Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Over the last several years, governments around the world have been passing regulations to ensure the integrity of the global financial system. One such regulation is Basel II.
The Basel II Accord is actually a set of concrete recommendations from the Bank for International Settlements, and its goal is to set global standards for capital adequacy and risk management practices for banks and other financial institutions. The recommendations are designed to ensure that financial institutions produce and report transparent, consistent, and auditable data that will allow them and others (such as regulators and investors) to address potential problems earlier than they have been able to do in the past.
In the United States, regulators have made compliance with Basel II compulsory for only the largest financial institutions; further, they have postponed the 2006 deadline for implementing Basel II by a year. However, there is substantial momentum in the marketplace that is driving many financial institutions to implement Basel II practices even before they are required to do so by regulators.
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?