Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Imagine that it's Spring 2020 and you run a warehousing company, in which it is common for your customers to store container-loads of goods in both the short-term (while awaiting a move to the container's next destination) and long-term (perhaps while the entity holding title to the goods in the container finds a buyer). Now imagine you discover that your warehouse contains containers of goods that could help combat the spread of the COVID-19 virus — masks, medical gowns, gloves or other personal protective equipment (PPE).
Or imagine this slightly different scenario: You own a trucking company and learn that your drivers are delivering pallets of hand sanitizer and disinfectants to a residential address. Perhaps they have delivered several pallets in a single delivery, or they are repeatedly bringing goods to the same place.
What, if any, obligations might you have in these scenarios? And importantly, what, if any, liability might you have if it turns out a customer is hoarding PPE?
The possibility of these types of scenarios is all too real, and so are the potential criminal and civil penalties that could flow forth from them. The Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. §4512) generally prohibits individuals and entities from hoarding materials that have been deemed to be scarce, or which would be made scarce by hoarding. Specifically, it prohibits accumulation of such materials "in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption" or if such accumulation is "for the purpose of resale at prices in excess of prevailing market prices." 50 U.S.C. §4512. Recently, an Executive Order (Executive Order 13910) was issued under which several categories of goods have been designated as "scarce" or "threatened." They include, among other things:
Items designated as "scarce" have been determined to be critical so that the government and society are equipped "to respond to the spread of COVID-19." (Department of Health and Human Services, Notice of Designation of Scarce Materials or Threatened Materials Subject to COVID-19 Hoarding Prevention Measures Under Executive Order 13910 and Section 102 of the Defense Production Act of 1950.) And they have been determined to be in short supply, to likely be in short supply, or to otherwise be the types of goods for which supply "would be threatened by hoarding." Id.
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?