Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Ethical Boundaries of Attorney Whistleblowers
In recent years, federal legislation has encouraged attorneys to become whistleblowers, first with the rules promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) that permit disclosure of client confidential information in certain circumstances and then with the additional whistleblower provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank) that create a financial incentive for disclosure of confidential information.
These whistleblower rules are in tension with the lawyer's duties of confidentiality and avoiding conflicts predicated on attorney self-interest. That's because they allow disclosure of client confidential information more broadly than do applicable ethics rules in many jurisdictions, and incentivize disclosure through monetary compensation to counsel.
In light of this tension fostered by the Dodd-Frank incentive program between counsel's loyalty to the client and a perceived societal need to learn of securities law violations, at least one bar association has opined that attorneys may not ethically serve as whistleblowers on their clients. This article describes the variance between SEC whistleblower rules and state ethics rules that led to the October 2013 New York County Bar Association ethics opinion that the federal whistleblower rules create risk of ethics violations such that attorneys should not be financially rewarded for revealing client confidences.
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 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?