Note From The Editor
February 02, 2006
Well it's a new year and I am hoping that it will be an exciting one. This year in addition to the MLF 50, which is open to firms of 100 attorneys or more,…
Overmessaging
February 02, 2006
Dwelling on your "message" (or what you want to say) at the onset of any reporter's inquiry, or at any point during the reporting process to the exclusion of all of the other component parts of the reporter/source/communications professional interaction (deadlines, non-verbal cues, relationships, etc.), is sure to result in less than optimal coverage. This can only be described as "overmessaging" or "over-PRing" a situation.
The Market Power Presumption Revisited: Court to Consider Whether Patents Confer Market Power in Tying Cases
February 02, 2006
Antitrust law has long prohibited producers with market power from engaging in tying arrangements, agreements in which the sale of a highly desired "tying" product is conditioned on the purchase of a second item. The Supreme Court has held that sellers must exert power over the marketplace to be guilty of illegal tying under the Sherman Act. Does the existence of a patent on a product create a presumption of market power? On June 20, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in <i>Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc.</i>, 2005 WL 770269, *1 (U.S.) (2005) to consider this question.
Litigation Budgeting: No Crystal Ball Required
February 02, 2006
Litigation may be simply one of the costs of doing business, but it's no secret that the difficulty in predicting those costs adds to the frustration in corporate legal departments. Concerns about costs and how to control or predict them weave their way throughout a survey of corporate litigation trends commissioned for the second consecutive year by Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., and conducted by an independent research firm. This article discusses one of the most effective, yet surprisingly underutilized tools for managing litigation costs: the litigation budget from outside counsel.
Sarbanes Oxley And The Non-Public Subsidiary: A Non-Sequitur?
February 02, 2006
By now, corporate counselors are well acquainted with the fact that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) and its whistleblower protections apply to publicly traded companies. What is less well known is that the Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower protections can also apply to non-public subsidiaries of publicly traded companies. Although the Department of Labor Administrative Review Board noted that it has not addressed the issue at the appellate level, a number of OSHA Administrative Law Judges (who hear SOX whistleblower cases at the trial level) have done so, and their decisions uniformly hold that SOX <i>can</i> protect the employees of <i>non-public subsidiaries</i> of publicly traded companies under certain circumstances. Those decisions also provide practical guidance for corporate counselors who want to limit SOX coverage strictly to the publicly-traded parent.
IP Transfer and Pricing Considerations for Financial Service Firms
February 01, 2006
Financial service companies make their money primarily through two core intellectual assets. The first is their expert knowledge of ways to create, expose, tranche and protect asset value. The second is their ability to project their expertise as embodied in their brand. Aside from the specialized intellectual asset merchant banks, financial service companies do not know how to value their knowledge nor their brand. Furthermore, historically they have not paid much attention to which of their global affiliates created the intellectual asset nor which of their affiliates deployed the asset — an activity that creates the accounting and financing phenomenon of "transfer pricing." The importance, more specifically the urgency, in rectifying this informational vacuum arises from recent changes in international tax law pertaining to the pricing of intangible assets that are transferred among Multinational Entity ("MNE") affiliates. This article, targeting the financial service industry, briefly summarizes the fears of the industry concerning transfer pricing and intellectual property ("IP"); cites an example of a recent innovation that has led to a revolution in the way bonds are priced identifying possible IP transfer pricing red flags; and concludes with suggestions for process improvements.
Are Condo Hotels Subject to SEC Regulations?
January 27, 2006
The latest real estate trend in the hospitality industry, across the country and around the world, is the "condo hotel." A condo hotel resembles, and is managed and operates as, a traditional hotel, except that certain hotel rooms are offered for sale as condominium units to individual buyers. In addition, unit owners usually have the option of placing those units in a reservation system or rental program and sharing in any associated fees. The proliferation of the condo hotel is largely the result of the benefits that condo hotels afford developers, lenders, and buyers. For a developer, the condo hotel provides the opportunity to turn a quick profit upon sale of condominiums as opposed to the incremental profits traditionally associated with the cyclical hotel industry. Lenders are also more likely to support developers as a result of the potential return on investment realized with condominium sales (even prior to construction). Finally, the condo hotel is attractive to buyers seeking a residence that includes all the amenities associated with traditional hotel stays. Condo hotel purchases and sales also raise new and unresolved legal issues, particularly whether the sale of a condo hotel unit constitutes the sale of a security requiring registration and compliance with federal securities laws.
How Courts Handle Equitable Distribution
January 27, 2006
The equitable distribution of the appreciation in value of the separately owned or separate property marital residence raises some unique issues. Real estate is generally considered to be a "passive" asset that increases in value mainly as a result of passive market forces rather than due to the "active" efforts of either spouse. Accordingly, the passive appreciation of such an asset would likewise remain the titled spouse's separate property, not subject to equitable distribution. Nevertheless, courts often distribute a portion of the appreciation to the non-titled spouse who resided in the separately owned marital residence. Perhaps courts have done so because, were it not for the titled spouse's residence, the parties would have presumably purchased a joint residence -- often one of the most valuable assets in the marital estate -- and would have shared in the appreciation that accumulated during the years of their economic partnership. Thus, courts have often awarded the non-titled spouse a share of the appreciation in a separately owned marital residence even when the non-titled spouse is unable to show that any efforts on his/her part contributed directly to the increase in value. These courts also seem to recognize that the marital "home" is something to which both parties to a marriage contribute simply by virtue of their economic partnership and that the value of certain contributions are difficult if not impossible to quantify.
Next-Generation CRM: Achieving the True 360-Degree Client View
January 27, 2006
As law firms grow in technological sophistication, the issue is no longer whether a firm is using a CRM system, but rather how they are generating greater ROI. Integrating with other key systems that allow users to take advantage of valuable content residing elsewhere in the firm is an important piece of this equation. How will next-generation CRM deliver a true 360-degree view of the marketplace and what features will help generate the most value from its content?
Best Option for E-Mail Recall, and Other Tips
January 27, 2006
If e-mail is so ubiquitous in our lives, why don't more people follow some general, common sense guidelines for composing, addressing and sending e-mails? This isn't a column on security; it's a look at some fundamental concepts that will keep you savvy about your e-mail habits.
