Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
EXPLAINING THE INSIDER/OUTSIDER DISCONNECT
Our last column explored the disconnect between how in-house and outside counsel view the work of the latter. The reader will recall that in a recent survey, 62% of law firms gave themselves an “A” for overall performance during the past 3 years. Only 19% of in-house counsel scored them that high.There are a few possible explanations.1. The in-house sector radically changed its value proposition in the year or so separating the surveys.2. Radically different samples between the previous surveys may have been polled. Even if true, it is cold comfort to law firms that they can never know which of these two radiclly different “priority sectors” of their current clients or prospects represents.3. In-house counsel change their fundamental priorities as their own moods dictate or, more probably, as internal pressures and external business conditions change, I'll bet on this explanation being the best one. If I'm not right in every instance, I'll be right often enough.4. Conclusion: law firm sellers must somehow shift with their clients and prospects. It's a formidable challenge, really.
Our last column explored the disconnect between how in-house and outside counsel view the work of the latter. The reader will recall that in a recent survey, 62% of law firms gave themselves an “A” for overall performance during the past 3 years. Only 19% of in-house counsel scored them that high.There are a few possible explanations.1. The in-house sector radically changed its value proposition in the year or so separating the surveys.2. Radically different samples between the previous surveys may have been polled. Even if true, it is cold comfort to law firms that they can never know which of these two radiclly different “priority sectors” of their current clients or prospects represents.3. In-house counsel change their fundamental priorities as their own moods dictate or, more probably, as internal pressures and external business conditions change, I'll bet on this explanation being the best one. If I'm not right in every instance, I'll be right often enough.4. Conclusion: law firm sellers must somehow shift with their clients and prospects. It's a formidable challenge, really.
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 Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
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?