Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
WHAT DID NOT WORK II.
November 19, 2007
WHAT DID NOT WORK II.This is the second in a series of comments on why in-house counsel rejected law firm business development efforts. Attorneys marketing must consider a wider range of sales considerations than typically brought to the table. Following are more examples of what I have heard counsel discuss law firm marketing presentations:1. Make sure everyone on your team sits facing the inside counsel. Don't insult them by looking out the window or keeping your back to someone.2. If you buy a table for a dinner as requested by in-house counsel, do not make the mistake of not showing up or sending the wrong people to the event. Filling seats is not what counsel had in mind when they invited you to attend a fund raising event for their favorite charity. 3. Make sure you know how many people the client will have present for your legal services presentation and don't overload the table. Bringing a swarm of attorneys to a sales pitch will raise numerous concerns in the in-house counsels' minds including, “If they bring this many to a meeting, how many are going to be billing me if I retain them?”
WHAT DID NOT WORK II.This is the second in a series of comments on why in-house counsel rejected law firm business development efforts. Attorneys marketing must consider a wider range of sales considerations than typically brought to the table. Following are more examples of what I have heard counsel discuss law firm marketing presentations:1. Make sure everyone on your team sits facing the inside counsel. Don't insult them by looking out the window or keeping your back to someone.2. If you buy a table for a dinner as requested by in-house counsel, do not make the mistake of not showing up or sending the wrong people to the event. Filling seats is not what counsel had in mind when they invited you to attend a fund raising event for their favorite charity. 3. Make sure you know how many people the client will have present for your legal services presentation and don't overload the table. Bringing a swarm of attorneys to a sales pitch will raise numerous concerns in the in-house counsels' minds including, “If they bring this many to a meeting, how many are going to be billing me if I retain them?”
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?