Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Home Topics

Litigation

Features

Bit Parts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Accounting-Malpractice Claim/Arbitration<br>Contributory and Vicarious Copyright Infringement/Interlocutory Appeal<br>Copyright Infringement/Substantial Similarity<br>Copyright-Infringement Filing/Bankruptcy Purchase

Features

e-Discovery Docket Sheet

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent court rulings in e-discovery.

Features

Prepare for e-Discovery

Jason Park

With state laws governing the capture and securing of evidence ' including electronic data ' the possibility of spoliation is a genuine concern. Not only could evidence subjected to spoliation be inadmissible, but misdemeanor or felony charges could apply to the collector and the contracting party.<br>Identifying electronic evidence, much like in a physical crime scene, starts with drawing increasing concentric circles around the victim or perpetrator. Some care must be taken regarding a company's policies and practices. State and federal law on personal property may be involved if the employee used personal devices legally or illegally in combination with the company's assets, and a warrant or commencement of discovery may be required to access personal property or equipment on private property.

Features

In the Marketplace

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.

Features

Supreme Court to Review Obviousness Standard: Is a Higher Bar for Patentability Imminent?

Steven S. Yu, M.D.

In reviewing <i>KSR Int'l v. Teleflex, Inc.</i> (No. 04-1350), the Supreme Court is set to tackle one of the fundamental issues of patentability ' the standard for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. '103. As expected, this case has generated significant interest and numerous <i>amicus</i> briefs have been filed. With oral argument expected to be heard late this month, this case marks the first time in 30 years that the Court will examine this particular issue.

Features

'No Sublicense' Rule Extended to Trademark and Publicity Rights: The Half-Century Saga of Miller v. Glenn Miller Productions, Inc.

Stephen W. Feingold & Sarah E. Cleffi

It is well settled that a patent or copyright licensee may not sublicense that right absent specific authorization. <i>See, eg, Gardner v. Nike, Inc.</i> 279 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2004); <i>Unarco Industries, Inc. v. Kelley Co.</i>, 465 F.2d 1303 (7th Cir. 1972); <i>In re Patient Education Media, Inc,</i> 210 B.R. 237 (S.D.N.Y 1997). Trademarks are often grouped with patents and copyrights as 'intellectual property,' but fundamental differences among the genres exist. <i>See, eg, Sony Corp of America v. University City Studios</i>, 464 U.S. 417, 439 n.17 (1984). Do the same policies supporting the so-called 'no sublicense' rule in the patent and copyright context apply to trademarks and related publicity rights?

Features

Betting on Litigation

Stanley P. Jaskiewicz

For all the publicity that our litigious society generates, the decision to sue or not, or even to send a so-called lawyer letter, is often agonizing for any business owners or principals.<br>This dilemma is particularly strong for the smaller firms that compose so much of the e-commerce sector. While the media often perceives lawyers as nothing more than 'ambulance chasers' constantly looking for personal injury lawsuits to stock their personal treasuries, most businesses should prefer to resolve disputes outside the courtroom.

Features

Litigation

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

Features

Data Mining

Scott Andino

The first part of this article discussed the importance and focus of data retrieval in matrimonial actions and the parameters of data mining. The conclusion herein addresses privacy concerns, the impact of e-mail, and the costs of data retrieval.

Features

'Equitable Paternity'

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

He who acts like a father is a father ' at least legally, even if not biologically. New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, concluded this in a recent ruling, imposing 'equitable paternity' on a man who wrongly assumed he had fathered a daughter and acted accordingly.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Navigating the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine in Bankruptcy
    When a company declares bankruptcy, avoidance actions under Chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code can assist in securing extra cash for the debtor's dwindling estate. When a debtor-in-possession does not pursue these claims, creditors' committees often seek the bankruptcy court's authorization to pursue them on behalf of the estate. Once granted such authorization through a “standing order,” a creditors' committee is said to “stand in the debtor's shoes” because it has permission to litigate certain claims belonging to the debtor that arose before bankruptcy. However, for parties whose cases advance to discovery, such a standing order may cause issues by leaving undecided the allocation of attorney-client privilege and work product protection between the debtor and committee.
    Read More ›
  • Revised Proposal: Understanding the Interagency Statement on Complex Structured Finance Activities
    Many U.S. financial institutions that have participated in equipment leasing transactions (particularly in the large-ticket and municipal markets) in the last 20 years will be keenly aware that as the structures grew ever more complicated, Congress and the federal regulatory agencies grew intensely interested. Whether the institution had a major role in the transaction or simply provided a service, some degree of scrutiny could be expected, often in conjunction with a tax audit of its client. The risks to financial institutions from participating in complex structured finance transactions of all types became a source for concern for banking and securities regulators. The principal federal regulators responded in 2004 with a proposal that financial institutions investigate, and bear responsibility for evaluating, the legal, tax, and accounting basis of their clients' complex structured finance transactions. The goal: to limit the institutions' own credit, legal, and reputational risk from such participation.
    Read More ›