Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
“Emails do not end in handshakes.” That is the headline from a recent British Airways ad aimed at encouraging business people to head across the pond for a good old-fashioned face-to-face meeting. Their message is spot on.
Certainly, social media, email, cell phones, faxes and so forth have all made it much easier to stay connected with your clients. But if you believe that social media is the only path to retaining your clients and facilitating closing skills, you need to reconsider. Your clients and prospects would tell you that they value the one-on-one time that an in-person meeting provides.
Certainly, the marketplace is crowded and competition is fierce. But savvy law firm marketers understand the unprecedented opportunity available today. The companies that will survive — and thrive — in this environment are those that understand that the old ways of marketing — filled with one-way communication, marketing hype and firm-focused messages — simply does not work anymore.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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.
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.
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?