Unless you’ve been on vacation all summer, the brawl between Google and Microsoft should be old news. New developments, however, have occurred with publication of the non-compete agreement signed by Kai-Fu Lee.

Google v. Microsoft

Earlier this year, Kai-Fu Lee quit Microsoft to go work for Google. In doing so, Lee allegedly violated a non-compete agreement he had signed with Microsoft. Predictably, Microsoft sued Lee to prevent the move and the brawl began. Microsoft landed the first punch by getting a temporary restraining order preventing Lee from working for Google until the case is resolved.

Non-Compete Language

As matters have moved forward, the language in the non-compete agreement has become public knowledge. Generally, Lee agreed not to work for a major competitor of Microsoft if he left the company for a period of one year. The specifics of the language, however, are grossly entertaining

In signing the non-compete agreement, Lee agreed:

1. “not to accept employment or engage in activities competitive with products, services or projectsof MicrosoftI worked on or learned confidential or proprietary information or trade secrets while employed.”

2. All litigation arising from the non-compete agreement would occur in the State of Washington.

Mr. Lee and Google have a serious problem. California courts rarely enforce non-compete agreements, while Washington courts do. Since Microsoft sued first and Lee specifically agreed to Washington jurisdiction, this case should remain in Washington. Google is trying to move jurisdiction to California, but Microsoft beat it to the punch. Google’s attorneys simply blew it.

Prediction

Predictions in legal disputes are iffy at best, but Mr. Lee and Google have really fallen on their face in this one. Why they didn’t sue Microsoft in California court before Microsoft could react is mind boggling. The deck is now stacked heavily in favor of Microsoft and you can expect an outright victory for Microsoft or a settlement on terms set by the company.

Richard A. Chapo is a San Diego business lawyer with http://www.sandiegobusinesslawfirm.com - providing legal services and legal advice to businesses in San Diego, California.

White Collar Crimes are defined as non-violent acts committed by individuals or businesses in the course of daily working activity. Some of these crimes include embezzlement, bribery, tax evasion, false advertising and other types of fraud. They are generally used to obtain money, property or services to gain advantage in business or in ones personal life.

According to the FBI, white collar crimes cost the United States more than $300 billion annually. These crimes are considered to be federal offenses and even though state and local law enforcement may be involved in the cases, charges will most often be presented by federal agencies such as the FBI, IRS, US Customs, Secret Service, EPA or the SEC.

Penalties for white collar offenses generally include fines, house arrest, community confinement and sometimes imprisonment. Federal agencies will many times make mistakes when prosecuting these criminals. They routinely make mistakes that violate peoples constitutional and civil rights. That is why it’s so important to hire a lawyer if you’ve been charged with any of these types of crimes. Just going to trial can be enough to humiliate, embarrass and often time destroy the future of a growing business. It’s best to just settle these cases outside of the courtroom and protect the name of your business.

Please visit our San Diego Criminal Defense Law Firm if you have been convicted of Fraud or any other type of crime at http://www.sddefenselawyers.com

You may freely reprint this article granted that this resource box is attached and all hyper links remain intact and active.

A majority of businesses have ownership groups of less than
five individuals. While this provides for efficient and
effective management, difficulties arise when something
happens to one of the owners.

If your business has multiple owners, ask yourself what
happens if:

Let’s face it so many people these days are so completely irresponsible one has to wonder what type a job they might be able to hold? One career path, which might fit the bill for a totally irresponsible person is to become an Attorney at Law. Now you might think that attorneys are responsible, but you are mistaken. You see not only are attorneys irresponsible but they help others who are irresponsible pretend to be responsible and re-assign their responsibility to another, an organization or an agency; that in itself is irresponsible as a citizen. Assisting another to defraud and forgo their duties to society and yet retain the efforts of the whole of that society or steal from the labors of another for that which you did not earn is irresponsible; how on Earth could it be another other than that.

Not long ago there was a huge defrauding by Law Students to discharge their student loans by using their new law degree and license to file bankruptcy. It was said to be good practice and some graduating students found a never-ending supply of bankruptcy clients not more than a 3-mile radius from the University Grounds.

So, if you are an irresponsible piece of garbage and a worthless excuse for a human being, I recommend you become a lawyer so you can continue your current level of work ethic and comfortable lifestyle that you are use to. Just think you can even drive a Beamer and pretend your human waste is without odor. All attorneys know everything is only a matter of definition. After all don’t your wants out weigh any other needs of society? If you believe that, you are already on your way to being a very excellent lawyer indeed. Think on this.

“Lance Winslow” - If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs

If you’ve taken the necessary steps to register your copyrighted works, you inevitably will have an opportunity to royalties off of them. To take advantage of the opportunity, you will need to be familiar with copyright license agreements.

Copyright License Agreement

A copyright license agreement sets for the terms under which a third party can use your content. In legal language, you will the “licensor” with the other party being the “licensee.” The purpose of the agreement is to set forth the terms under which you, the licensor, will grant the third party, licensee, the right to use, publish or reuse your copyrighted work in exchange for a royalty. Let’s take a closer look at key components of the licensing agreement.

Specific Rights Granted

This may sound obvious, but the agreement needs to detail exactly what copyrighted material can be used. If you have copyrighted articles, are you granting a right to use all of the articles or only certain ones? It is highly recommended that the agreement contain a detailed description of the exact materials being covered.

Once you agree upon the exact materials, you need to determine any restrictions on how the material can be used. Can the material be used on the Internet or will it be restricted to a certain niche’ such as manuals or collections of materials?

An extremely important issue is whether the agreement grants exclusive or non-exclusive rights. In English, this simply defines whether the licensor can grant similar rights to other parties. The grant of exclusive licenses should require a much larger royalty rate since you are essentially betting the third party will be successful.

Licensing Royalties

In exchange for your copyrighted work, the third party is going to make royalty payments to you. The particular amount of the royalty is dependent upon the nature of your work. Issues to consider include:

1) Will you be paid a flat amount or percentage of sales?

2) If a percentage, will it be figured from gross revenues or something less?

3) How often will you be paid?

4) What rights will you have to audit the books of the third party to determine you are getting the full royalty?

In some situations, you may decide to forgo a royalty payment. This usually occurs when the third party will use the materials in manner that produces massive publicity for you. For example, many professionals seek to right columns for publications as a marketing tool. Often, they will not charge the publication for the material because the resulting publicity carries enough of a benefit.

In Closing

If you are considering licensing copyrighted content, keep the above in mind. Since such agreements are difficult to break, hiring an attorney is worth the expense.

Richard A. Chapo is with http://www.sandiegobusinesslawfirm.com - providing legal services to San Diego businesses.

Regardless of the type of business you conduct, there is a
significant risk of being sued in our litigious society.
Lawsuits can range from claims of negligence to defective
products to disputes with employees. Incorporating is a
means of guarding against these potential threats.

Single Incorporation - Protecting Your Personal Assets

Incorporating your business is a method for creating a legal
wall between your personal assets and business. Any judgment
against your business will not impact your personal assets.
While your home, savings, stocks, etc., are protected, what
happens to your business? If a judgment is rendered against
your business, the business assets are as good as gone. This
doesn’t have to be the case.

Double Incorporation Strategy - Protect Your Business Assets

Many businesses can benefit from pursuing a double
incorporation strategy. The strategy is designed to address
the situation where a business has significant assets that
are exposed to litigation risk. If you incorporate your
business, it is all well and good that your personal assets
are not at risk. But what if your business has a number of
high value assets such as manufacturing machinery, office
equipment, popular domain name, custom software or other
items? Merely incorporating your business will not protect
these assets because they are owned by the business entity.
Since a successful lawsuit would result in a judgment
against the business entity, all assets of the business
could be seized as part of the judgment. In short, you lose
your machinery, office equipment, intellectual property or
any other item of tangible value. The double incorporation
strategy prevents this scenario.

As the name suggests, the double incorporation strategy
involves the creation of two business entities. The first is
your “at risk” business that interacts with your customers
or clients. The second entity, a “holding corporation”, is
then created to own the valuable assets of your business.
This holding corporation then leases the relevant business
assets to your “at risk” entity. If the “at risk” entity is
sued, the holding company merely recovers its assets and the
plaintiff is forced to settle for pennies on the dollar
because the “at risk” entity has few assets. In essence, the
plaintiff wins the battle, but loses the war.

Most people know that a business entity can be used to
create a protective shield for their personal assets. If
your business has high value assets, now you can use this
double incorporation strategy to protect those assets as
well.

Richard Chapo is the lead attorney for the law firm
http://www.SanDiegoBusinessLawFirm.com - a firm providing
legal advice to California businesses. This article is for
general education purposes and does not address every facet
of the subject matter. Nothing in this article creates an
attorney-client relationship

The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals has dealt a blow to privacy advocates by invalidating a California privacy law. In litigation brought by the American Bankers Association and others, the appellate court overruled the finding of a trial judge that the California law could stand. Instead, the appellate justices found the law to be pre-empted in part by the federal 2003 Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.

When a state law conflicts with a federal one, the federal law takes precedent. For instance, the Supreme Court has ruled abortion to be constitutionally protected. No state may pass anti-abortion laws and have them enforced.

The question at issue in the California law was a section giving California residents the right to block financial institutions from selling their private information to third parties.

A San Francisco trial judge, Morrison C. England, Jr., had ruled the section conflicted with provisions of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, but was not pre-empted because the federal law allowed for stricter state laws. The 9th Circuit court disagreed.

The case will be returned to Judge Morrison in the next 60 days. He will then determine whether any other provisions dealing with the sale of personal financial information are still enforceable. Given the appellate ruling, it is difficult to imagine a ruling upholding this section of the California law.

Notwithstanding these developments, approximately seventy percent of the California privacy law is still enforceable. Financial institution still must get permission from customers prior to selling or sharing your information with third parties.

You should be concerned about financial institutions selling your private information to others. With all the incidents of identity theft in the news, chances are you will eventually become a target. Banks should be focusing on protecting their customers, not making a buck off private information.

Richard Chapo, Esq., is a business lawyer with http://www.sandiegobusinesslawfirm.com - offering legal advice to San Diego businesses. This article is for general education purposes and does not address every facet of the subject matter. Nothing in this article creates an attorney-client relationship.

The legal protection known has “copyright” has come front and center over the past few years with major legal rulings regarding peer-to-peer networks on the Internet. Copyright protection, however, can be a confusing area of the law. This article details what can and cannot be protected by copyright.

Copyright Protection? - Yes

Copyright protects “original works of authorship” in a tangible, fixed form of expression. The material does need to be directly perceptible as long as it can be expressed with the aid of technology. A good example of this is a movie, which requires a projection device of some sort.

Materials that can be copyrighted include:

1. Literary works;

2. Musical works, including any accompanying words

3. Dramatic works, including any accompanying music

4. Pantomimes and choreographic works

5. Pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works

6. Motion pictures and other audiovisual works

7. Sound recordings

8. Architectural works

Each of these categories is traditionally given a very broad reading. For instance, “literary works” include computer programs and plans for building a home are considered “pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works.” While copyright cuts a broad path, it doesn’t cover everything.

Protected by Copyright? - No

If a work is not tangible, copyright protection will not apply. This can lead to confusion, so here are a few categories not eligible for protection from copyright:

1. Works that are not fixed. For example, the statements made by experts at a round table discussion or a comedian’s stage act.

2. Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans. These materials may be eligible for patent protection.

3. Ideas, procedures and methods.

Copyright protection is a valuable intellectual property tool. If it all possible, copyright the material you produce to prevent others from misusing it.

Richard Chapo is with http://www.sandiegobusinesslawfirm.com - providing legal services to businesses in San Diego.

The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U. S. law, but you should still give notice whenever possible. Because prior law did contain such a requirement, however, the use of notice is still relevant to the copyright status of older works.

Under the 1976 Copyright Act, creators of covered works were required to give notice of copyright on the work in question. This requirement was eliminated when the United States signed onto the Berne Convention in March 1989.

You should give notice of copyright whenever possible because it puts the public on notice that the work is protected by copyright, identifies the copyright owner, and shows the year of first publication. Furthermore, in the event that a work is infringed, if a proper notice of copyright appears on the published copy or copies to which a defendant in a copyright infringement suit had access, then the defendant can’t claim innocent infringement as a defense. Innocent infringement occurs when the infringer did not realize that the work was protected.

The use of the copyright notice is the responsibility of the copyright owner and does not require advance permission from, or registration with, the Copyright Office.

Form of Notice for Visually Perceptible Copies