Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The release of these Principles followed a two-day Town Hall meeting the FTC held late last year on behavioral advertising, which itself followed the FTC's Tech-Ade Workshop in 2006. The FTC staff's Principles include specific recommendations and questions for industry regarding:
Comments on the proposed Principles were initially due by Feb. 22, but the deadline was extended to April 11. Comments are likely to range from the very specific ' some trade associations may propose entirely new or modified self-regulatory principles for their members ' to the general, with other trade associations and coalitions offering arguments, and perhaps even econometric and other statistical evidence supporting arguments opposed to the staff's proposals.
While the FTC document recognizes that behavioral advertising provides a number of benefits to consumers, it is important to understand that the staff's proposed Principles are based on the premises that:
Broad Definition of Behavioral Advertising
The proposed Principles, describ-ed in detail below, would impose a heavy self-regulatory burden on the online behavioral-advertising industry. The Principles would extend well beyond the principles of the Net-work Advertising Initiative ('NAI') for Online Preference Marketing (see, www.networkadvertising.org/pdfs/NAI_principles.pdf.), approved by the FTC in 2000 (see, Online Profiling, A Report to Congress Part 2: Recommendations (July 2000), available at www.ftc.gov/os/2000/07/onlineprofiling.htm). They would also apply to a very wide array of online activity.
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.
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.
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.
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?