing and communications programs. It quickly became the benchmark for the profession. This year, a separate competition, the MLF 50/II, a listing of The Top 50 Small to Mid-Size Law Firms (10-100 attorneys) in Marketing and Communications has been added.
The MLF 50/II ' The Top 50 Law Firms of 10-100 Attorneys in the areas of Marketing and Communications ' will be published in the September issue of Marketing The Law Firm. All entries are due by July 21. The MLF 50 ' The Top 50 Law Firms of 100 or More Attorneys in the areas of Marketing and Communications will move to a November publication date. All entries for this competition will be due by September 15.
Criteria For Selection
Submissions for consideration are the same for both the MLF 50 (100+ attorneys) and MLF 50/II (10-100 attorneys).
Each firm will be required to write an essay of 750 words total (segmented by topic; eg, if you are describing a marketing strategy, please begin your description with the category subheading ' in this case 'Marketing Strategy') describing its marketing and communications program. The following criteria will be used to evaluate each firm:
All submissions should be sent via e-mail only to Elizabeth Anne 'Betiayn' Tursi, Editor-in-Chief, Marketing The Law Firm at [email protected]. Any collateral materials accompanying the essay must also be in a format that can be transmitted via e-mail. No entries will be accepted that are sent via mail or fax to Law Journal Newsletters. Any questions should be referred via e-mail to Betiayn Tursi.
I want as many of your firms as possible to have the opportunity to be part of these competitions. Here's your chance to highlight your marketing departments and your successes!
' Elizabeth Anne 'Betiayn' Tursi, Editor-in-Chief
In an effort to keep our readership informed with up-to-the-minute information, we are adjusting our publication schedule for our competitions.
You may have noticed that the originally scheduled listing of the MLF Canadian 20 is not featured in this issue. It has been determined that we need a bit more time to compile the listing. The listing and a companion article will appear in the July issue.
Last year, the MLF 50 premiered in Marketing The Law Firm. It set the bar for all law firms of 100 attorneys or more to highlight their distinctive and successful marketing and communications programs. It quickly became the benchmark for the profession. This year, a separate competition, the MLF 50/II, a listing of The Top 50 Small to Mid-Size Law Firms (10-100 attorneys) in Marketing and Communications has been added.
The MLF 50/II ' The Top 50 Law Firms of 10-100 Attorneys in the areas of Marketing and Communications ' will be published in the September issue of Marketing The Law Firm. All entries are due by July 21. The MLF 50 ' The Top 50 Law Firms of 100 or More Attorneys in the areas of Marketing and Communications will move to a November publication date. All entries for this competition will be due by September 15.
Criteria For Selection
Submissions for consideration are the same for both the MLF 50 (100+ attorneys) and MLF 50/II (10-100 attorneys).
Each firm will be required to write an essay of 750 words total (segmented by topic; eg, if you are describing a marketing strategy, please begin your description with the category subheading ' in this case 'Marketing Strategy') describing its marketing and communications program. The following criteria will be used to evaluate each firm:
All submissions should be sent via e-mail only to Elizabeth Anne 'Betiayn' Tursi, Editor-in-Chief, Marketing The Law Firm at [email protected]. Any collateral materials accompanying the essay must also be in a format that can be transmitted via e-mail. No entries will be accepted that are sent via mail or fax to Law Journal Newsletters. Any questions should be referred via e-mail to Betiayn Tursi.
I want as many of your firms as possible to have the opportunity to be part of these competitions. Here's your chance to highlight your marketing departments and your successes!
' Elizabeth Anne 'Betiayn' Tursi, Editor-in-Chief
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
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.
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.
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?