Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Have you ever discovered negative and possibly untruthful statements about your law firm online that did not present you in the most favorable light? These statements may have also been prominently displayed in the top positions of the Google search engine results pages (SERPs).
If the answer is yes, then you may want to learn more about reverse SEO, which helps suppress negative publicity by outranking it with other positive content.
Reverse SEO is part of a firm's online reputation management strategy that suppresses negative content such as bad service reviews in search engines so that potential clients and partner companies will have difficulty finding it.
For example, let's say you are a tax attorney based in New York City. This is a competitive environment and to gain higher visibility you created profiles on Yelp, Avvo, Justia and FindLaw. After years of helping your clients navigate the challenging tax issues, suddenly there is John, whom, for whatever reason, is dissatisfied with the service you provided him.
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?