Supreme Court Justices Consider CourtsRole in Arbitration | حقوق مجله ملی

ایالات متحده. Supreme Court’s pro-arbitration trend appears intact after oral arguments Monday in a key case asking whether it should be courts or arbitrators themselves who rule on the enforceability of an arbitration agreement.

Consumer groups say the outcome of the case, Rent-A-Center, West v. جکسون, could determine whether courts have any role in overseeing arbitration clauses in labor agreements, which they see as biased toward employers. Business groups, به سهم خود, don’t want courts second-guessing what they see as validly agreed-upon arbitration agreements.

If companies win, this really will be a watershed case,” said Deepak Gupta, an attorney for Public Citizen, which asserts that arbitrators rule against consumers 94 درصد از زمان.

During the past two decades, the high court has generally ruled to strengthen the enforceability of arbitration agreements. روز دوشنبه, few justices appeared eager to change that trend, though several seemed to believe that courts should play some role in checking especially egregious agreements. Dallas lawyer Robert Friedman of Littler Mendelson, representing the business side of the case, urged the Court to continue its practice ofsending very, very complicated matters to the arbitratorrather than the courts

از طریق Law.com – Supreme Court Justices Consider CourtsRole in Arbitration.

ICC اعلام تجدید نظر در هزینه های داوری

The International Chamber of Commerce has announced a revision of its current arbitration costs and fees. The change will become effective on 1 May 2010 and apply to all arbitrations commenced on and after that date.

The revision does not change ICC’s traditional method of calculating administrative costs and arbitrators’ fees on the basis of the amount in dispute. اما, the rates applicable to each ‘slice’ of the amount in dispute have been adjusted. An increase averaging 0.14 of a percentage point has been applied to most slices. At the top end of the scale, a new slice has been added to distinguish between cases valued at US$ 100–500 million and those over US$ 500 میلیون. In the latter cases, a flat rate of US$ 113,215 will be charged for administrative expenses and arbitrators’ fees will be calculated using rates that are the same, or slightly less, than before. The initial payment required when filing a request for arbitration has been raised from US$ 2,500—the level at which it has been held since 1998—to US$ 3,000.

ICC Arbitration costs were last revised in January 2008. از آن زمان به بعد, the global economy has suffered a period of exceptional and unforeseen instability. The volatility of the financial markets has created a situation of great unpredictability, not least for the ICC Court. The Court’s revenue is in US dollars, but most of its expenditure is in euros. The increase in the levels of its administrative expenses will allow the Court better to withstand the impact of these developments and to maintain the quality of service for which it is recognized worldwide.

از طریق داوری.

International Litigation: How to File a Lawsuit Against a Foreign Investment Advisor : کسب و کار بین المللی حقوق مشاور

I was recently contacted by a client who lost several million US dollars due to negligent investment advice. Because the firm is based overseas, the client did not know what to do. متاسفانه, this scenario has become all too common in the wake of the global financial crisis.

Whether your claim is against an institution based in the U.S., the EU or elsewhere, you have a number of options. I will very generally touch on them below.

Many wealthy investors rely on foreign investment advisers who are typically employed by international financial institutions.

متاسفانه, as a result of the global financial crisis many investments advisers understated the risks involved with – for example in structured products linked to stock market indices.

Almost all legal systems have a concept of negligence, which would make a financial adviser potentially liable if the quality of their advice fell below that to be reasonably expected, causing loss to a client.

Your adviser is also very likely to be subject to local financial regulation and supervision that might include compensation schemes. But where these options are not available locally, or have proved unsatisfactory, your only option might be to sue.

[ادامه داد] International Litigation: How to File a Lawsuit Against a Foreign Investment Advisor : کسب و کار بین المللی حقوق مشاور.

چین دعوای قضایی و داوری. شاید. – چین قانون در وبلاگ ها: یک وبلاگ در مورد قانون چینی و مسائل حقوقی از انجام کسب و کار در چین.

مردم بیش از حد اغلب در قانون و یا انتخاب از قانون تمرکز, هنگامی که غالبا از آن قانون است نه آنقدر که تعیین بهترین مکان برای ادامه با طرح دعوی در دادگاه, اما ناملموس. The reality is that most breaches of contract in the United States also constitute a breach of contract in China, in Russia, in the Sudan, or wherever else. Buying a product and then not paying for it is, as far as I know, a breach of contract everywhere in the world. به طور مشابه, getting drunk and running someone over with your car gives rise to a cause of action probably everywhere in the world as well. I am not saying the choice of law is not important, but I am saying it is wrong to assume it is the most important.

Take negligence. Getting run over by a drunk driver is probably pretty much the same cause of action in both China and the United States and the laws for that cause of action will probably be pretty much the same. But let&پس از;ها دریافت واقعی اینجا و بپرسید کجا می خواهد شما به جای آن طرح دعوی در دادگاه اگر شما شاکی هستند? در ایالات متحده که در آن شما می توانید دوستان و بستگان خود را در شهادت قرار داده ایستادن در مقابل یک هیئت منصفه شهادت چگونه شما را از زمان حادثه هرگز و که در آن چند میلیون دلاری احکام معمولا اتفاق می افتد, و یا در چین که در آن شواهد خود را تنها ممکن است در نهایت گزارش یک دکتر نوشته شده و که در آن شما خواهد شد lucking برای به دست آوردن $30,000?

و یا گرفتن یک نقض قرارداد که در آن شما خرید قسمت معیوب را به یک میلیون دلار به یک قطعه از تجهیزات ساخت و فروش. در ایالات متحده ، یک فرصت خوب برای جمع آوری سود شما را از دست داده که قادر به فروش تجهیزات میلیون دلاری خود را داشته باشند, whereas in China your chances of getting those lost profits would be minuscule.

از طریق چین دعوای قضایی و داوری. شاید. – چین قانون در وبلاگ ها: یک وبلاگ در مورد قانون چینی و مسائل حقوقی از انجام کسب و کار در چین..

دادگاه صلاحدید دادگاه مورد آزار قرار گرفته در دستور قانونی امتحان غایب درخواست انتظار برای تولید و یا حرکت وادار و در انتصاب استاد ویژه : قانون کشف الکترونیک

در دوباره هنر هریس, 2010 WL 1612205 (شرکت تکث. APP. آوریل. 22, 2010)

در این مورد, استینافی دادگاه اعطا شاکی را از حکم دادگاه عالی بدادگاه تالی حکم و خروج سه سفارشات کشف زمینه ای پس از پیدا کردن که دادگاه محاکمه مورد آزار قرار گرفته تشخیص خود هنگامی که آن دستور داد تولید درایوهای سخت درخواست کننده برای معاینه پزشکی قانونی و زمانی که آن را منصوب کارشناسی ارشد ویژه به انجام آن معاینه دستور.

در حالی که از واقعیت تا حدودی پیچیده, کافی است که می گویند که در این دوره از کشف, شاکی هنر هریس به نوبه خود بیش مربوط به "رسانه های الکترونیکی" را برای تحقیقات پزشکی قانونی به رغم این واقعیت که هیچ درخواست در حال بررسی برای تولید چنین رسانه هایی وجود دارد ، دستور داده شد, بدون درخواست در حال بررسی برای تولید هر نوع که او با پیروی نمی بود, و هیچ حرکت معلق برای وادار تولید منظور قانع کننده بود., در عوض, در نتیجه بعید است از یک حرکت وادار تولید چنین از متهم دیگری در ابتدا با وجود نشان می دهد که هریس می تواند تنها داده های غیر ممتاز پاسخگو تولید, تولید سفارش دادگاه فوتی و فوری از رسانه های ذخیره سازی الکترونیکی با این وجود از جمله هریس دادگاه همچنین دستور داد که انتصاب یک استاد خاص برای انجام معاینات پزشکی قانونی.

علاوه بر تولید قانع کننده هریس مربوط به رسانه های ذخیره سازی الکترونیکی, دادگاه همچنین موفق به حرکت هریس برای یک حکم حراستی و ادعای امتیاز.

ورود زیر از نظم آن, دادگاه حرکات هریس برای روشن شدن و تجدید نظر را رد کرده. بر این اساس هریس واصل یک دادخواست برای حکم حکم دادگاه عالی بدادگاه تالی.

دادگاه استیناف ، در مورد اخیر به شدت بر روی تجزیه و تحلیل دیوان عالی تگزاس تکیه, در دوباره Weekley HOMES, L.P., 295 S.W.3d 309 (شرکت تکث. 2009), که به تایید کرد که به موجب تکث. R. مدنی. P. 196.4, اطلاعات الکترونیکی است به کشف تنها بر اساس یک درخواست خاص برای تولید آن علاوه بر, دیوPن عالی کشور به رسمیت شناخته شده که "'[p]roviding دسترسی به اطلاعات با معاینه سفارش از وسیله ذخیره سازی الکترونیکی حزب به خصوص سرزده است و باید به طور کلی دلسرد, فقط به عنوان اجازه دسترسی باز به فایل کابینت برای مطالعه به طور کلی یک حزب خواهد بود. "

از طریق دادگاه صلاحدید دادگاه مورد آزار قرار گرفته در دستور قانونی امتحان غایب درخواست انتظار برای تولید و یا حرکت وادار و در انتصاب استاد ویژه : قانون کشف الکترونیک.

ویندوز XP هنوز هم امنیت کمتری نسبت به پیروزی 7 و ویستا | کامپیوتر

مایکروسافت منتشر کرده است گزارش حادثه امنیتی جدید–هشتمین حجم کلی سه ماهه مایکروسافت از روند امنیت کامپیوتر و شبکه. این گزارش نشان میدهد که یک بار دیگر که امنیت را می توان تا حد زیادی با ارتقاء به آخرین نرم افزار بهبود یافته, و از طریق آموزش و پرورش کاربر.

یافته های کلیدی خلاصه برخی از داده های مربوط به کشف بیش از سه ماه گذشته. در اینجا برخی از برجسته:

• نسخه های 64 بیتی ویندوز 7 و ویندوز ویستا SP2 کاهش میزان عفونت از هر پیکربندی سیستم عامل های دیگر در 2H09 بود, اگر چه نسخه های 32 - bit هر دو به حال میزان عفونت که کمتر از نیمی از ویندوز ایکس پی با سرویس پک خود را به روز, SP3.

• دامنه ملحق کامپیوتر خیلی بیشتر به احتمال زیاد برای مواجهه با کرم ها نسبت به کامپیوترهای غیر دامنه, در درجه اول به دلیل از راه کرم انتشار. کرمها به طور معمول گسترش بیشتر به طور موثر از طریق سهام فایل های نا امن و حجم ذخیره سازی قابل جابجایی, که هر دو اغلب فراوان در محیط های سازمانی و کمتر شایع در خانه.

• در ویندوز XP, آسیب پذیری های مایکروسافت حساب برای 55.3 درصد از تمام حملات در نمونه مورد مطالعه. (مقایسه اهداف سوء استفاده مبتنی بر مرورگر)

• در ویندوز ویستا و ویندوز 7, نسبت آسیب پذیری مایکروسافت به میزان قابل توجهی کوچکتر, حسابداری برای فقط 24.6 درصد از حملات در نمونه مورد مطالعه. (مقایسه اهداف سوء استفاده مبتنی بر مرورگر)

از طریق ویندوز XP هنوز هم امنیت کمتری نسبت به پیروزی 7 و ویستا – PCWorld کسب و کار مرکز.

محافظت از مالکیت فکری | USDOJ: عدالت وبلاگ

Today the Department of Justice is recognizing  the 10th annual World Intellectual Property Day. Intellectual property refers to creations of the mind –music, literature, فیلم, artistic works, and inventions. Intellectual property is one of America’s greatest assets. Its protection is central to our economic prosperity and security as well the public’s health and safety. Aggressive intellectual property law enforcement is crucial to our continued success and safety, and is a top priority of the Department of Justice.

پیشتر در سال جاری, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the creation of the Task Force on Intellectual Property. The Task Force strengthens efforts to combat intellectual property crimes through close coordination with state and local law enforcement partners as well as our international counterparts.

امروز, that Task Force got even stronger. Acting Deputy Attorney General Gary  G. Grindler, who serves as the Chair of the Task Force, announced the appointment of 15 new Assistant U.S. Attorney positions and 20 FBI Special Agents to be dedicated to combating domestic and international IP crimes.

از طریق Protecting Intellectual Property « USDOJ: عدالت وبلاگ.

اجرای IP های خشونت آمیز است | معاون AG گری G. Grindles | حقوق مجله ملی

Businesses that create and rely upon intellectual property, from large entertainment conglomerates to small biotech firms, make up among the fastest-growing sectors of the U.S. اقتصاد. These industries also represent a significant portion of U.S. exports, with intellectual property now comprising a significant — and growing — share of the value of world trade. The proliferation of worldwide Internet access and advances in traditional distribution methods, such as transportation and shipping, now allow American businesses of all sizes to market their intellectual property throughout the world. Digital content, whether embodied in software, books, games, movies or music, can be transmitted from one corner of the world to another almost instantly.

But these unprecedented opportunities for American businesses and entrepreneurs are put at risk by criminals and criminal organizations that seek unlawfully to profit by stealing from the hard work of American artists, authors and inventors. For every new technological advancement by American business, there is, unfortunately, a criminal who would seek to misuse it for his own illicit purposes. Criminals are responding to American innovation with their own creative methods of committing intellectual property crimes — from widespread online piracy to well-funded corporate espionage to increased trade in counterfeit pharmaceuticals and other goods.

When we fail to enforce intellectual property rights aggressively, we fail to protect some of our nation's most important and valuable resources. The theft of even a single trade secret can completely destroy a burgeoning small business. When criminals sell counterfeit drugs and medical devices to consumers, our nation's public health is compromised. And when illicit products such as counterfeit airplane parts or pirated electronic components make their way into the marketplace, they place our public safety at risk.

In light of these threats, it is imperative that the government act, and act aggressively. And that is exactly what we at the Department of Justice are doing. In cooperation with our partners across the federal government, the Department of Justice has redoubled its commitment to protecting American innovation and technology through aggressive criminal and civil enforcement of our nation&پس از;s intellectual property laws.

از طریق اجرای IP های خشونت آمیز است.

World Intellectual Property Day | کاخ سفید

In recognition of World Intellectual Property Day, the US government is engaging in activities all over the world to highlight the importance of intellectual property and our commitment to protecting it.

Our law enforcement agencies, the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, announced today the formation of a national network of law enforcement personnel.

The Department of Justice announced that the FBI is increasing its manpower that focuses of IP significantly, by creating regional IP squads in major cities around the nation and adding an additional 20 new agents to those squads.

بعلاوه, the DOJ announced that it will be adding 15 new prosecutors throughout the country to add to its current force of 200 prosecutors specially trained to handle IP enforcement.

In collaboration, the Department of Homeland Security announced that its multi-agency IPR Center is creating partnerships with 70 فدرال, state and local law enforcement in 22 cities to collaborate on IP enforcement actions.

And ICE announced the efforts of a major sweep – Operation Spring cleaningthat resulted so far in 45 دستگیری, the seizure of 701,384 counterfeit items valued at $44 میلیون.

Many other agencies that also work on IP enforcement are joining this united effort.  Secretary Clinton and Secretary Locke and Ambassador Ron Kirk are issuing statements highlighting the importance of intellectual property. There are also a numbers of events taking place today where senior government officials are speaking on intellectual property, including Ambassador Miriam Sapiro of USTR at the National Press Club, Under Secretary of State Robert Hormats at the US Chamber of Commerce. I will be speaking at an event with the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee John Conyers, the head of USTR, Ambassador Ron Kirk, the head of our US Patent and Trademark Office David Kappos and other senior Commerce officials, including Under Secretary Francisco Sanchez.  And embassies throughout the world are reaffirming those same sentiments in statements issued by their ambassadors and in a number of educational programs they are holding.

The President has made clear that strong enforcement of America’s intellectual property is a critical part of our plan to promote exports and create jobs.  I look forward to continuing our dialogue and utilizing the expertise out there to harness and protect what has always been one of America’s greatest strengths – the diversity of great ideas.

از طریق World Intellectual Property Day | کاخ سفید.

Dukes V وال مارت | دادگاه استیناف نهم از نظر تجدید نظر| قاضی مایکل D. هاوکینز

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/04/26/04-16688.pdf