Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the News
California Franchising Good-Faith Legislation Moves Forward
A bill has advanced in the California Assembly that, if ultimately passed, will enhance franchisee rights in that state. SB 610, which was introduced by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Dist 19), was approved by the Senate last year. It aims to enhance the right of franchisees to participate in associations, to regulate the sale and transfer of franchises and to enforce the duties of good faith and fair dealing in franchising agreements.
When the Bill last year failed to gain the support it now appears to have, the International Franchise Association (IFA) issued a statement about SB 610's defeat, which stated, in part: “Lawmakers in California recognized the basic tenet of the franchise model is the contract, and both franchisees and franchisors need to work to adhere to the terms of the contract for the model to thrive. Franchising remains the most viable way to own and operate a small business for many Americans, and legislators didn't want to upset the apple cart to appease a few isolated grievances when there are processes already in place within those systems, and the courts, to address them.” See, “California Legislature Rejects Attempt to Undermine Franchise Contracts.”'
Others are on board with the proposed legislation. For instance, The American Association of Franchisees and Dealers (AAFD), a California-based trade association for franchisees, issued a statement in June explaining its support. It states, in part: “Modern franchise relationships are most always governed by one-sided 'take it or leave it' adhesion contracts that elicit substantial monetary investment from franchise owners, but severely limit a franchisees rights in the franchise relationship. For franchisees, the franchise relationship is almost always a 'bet the farm' transaction whereby most franchise owners place their business and financial futures on the line in reliance on the strength of a brand and a franchisor's promise of substantial support.”
California Franchising Good-Faith Legislation Moves Forward
A bill has advanced in the California Assembly that, if ultimately passed, will enhance franchisee rights in that state. SB 610, which was introduced by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Dist 19), was approved by the Senate last year. It aims to enhance the right of franchisees to participate in associations, to regulate the sale and transfer of franchises and to enforce the duties of good faith and fair dealing in franchising agreements.
When the Bill last year failed to gain the support it now appears to have, the International Franchise Association (IFA) issued a statement about SB 610's defeat, which stated, in part: “Lawmakers in California recognized the basic tenet of the franchise model is the contract, and both franchisees and franchisors need to work to adhere to the terms of the contract for the model to thrive. Franchising remains the most viable way to own and operate a small business for many Americans, and legislators didn't want to upset the apple cart to appease a few isolated grievances when there are processes already in place within those systems, and the courts, to address them.” See, “California Legislature Rejects Attempt to Undermine Franchise Contracts.”'
Others are on board with the proposed legislation. For instance, The American Association of Franchisees and Dealers (AAFD), a California-based trade association for franchisees, issued a statement in June explaining its support. It states, in part: “Modern franchise relationships are most always governed by one-sided 'take it or leave it' adhesion contracts that elicit substantial monetary investment from franchise owners, but severely limit a franchisees rights in the franchise relationship. For franchisees, the franchise relationship is almost always a 'bet the farm' transaction whereby most franchise owners place their business and financial futures on the line in reliance on the strength of a brand and a franchisor's promise of substantial support.”
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
Generative AI and the 2024 Elections: Risks, Realities, and Lessons for Businesses
GenAI's ability to produce highly sophisticated and convincing content at a fraction of the previous cost has raised fears that it could amplify misinformation. The dissemination of fake audio, images and text could reshape how voters perceive candidates and parties. Businesses, too, face challenges in managing their reputations and navigating this new terrain of manipulated content.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.