Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A number of years ago while I was the executive for a franchisor, I was asked for a variance by a franchisee who said he was planning to attend the annual conference, but got called away because of a sick relative. I faced a dilemma because the annual conference was very important to the system, but it is hard to reject a personal request. Also, I realized that if I said no to the franchisee, I might face some blowback if he complained to other franchisees about our seemingly harsh policy.
My situation was not unique. Every franchise system chief executive encounters similar situations in which a franchisee has a good reason for not complying with a rule, or in which the infraction is fairly minor. But how can a franchisor be sure about where to draw the line and how strictly to enforce the rules that are set out in the franchise agreement or operations manual?
After all, we know a franchise system's compliance issues normally start out small, but it doesn't take long for the infractions to get bigger. If the franchisor continues to look the other way, before long, the franchisor only will be enforcing compliance on royalty payments.
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.
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.