Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Technology in Marketing: Building Consumer Clientele Through Web 2.0 Site Avvo
[Editor's Note: This month we are again privileged to have a guest columnist. Shelly Crocker is a founding member and managing partner of Crocker Kuno LLC, a firm based in Seattle, WA. Shelly presents a case study on how one Web offering is increasing business development opportunities at her firm. Our regular columnist, Nancy Manzo, will return in July.]
Law is known to be a conservative field, in the traditional sense of the word, meaning slow to change. Lawyers do adopt new technologies when they feel confident they will improve their practices, but have adapted to new marketing technologies somewhat more slowly. Thus, many law firms have published Web pages, but many others have not yet harnessed the power of the Internet to pursue new marketing opportunities, and still continue to rely on legal directories like Martindale Hubbell.
Potential clients rely on referrals from friends and family or yellow pages ads to find attorneys, and most individual or small business clients lack access to resources to go about finding a suitable lawyer. Although in recent years it has become fashionable for certain lifestyle magazines to include a feature on top lawyers, only some lawyers can be included and the geographic scope is limited. Martindale Hubbell's peer review rating system may be meaningful to other attorneys or corporate counsel, but the average consumer of legal services is unlikely to be persuaded by the arcane system of letter grades even if they know it exists.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.