Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Mindset for Happiness: Retrain Your Brain
Recently, there has been a lot written about lawyers and their lack of happiness. This unhappiness extends to both their profession and their personal lives. The first week of May was the ABA's Well-being week, during which firms are encouraged to offer programming and activities that address the six pillars of the ABA Well-being Pledge. Some firms do participate, while others do not. However, regardless of what firms do, the root of unhappiness ultimately comes from within the individual and cannot be changed or affected by a firm's thoughtful and engaging programming.
Happiness is not a permanent feature or personality trait, but a more fleeting, changeable state. Progress on our professional and personal goals can make us feel happier and more satisfied with life. The pursuit of happiness can be a goal, but it is important to remember that happiness is not permanent, and it is normal to experience negative thoughts and emotions. It is important to identify and challenge negative thoughts.
Negative Thinking
As humans, we have negative thoughts to protect ourselves from danger. For example, if you see fruit in a tree and wonder if you should climb on the limb to retrieve it, your negative thought might be, "If I climb up there, the branch might break and I'll fall to the ground." This negative thought is a way for your body to protect you from injury. When we have negative thoughts, our body produces cortisol, a hormone produced by the adrenal gland, that puts our physical body in a state of readiness to either fight or flee. In this case, the negative thought is helping you to avoid injury by making you less likely to climb the tree.
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.
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.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?