Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Need for New Policy and Business Paradigms
New products frequently give rise to new waves of product liability litigation. With nanotechnology-rooted innovation forecasted to account for upward of $1.5 trillion in global commerce by 2015, the stakes are high. The low-hanging fruit of nanotechnology is being harvested now, with some 600 nano-labeled products on the market internationally (including such things as sunscreens). But the bigger investment and return on nanotechnology is poised to unfold over the next five to 15 years and beyond ' in the form of personalized medicine (targeted drug delivery, with fewer side effects); improved, cleaner means of energy production, storage, and distribution; faster (more powerful, miniaturized) computers and personal communication devices; and major advances in infrastructure improvement, in the form of lighter, stronger cement and steel (among other things). Examples of its promise abound. See Nanotechnology: The Future is Now, metropolitan corporate counsel at 59 (Dec. 2007).
Without doubt, the emerging field of nanotechnology ' involving the design and engineering of material, structures, and devices at the atomic and molecular level ' is one holding great commercial and social significance for a broad cross-section of the global economy. See D. Wallace and N. Booke, Industrial Revolution Redux, product liability law & strategy at 1 (Jan. 2008). At the same time, nanotechnology raises a number of questions yet to be answered concerning the possible variety of human health and environmental risks that might follow in the wake of commercial exploitation. Significantly, these concerns are increasingly being voiced by a broad cross-section of stakeholders, including a lobbying coalition consisting of industry
players and environmentalists. See, e.g., Agency Seeks Data about
Health, Environmental Risks of Nanotechnology, worker's comp. rep. (LRP Pub. Apr. 11, 2008).
At the heart of the matter are worries that through the National Nanotechnology Initiative, a product of the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, the federal government is promoting the development of nanotechnology at the expense of ' without sufficient focus upon ' the health and environmental aspects of this technology. Id. (noting that 'less than $10 million' of the federal government's 'more than $1 billion' annual expenditure on development of nanotechnology 'is being spent on research relevant to understanding and managing the risks of occupational exposure to nanomaterials'); see also President's Science Advisory Council Blasts Nano EHS R&D Funding, inside osha (Jan. 21, 2008).
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.
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.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
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?