Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
New DOJ Actions Impact GC and Compliance Officer Roles
Several new, highly publicized fraud enforcement initiatives of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) are likely to impact the roles of the general counsel and chief compliance officer. In most organizations, there are elements of overlap in how these officers relate to the compliance program structure and the conduct of internal investigations. In the context of these new initiatives, however, absolute clarity on executive-level leadership is necessary in order to ensure an effective and coordinated organizational response. The governing board, with its obligations for legal compliance oversight, will in most instances conclude that the general counsel is best qualified to lead that response.
The Issues at Stake
Two particular policy initiatives are at issue. The first is the DOJ's Sept. 9 “Yates Memorandum” setting forth specific guidelines on corporate conduct (http://1.usa.gov/1iyk5dI.) These guidelines incorporate a substantially increased government focus on individual accountability for corporate wrongdoing, and, of particular relevance, on corporate eligibility for “cooperation credit” in the context of government investigations. In so doing, the Yates Memorandum establishes a direct linkage between a corporation's ability to receive cooperation credit ' certainly a desired fiduciary goal ' and the extent of the corporation's efforts to provide the government with information on individuals responsible for the corporate wrongdoing.
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?