Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Practice Tip: Intelligent Cars
There is a reason the magazine is titled Car and Driver ' the two have always gone together. But that might be changing. Recent technological advances are allowing the car industry to consider a shift away from the need for a driver because of increasingly intelligent and connected vehicles. Increases in intelligence and connectivity also provide new opportunities for cars to interact with consumers' mobile devices. As many companies evaluating this issue likely will turn to their product liability counsel for help with initial issue spotting, this article briefly surveys the major legal challenges likely to be faced during this evolution in several key areas: 1) product liability and insurance; 2) standardization; and 3) intellectual property. First, however, we consider some highlights of this rapidly evolving technology.
Overview of Intelligent Car Technology
Google's foray into driverless cars has been widely covered by the press ' from Google's successful push for legislation permitting use of autonomous cars (first in Nevada, and now expanding to other states), to its recent announcement of a fleet of 100 prototype driverless cars, to publicity over a patent that envisions services such as ad-supported, autonomous taxis. Additionally, major manufacturers are developing features that reduce a driver's need to control a vehicle directly ' at least in certain conditions. For example, several major manufacturers have released or announced cooperative-adaptive cruise control that uses data from vehicle-to-vehicle communications to maintain a safe, uniform following distance. These systems can also improve fuel efficiency by reducing unnecessary acceleration and deceleration. Another possibility under consideration uses this type of system to convoy vehicles together automatically. Many other automated features like lane tracking aids, blind spot assistance, and automatic parking are becoming increasingly available and, in some cases, aggressively marketed.
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.