Through newly-forged deals, the music-streaming service Pandora has put an end to royalty disputes with Broadcast Music and the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, according to a report published at AppleInsider.com.

The report says Pandora had been licensing songs from the two groups under rates set by the U.S. District Court in Manhattan, which intervened because the parties couldn’t agree, according to the Wall Street Journal. Pandora sued ASCAP in 2012 in a bid to get rates lowered, while Broadcast Music sued Pandora in 2013, hoping to get rates hiked.

“The latter request was granted earlier in 2015, leading to an appeal by Pandora. With a formal arrangement under its belt, the appeal has been withdrawn,” the report says.

Read the article.

Celgene Corporation has announced the settlement of litigation with Natco Pharma Ltd. of India, Natco’s U.S. partner, Arrow International Limited, and Arrow’s parent company, Watson Laboratories, Inc. (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Allergan plc) relating to patents for REVLIMID (lenalidomide), reports StreetInsider.com.

“As part of the settlement, the parties will file Consent Judgments with the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey that enjoin Natco from marketing generic lenalidomide before the expiration of the patents-in-suit, except as provided for in the settlement,” the story reports.

“Celgene has agreed to provide Natco with a license to Celgene’s patents required to manufacture and sell an unlimited quantity of generic lenalidomide in the United States beginning on Jan. 31, 2026.”

Read the article.

A U.S. appeals court decision Tuesday may reflect favorably on the Washington Redskins football team’s chances to restore federal trademark protections, reports CBSDC.

“Freedom of speech, an argument made in federal court by the Redskins in July, was front and center for a ruling made by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., writes Chris Lingebach.

The court rejected a provision of federal law that would bar registration of disparaging trademarks on the grounds that doing so violates the First Amendment.

Read the article.

A recent summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit – which exercises federal appellate jurisdiction over New York, Connecticut and Vermont — serves as a reminder that an employer’s reliance upon its employee handbook can also prove its undoing, writes Michael McKeon of Pullman & Comley in an article published on JDSupra.com.

“In Langenkamp v. Olson, the Second Circuit reversed the federal trial court’s dismissal of a breach-of-contract claim brought by a non-tenured faculty member of New York University. The appellate court held that by expressly incorporating the Faculty Handbook into its offer of employment, NYU had transformed its provisions into contractual terms,” McKeon writes.

His article explains that it is critical that employers use care when drafting and referencing such handbooks.

Read the article.

Mitratech, a provider of Enterprise Legal Management (ELM) solutions, has recognized legal service provider Elevate as a Certified Partner to offer legal bill review services to Mitratech’s fast-growing client base.

“Our leading spend management and e-Billing systems automate much of the invoicing process and can save up to 10% in legal costs, but even more value is generated when a team consistently reviews the adjustments made by the technology. We have found that many clients don’t have the time or resources to take this on, and Elevate’s services address precisely that need,” noted Jason Parkman, CEO of Mitratech.

In a release, the company said several Mitratech clients already use Elevate’s services and have achieved several benefits, including:
• 3–10% additional cost savings as a result of more sophisticated and consistent review
• Reassignment of in-house staff to other valuable work within the department
• Reduced cycle time between invoice receipt and payment, enabling early payment discounts
• Enhanced invoice management and cost control processes

Read the release.

Katherine (Kate) Heptig, counsel in Farrell Fritz’s corporate department, has been selected by Long Island Business News as a “40 Under 40” award recipient for her leadership in business, support of Long Island’s not-for-profit organizations and commitment to the community. She will be honored at a gala on Thursday, January 21, 2016 at Crest Hollow Country Club in Woodbury, NY.

During her career, Heptig has handled several M&A transactions. Two matters on which she has recently worked include representing Cook Maran & Associates in its sale to Prime Risk Partners, and representing The Flood Group in its sale to Hub International Limited. Shehelped structure these transactions and negotiate and draft various agreements.

She played an integral role in launching the firm’s New York Venture Hub and Tax Law for the Closely-Held Business blogs. She has authored posts for both blogs.

Heptig is the chair of the Nassau County Bar Association’s Corporation, Banking & Securities Law Committee and a member of the Long Island Association’s Young Professionals Committee. She also lectures for professional organizations. She was selected to the 2015 (Tax) Super Lawyers New York Metro – Rising Stars and 2014 (Business/Corporate) lists. She was a recipient of Long Island Business News’ 2013 “Leadership in Law” Associate award.

Heptig has assumed a leadership role in several community organizations. She serves on the Board of Trustees and Governance Committee for The Cradle of Aviation Museum in Garden City, and on the Dean’s Advisory Board for The Hofstra University College of Liberal Arts. She also serves on the Board of Directors of the Long Island chapter of Girls on the Run, a nonprofit youth development program for girls in grades three through eight.

She is pursuing her Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree in Employee Benefits. She earned her Juris Doctor degree from the University of Pennsylvania Law School and her Bachelor of Arts degree, summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, from Hofstra University.

The third program in Norton Rose Fulbright‘s global litigation school web seminar series discusses unconventional oil and gas development in the United States and the dramatic rise in claims associated with that activity.

“These claims have ranged from environmental claims alleging that hydraulic fracturing, a process used in unconventional oil and gas development, is causing contamination to underground fresh water aquifers to claims for nuisance due to the increased noise and dust associated with the drilling,” the firm says on its site. “It has also led to an increase in the number of heavy truck accidents and lawsuits involving crude by rail and several high profile derailments.”

Watch the video.

Will you or your law firm practice be affected by this week’s compromise by Congressional leaders regarding taxes and deductions if it becomes law (which is currently anticipated)?

Accountant Steven Bankler has outlined which “Extenders,” both for business and individuals, are being made permanent, and also which “Extenders” are being extended through 2016 and which are extended through 2019.

In an analysis published on his website, he has outlined how those extenders apply to businesses and to individuals.

Read the report.

Certified Forensic Accountant Steven Bankler takes a look back at his tenure as an expert witness for a congressional committee investigating President Bill Clinton’s investment in Whitewater Development Corporation.

In a report published on his website, he explains that he was U.S. Senate’s investigative accountant for the Special Committee to Investigate Whitewater Development Corporation and Related Matters, administered by the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

“One could say that the Whitewater investigation presented a “trial by fire” test of my Daubert prowess, since the standard was still in its infancy,” he wrote. “These days, 20 years after the standard was first introduced, there is no excuse not to be prepared.”

Read the report.

Identity theft protection firm LifeLock will pay the Federal Trade Commission $100 million to settle charges that it failed to comply with a 2010 federal court order, the FTC said on Thursday.

Fortune reports the FTC claimed that LifeLock violated a judge’s order requiring that it properly safeguard sensitive personal data like Social Security, credit card, and bank account numbers. Additionally, the regulators alleged that LifeLock lied to consumers that it kept consumer data secure in a similar way to how financial institutions lock up data, the magazine reports.

Read the article.

Power Integrations has announced the latest result in one of its ongoing patent cases against Fairchild Semiconductor. After a trial in federal district court in San Francisco, a jury awarded Power Integrations $139.8 million in damages stemming from Fairchild’s infringement of two Power Integrations patents.

The infringement finding occurred in March 2014 and remains intact; the just-concluded trial was solely to retry damages after an earlier award of $105 million was set aside by the court in view of an intervening change in the law. Power Integrations will also be seeking a permanent injunction against the more than 140 Fairchild parts implicated in this case.

Read the article.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has reached a settlement with JPMorgan Chase agreeing to pay penalties totaling $367 million, after the SEC accused two of the bank’s wealth management subsidiaries of failing to disclose conflicts of interest to clients, reports consumerist.com.

“The SEC found that JPMorgan Securities and JPMorgan Chase Bank preferred to invest clients in the firm’s own proprietary investment products, but didn’t exactly go out of their way to disclose this preference,” the site reports. “The regulators say that, without this information, JPMorgan’s were deprived of information they needed to make fully informed investment decisions.”

Read the article.

Corporate Compliance Insights presents a short film about Richard Bistrong’s journey through the dark side of international business, “getting caught” and what that might mean for today’s compliance challenges.

Richard Bistrong is a former sales and marketing executive in the law enforcement and defense sector for more than 15 years, most of which was as VP for international sales. He pleaded guilty and sentenced to one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA, including books and records as well as exporting goods without authorization.

Watch the film.

InformationWeek has posted a free on-demand webinar reviewing key industry cyber security trends affecting financial institutions and methods of preventing and responding to a breach.

“If you’re like most financial institutions, you have controls that identify breaches, but need proper procedures that’ll enable you to recover from such an event,” InformationWeek says on its Bank Systems & Technology site. “In addition, you now face regulatory guidance for developing cyber resilience within your security program. Your ability to respond quickly to cyber security incidents is critical to limiting the impact of a breach on your operations.”

The webinar discusses the current threats across the financial marketplace and explore strategies for implementing a successful incident response program as outlined in the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council’s cyber resilience guidance.

Watch the on-demand webinar.

Bank Info Security is promoting a free webinar on avoiding phishing: unauthorized access to corporate and organizational networks that has cost businesses millions of dollars.

The webinar is scheduled for two presentations: Tuesday, Dec. 22, 2015, at 1:30 p.m. EST, and Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2016, at 3:30 p.m. EST.

PhishMe COO Jim Hansen will draw on his 25 years in law enforcement and IT security to discuss:

• Conditioning employees to identify and avoid phishing attacks
• Empowering users to quickly and easily report suspicious emails
• Analyzing suspicious emails to provide contextual real-time attack intelligence
• Attack case studies & attacker technique analysis

Register for the webinar.

The U.S. Supreme Court has reversed a California appellate court’s refusal to enforce an arbitration provision in a contract, concluding that the court’s decision is incompatible with the Federal Arbitration Act and prior Supreme Court precedent, reports John G. Papianou of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads LLP.

DirecTV, Inc. v. Imburgia involved two DirecTV customers who sued the company in California state court, claiming early termination fees in their service agreements violated California law, Papianou wrote in an article published by Lexology.com. DirecTV cited a provision in the service agreement that called for binding individual arbitration of all disputes between DirecTV and its customers. The trial court denied the request and DirecTV appealed.

He wrote that the message is clear: arbitration agreements that waive class actions or class arbitration are enforceable. And state-court judges must enforce them.

Read the article.

The insurance relationship is contractual, but when policyholders claim insurers failed to honor their obligations, they typically invoke the tort of “bad faith,” writes Robert D. Helfand of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt.

“When courts try to explain this anomaly, they cite features of insurance making it uniquely important that parties respect each other’s interests. Courts often say these features make the duty of good faith ‘reciprocal,’ ” he explains.

He discusses some cases that provide another reason for asserting that the insured’s bad faith injured the insurer in ways that were foreseeable when the contract was made. Even if the argument falls short, it might still create a basis for reducing the insurer’s exposure.

Read the article.

As demonstrated by two recent cases, the trends of delegating arbitrability questions to the arbitrator, and precluding parties from contractually modifying appellate rights, are here to stay, writes Timothy J. Abeska of Barnes & Thornburg in an article published by the National Law Review.

In Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2015), a dispute in an employment agreement, Brennan sued his employer, Opus Bank, claiming he was entitled to terminate his employment for “Good Reason” and collect a severance benefit. The bank treated Brennan’s termination as a voluntary resignation which did not trigger an entitlement to severance.

The other case was Atlanta Flooring Design Centers, Inc. v. R.G. Williams Construction, Inc., 333 Ga. App. 528, 773 S.E.2d 868 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015).

Read the article.

By Amy Heller
Law Office of Amy Cohen Heller

It’s that time of year when we look back at what we did and look forward at where we want to go. It’s also a good time to review what we have and whether we have dotted our “i’s” and crossed our “t’s”. In this article, the “t” stands for Trademarks.

Trademarks are an important — but often overlooked — business asset. Managed and properly protected, trademarks can bring significant value to your business and keep competitors at bay. Based on my work with clients and their U.S. trademark portfolios, here are a few easy-to-miss items to check on as we start a new year:

Has your company changed names, ownership or address since the mark was registered? If so, you may need to review whether an assignment of trademarks has been completed and recorded with the USPTO or whether important information has been updated.

For an existing Registered Trademark, what goods and services does the registration reference, and are these the current goods or services using the mark? If the mark is not being used on the goods and services referenced in the registration, the registration may be unenforceable or– worse yet–subject to cancellation. Goods/services that are not in use can be deleted from a registration; if use has expanded beyond what is stated in the registration, you should consider filing new applications immediately.

Are there registrations for marks which are not in use? To be effective and enforceable, the marks must be actively in use in commerce. Reviewing your registrations and confirming that actual use of the marks are being made on the appropriate products or services is important to do on an annual basis. This will also ensure that you can submit required affidavits to renew marks, and encourage the business to periodically use marks to keep them effective.

Are the proper trademark symbols being used with your marks? For marks which are registered with the USPTO, a ® symbol is appropriate. Non-registered marks can use a ™. If your mark has become registered in the last year, it is good to confirm the ® symbol has replaced the TM.

Is A Watch Service in Place?

Trademark owners are responsible for policing and protecting their trademarks. A watch service can identify pending trademark applications (either nationally and/or internationally) that may potentially infringe your existing marks. If you have a service, you may want to review the marks being watched and determine whether additions or deletions should be made to the list. If you do not have a service in place, it is a good time to consider whether one should be implemented. There are many types of watch services, from U.S. to worldwide watch services. Pricing depends on the number of marks, number of classes watched and the number of countries and can range from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars per year.

Are appropriate licenses in place for marks being used by third parties? A trademark owner is responsible for insuring that its marks are being used properly and with adequate quality control. If you are permitting third parties to use your marks, it is important to have those marks registered to cover the licensed goods and to have a written license in place to maintain that control.

If after reviewing these questions, you see gaps in your trademark process, it may make sense to conduct a trademark audit covering these and related mark items. Chances are if these items are slipping out of your grasp, you are also at risk in related areas. For example, in reviewing some of these issues with in-house counsel, failure to maintain a registration may violate the reps and warranties in contracts or impact a company’s ability to continue selling a product for which it may no longer own trademark rights; and failure to use the appropriate trademark registration symbols could result in the public perception that the mark was generic. On the plus side, keeping the trademark portfolio up-to-date can be key to any M & A activity, making the company and the shareholders look good. Additionally, these steps can provide useful information on where future trademark protection is needed. Taking stock of your trademark portfolio may uncover and avoid potential liabilities down the road. It’s a good time of year to cross those “t’s”.

• Amy Cohen Heller is an Intellectual Property Attorney specializing in Trademark Law. Her previous experience includes in-house Trademark Counsel at Fortune 500 companies and counsel positions at IP and large national practice law firms. She can be reached at https://www.linkedin.com/in/amy-cohen-heller-1238bb11 or aheller@achellerlaw.com

© December 2015

The Wall Street Journal lists five points to keep in mind when considering the Federal Reserve’s action on interest rates at today’s Fed meeting.

“The Federal Reserve, after holding its benchmark federal-funds rate near zero for seven years, is likely to raise it this week by a quarter percentage point.” according to the report. “The widely expected move ‘will be a testament…to how far our economy has come in recovering from the effects of the financial crisis and the Great Recession,’ Chairwoman Janet Yellen said earlier this month. Looking past liftoff, the U.S. central bank will seek to shape expectations for how quickly interest rates will rise in the coming months and years.”

Read the article.