Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
NYC Local Law 18 On Short-Term Rentals Takes Effect
On Jan. 9, 2022, the New York City Council passed the Short-Term Rental Registration Law (Local Law 18), which directly impacts the ability of an individual unit owner to rent his or her apartment on a short-term basis, i.e., for a period of less than 30 days. The law took effect on Sept. 5, 2023.
This law now requires all short-term rental hosts to register with the Mayor's Office of Special Enforcement (OSE), which oversees the enforcement of Local Law 18. Although not a de-facto ban on all short-term rentals in NYC, Local Law 18 imposes significant and burdensome requirements on short-term rental hosts, which has already had the intended impact of severely limiting a host's ability to lease his or her apartment on a short-term basis. Under the new law, Booking Services (such as Airbnb, VRBO and booking.com) are prohibited from processing any transactions for an unregistered host.
OSE defines these short-term rental services as a "booking service," which is "any entity that, directly or indirectly (1) provides one or more online, computer or application-based platforms that individually or collectively can be used to (i) list or advertise offers for short-term rentals, and (ii) either accept such offers, or reserve or pay for such rentals; and (2) charges, collects or receives a fee for the use of such a platform or for provision of any service in connection with a short-term rental." A platform is not a "booking service" if it solely lists or advertises offers for short-term rentals but does not have a mechanism to accept the offer or pay for the rental.
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.