Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the Courts
Third Circuit: U.S. Senator Must Face Fraud Charges
On July 29, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a district court's denial of a motion to dismiss corruption charges against United States Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ). United States v. Menendez, 2016 WL 4056037 (3d Cir. July 29, 2016). Menendez was charged in April 2015 in connection with allegations that he attempted to intervene in a government investigation of one of his largest campaign donors. The court rejected arguments by Menendez that he was engaged in legislative conduct and thus protected by the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause. The New Jersey Democrat now faces the prospect of a trial on 12 felony charges in the fall, including bribery, conspiracy, and honest-services fraud.
According to prosecutors, between 2006 and 2013, Senator Menendez solicited and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions and personal gifts from Dr. Salomon Melgen, a Florida-based ophthalmologist. In exchange, Menendez used the power of his office to lobby on behalf of Melgen with members of the executive branch in an array of legal matters, including allegations of Medicare fraud. Melgen was charged alongside Menendez and faces additional charges of Medicare fraud in the Southern District of Florida.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
"Holy Fair Use, Batman": Copyright, Fair Use and the Dark Knight
The copyright for the original versions of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse have expired. Now, members of the public can create — and are busy creating — their own works based on these beloved characters. Suppose, though, we want to tell stories using Batman for which the copyright does not expire until 2035. We'll review five hypothetical works inspired by the original Batman comic and analyze them under fair use.