“L’Oreal has been facing an increasing volume of illicit trade in fake fragrances and fake cosmetic products on some online auction sites,” the company have said in a recent statement.

L’Oreal have decided to take legal action to defend its registered trademarks.

Ebay is currently one of the most popular websites in the world, currently ranked 21 according to Alexa statistics. With such a mass of content, the question has to be asked, can eBay possibly monitor every product sold?

It is illegal for a driver to be blindfolded while operating a vehicle.
It is illegal to impersonate a person of the clergy.
It is illegal to maim oneself to escape duty.
It is illegal to stab yourself to gain someone’s pity.
It is illegal to wear a fake mustache that causes laughter in church.

View the rest here

Most times this form of hacking goes undiscovered, or alternatively, if discovered, the true owner of the personal copyright views it as too time or money consuming to go after the hacker. Whether or not you view it as such, this form of hacking constitutes theft. Unlike theft of tangible goods or chattels, this is theft of intellectual property to which only you have the right. When the theft, or hacking, rises to the level of intrusion where it becomes necessary to take action, a person must first determine how to go about putting a stop to the theft. (more…)

I previously authored an article for MITECHNEWS.com on non-compete contracts from an employee perspective. This article will address non-compete and non-solicitation agreements from the employers point of view.

In 1987, the Michigan Legislature passed Section 4(a) of the Anti-Trust Reform Act, which declared that it is the public policy in the State of Michigan to enforce reasonable non-competition and non-solicitation provisions in employment contracts. Prior to this statute, non-compete and non-solicitation agreements were generally disfavored in the State of Michigan-by-Michigan courts. Judges viewed them as generally non-competitive and potentially as anti-trust violations in that they restricted free trade. Judges are now instructed by the Michigan legislature to enforce non-compete agreements to the extent that they are reasonable in terms of geography, scope, duration, and other terms. (more…)

A domain name registrar is the organization or company responsible for providing domain name registration services to the public. A domain name registrar is either authorized by ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, an organization dedicated to Internet governance) to provide registration services or is authorized by its respective government to register domain names within a specific ccTLD (country code Top Level Domain name extension). A registrar must also be authorized by the registry of a Top Level Domain to act as an agent of the registry to process domain name registrations, where the agent is not a reseller. The registrar is also responsible for creating and maintaining a WHOIS database for its customers. The number of registrars has exploded in recent years, with some being more reputable than others. Examples of domain registrars include GoDaddy, Network Solutions, Register.com. (more…)

Wrong. Filing a medical malpractice lawsuit in New York is downright difficult. A lawyer must first conduct a thorough investigation of the facts and then have all the medical records reviewed by a medical expert. Only after the expert has confirmed evidence of wrongdoing; that the wrongdoing caused injury; and that the injury is significant, can the attorney go forward and file suit.

Remember, nobody likes a frivolous lawsuit. It’s bad for the lawyer, the client, the doctors, and the Court system. While there may always be differences of opinion about what happened and who is responsible for the victim’s injuries, a New York Medical Malpractice lawyer is ethically prohibited from filing a lawsuit that has no merit. Besides, who wants to waste thousands of hours of their time prosecuting a case that has no merit, and spent countless amounts of money to pursue a case that doesn’t belong in the Court system?

2. They sue everyone who saw the patient, even if there’s no reason.

Most of the time, this is incorrect. A lawyer is ethically bound to sue only those individuals who can be directly linked to the client’s injuries. Sometimes, after reading a hospital record it appears as if nurses and health care providers participated in the events that led to the client’s injuries. In those cases it may be necessary to name people in the lawsuit that might be peripherally involved.

Once it becomes clear during the course of the lawsuit that certain individuals had nothing to do with the malpractice or causing injury, the patient’s lawyer is likely to dismiss that person from the lawsuit- either after they have given testimony or shortly before trial. (more…)

This basically means that large US and European energy companies such as the ones that have employed George Bush, Dick Cheney and countless other members of the American Government will have the chance to have long term control over oil in Iraq.

As most divorce lawyers will tell you, the least expensive way to achieve a divorce is through an amicable settlement involving both parties. If you and your spouse can agree on child custody (if applicable), alimony, the division of assets and other important information relating to the divorce, you may be able to achieve satisfaction through divorce mediation. Because a neutral third-party individual presides over the matter, both you and your spouse will need to seek the help of a divorce attorney if preferred. Although not required, a divorce lawyer can offer important information throughout the mediation process, including your rights under the current divorce laws and advice on divorce that you may not otherwise consider. A divorce mediation is quicker and more affordable than a lengthy litigation process through divorce court. There are several instances in which divorce mediation may not be an option, including a marriage that has a history of abuse or when one spouse is fearful of the other. (more…)

Many of our female clients will have had letters from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and the Department of Work and Pensions.

The letters have been sent out to inform those concerned that they may have missed National Insurance contributions in the past, meaning that their basic state pension entitlement would suffer.

The letter normally comes with fairly incomprehensible paperwork basically saying that you can remedy the situation by paying Class 3 NI Contributions if you wish.

If you’ve received a letter, I’m sure that you will have studied these various communications avidly, and made the appropriate decision for yourself…

What, you haven’t? (more…)

Use of covert recordings

Dogherty was dismissed for misconduct through the use of unreasonable force and inappropriate language in relation to some children. She relied upon her covert recordings to support her claim for unfair dismissal in the employment tribunal because she disputed the minutes of the open hearing of the disciplinary and appeal hearings produced by the school. She applied rather late in the day to have the evidence of her covert recordings admitted. The employment tribunal, by a case management order, allowed her to use the unauthorized recordings she had made of the disciplinary and appeal panel hearings, including the private deliberations. In other words, even though the employer did not know that the meeting nor the private deliberations were being recorded, that evidence could be used in the tribunal.

Appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal

The school appealed against the Order. It argued that Dogherty’s clandestine recording of the deliberations of members of disciplinary and appeal panels amounted to an unjustified infringement of the governors’ right to privacy, and that the public interest required those deliberations to remain private. Dogherty invoked her right to rely on the disputed evidence and to a fair hearing under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Applying XXX v YYY [2004] IRLR 471 the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that “the first and most important rule of the law of evidence…is that evidence is only admissible if it indeed is relevant to an issue between the parties.” It had no hesitation in upholding the tribunal’s finding that the material contained in the recordings was relevant to Dogherty’s unfair dismissal claim.

A majority of the EAT was satisfied that the decision taken by the ET was within the range of responses that a reasonable tribunal might make and refused to interfere in the absence of any questions of law-Barracks v Coles (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) [2006] EWCA Civ 1041 applied. Further, it was held, according to the overriding objective in the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1861) the tribunal could do justice by admitting the evidence, giving the school a full opportunity to consider it, and by penalising Dogherty in costs for disclosing the evidence late. (more…)