Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
FIFA Decision Confirms Long Arm of Honest Services Fraud
The U.S. government's lead role in the prosecution of corruption within the Zurich, Switzerland-based Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) may be a paradigmatic example of U.S. law enforcement acting as the world's policeman, reaching out around the globe to prosecute wrongdoing with little apparent connection to the land of baseball, hot dogs and apple pie. Didn't the Supreme Court remind everyone just a few years ago that U.S. statutes are presumed only to apply domestically? If corruption is based on foreign executives violating their duties of loyalty to foreign private entities, how does that translate into a violation of U.S. criminal law? Does it matter that the conduct in which the foreign executive engaged — commercial bribery — may not be illegal under the law of the executive's home country?
The Second Circuit answers these questions in its recent decision in United States v. Napout, 963 F.3d 163 (2d Cir. 2020), affirming the convictions of Juan Angel Napout, the former president of Paraguay's national soccer federation, and Jose Maria Marin, the former head of the Brazilian national soccer federation. In doing so, the decision joins a long line of authority illustrating that as long as the scheme entails some use of the U.S. banking system, the Department of Justice can venture broadly indeed to prosecute foreign nationals under U.S. criminal law for conduct that appears predominantly foreign in locus and effect, with little regard for whether that conduct would violate the criminal laws of their home country.
Background on FIFA Prosecutions
After public allegations that senior FIFA officials demanded bribes in connection with the 2010 bidding process to be the host country for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup tournament, FIFA commissioned an internal investigation led by former Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia. Garcia later resigned in protest after FIFA leadership released a summary he claimed to be inaccurate, rather than his 430-page investigation report.
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?
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.