Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b><i>Media & Communications: </i></b> Why You Should Be Newsjacking
Newsjacking is a method of leveraging hot news items to generate brand recognition and client visibility. Successful newsjackers track breaking news and emerging trends, and use clever thinking to either make connections that put their clients front and center, or to simply insert their clients into a high-profile conversation that otherwise would never have included them.
In legal marketing, lawyers have long been stymied by their inability to discuss confidential matters, and newsjacking offers an exciting new means of sidestepping this issue. Even if lawyers can't discuss a particular case, they can offer compelling insights based on their relevant areas of expertise. Newsjacking can bring a savvy firm to the forefront of a hot legal issue, completely circumventing any confidentiality concerns.
My public relations firm recently used newsjacking to capitalize on the European Court of Justice's landmark ruling on the Safe Harbor Agreement, which found that personal data sent from the EU to U.S. servers is potentially subject to U.S. government surveillance. The ruling provided two of our clients, who were not parties in the matter, the chance to get in front of U.S. and international audiences by sharing their expert opinions on the case. One client advises companies on privacy and security policies, and the other counsels companies on technology transactions ' both areas significantly impacted by the ruling. Our rapid-response outreach resulted in our clients being quoted in top-tier media outlets and invited to speak on the topic.
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.