Law Articles

Avoiding Construction Claims through Guaranteed Maximum Contracts

2008-04-07T22:33:00.001+07:00

Guaranteed Maximum Contracts or G-Max are becoming more popular as a corporate vehicle to minimize risk, avoid claims and integrate the diverse interests of a complex project. Not to be confused with cost plus, the G-Max contract is bid exactly the same as lump sum. The contractor assumes the same risk, with a big stipulation: he's willing to share in the savings on the basis of the owner's guarantee of fee and prompt payment of net cost.

There's no difference in cost or risk between Lump Sum and Guaranteed Max, but a big difference in results, particularly on the owner's side of the fence. Don't let anyone tell you that G-Max cost more. They don't! In fact, Lump Sum contracts are sometimes converted to G-Max for the same price or less.

How do they work? In the following example, the best bid price received from a qualified general contractor for a major renovation is $2.5 million. The owner's budget is $2.2 million, but modifications and changes are anticipated for an additional $500,000 estimated construction costs. Time is of the essence. The project must start immediately. The owner wishes to cut $300,000 from the base contract without changing the scope of work and at the same time control cost of the additions without giving away the $500,000. The contractor already dropped his price on the first round of negotiations and won't budge off his $2.5 million. This project is an ideal candidate for G-Max conversion.

The Owner who awards the contract should ask the contractor: "How much fee (or profit) do you want in this project?" (Assume 6 percent). When the contractor states "$150,000," the owner says: "Then what you are saying is that this project's actual cost is $2.35 million. We'll guarantee your fee of $150,000, but we believe you can bring this project in for under $2 million by working with some of our people who know construction. Do you see that as a realistic possibility? " If the contractor answers "Yes," then the owner asks: "Would you then accept a Guaranteed Max contract with the understanding that all costs saved below the $2.35 million will be returned to the owner? " If the answer is "Yes," then you can establish the method of administration. If the answer is "No," then you negotiate a 75-25 or 50-50 split in the savings and ask: "If we guaranteed $500,000 of additional work to the base contract, will you agree to reduce your fee on extras for the first $250,000 of additional work?"

This is just the beginning, there are many possibilities. The yield at the end of the project often exceeds the original objective (in this case $300,000) because the atmosphere has changed from adversarial to partner. With proper controls, and by working with contractors as a team member, it is possible to obtain greater yields on the bottom line than by any other contracting method.

G-Max contracts best achieve the owner's objective because a partnership is formed between owner and contractor wherein the owner agrees to reimburse the contractor for actual cost as it occurs, not from a schedule of values. This eliminates the distrust between parties. It also eliminates the contractor's negligence to pay his suppliers and subcontractors because he gets audited monthly. In today's market, this one issue alone will solve a lot of problems and insure both savings and a smoothly running project.

The owner plays an active role throughout the entire process. The whole issue of cost is manageable when the savings are shared, rather than negotiated from an adversarial position. When the administration is properly set-up and organized, the benefits are truly amazing. Because every purchase order and invoice received from the contractor is submitted to the owner as backup, and because the owner agrees to cut the time for processing and pay promptly, a positive and successful relationship is assured. Front end loading disappears, so does the haggling with price.

There is another reason for using the G-Max contract system: It is the best vehicle for recovering cost when pricing on extras becomes unreasonable. The fact that owners have tremendous leverage on extras is not often mentioned among users, perhaps because it is a business advantage. Consider once again the outrageous cost for a new door. Assume that the contractor wants $1,500 to cut the hole and install a new door, plus another $50,000 to relocate the 4-inch gas pipe that nobody knew existed. Assume also that the true cost of the piping relocation is only $10,000, but the contractor will not back off his estimate. The work must start and he demands approval. Under lump sum contracts owner's haven't got much choice, but under the G Max system, even if you agree to the $50,000, all you've given away is the difference in fees, or $2,400 instead of $40,000. Once the work is complete and true cost is known, even this can be adjusted. There's a strong incentive here to be honest. Nothing like it exists with any other format. Cost plus contracts claim to be the same, but in reality they do not have any incentive for shared savings or efficiencies.

Still another advantage of G-Max occurs when work must start ahead of final drawings. There are often issues that delay completion of the drawings and therefore start of construction. The G-Max format allows owners to minimize risk when proceeding with work ahead of final drawings. It has been my experience to start work on 30 percent completed drawings while obtaining a G-Max price for the entire project based on preliminary drawings and outline specifications. That's an extreme example, but it does happen.

The downside also needs stating. G-Max contracts require more work on the owner's part to administer. The main effort involves defining what is cost. And if you are not interested in collecting discounts, obtaining credits for small tools, establishing realistic labor rates, monitoring rentals, and are not really prepared to act as a partner with your contractor in the project, then this program is not for you. Don't try this if you don't have a strong administrator experienced in general contracting. Contractors resent inexperienced owners questioning their decisions, and they certainly aren't eager to have their books audited by anyone they don't trust. Properly set-up and administered however, G-Max contracts are a win-win situation."

Building Protection into Representative Agreements

2008-04-07T22:27:00.002+07:00

Relationships between manufacturers' representatives and suppliers are similar in many ways to a marriage. Before a contractual commitment, there is a courtship, a time during which both parties are able to examine their prospective partner during a variety of circumstances. If the attraction continues, both parties perform due diligence in order to ensure the absence of any nefarious dealings, both past and present. If a commitment is desired, both parties enter into a contractual relationship for the long-term. However, unlike a marriage, there is never a clause in a representative agreement that includes the words, "until death do us part." Representative relationships are expected to last only for a period during which both the rep and supplier reap benefit from the relationship. Once a partner can no longer foresee a benefit from the relationship, the partnership may be dissolved.

During the early years of a representative relationship, little fears on both sides can become irritants that grow, fester, and hold back both parties from achieving greater success. What can be done to reduce the impact of otherwise minor fears? Both parties can build into the representative agreement protection that shields them from some of their greatest fears. Manufacturers' representatives often fear unjust termination by a supplier for whom they work diligently for several months or years with relatively little compensation. Suppliers often fear inability to terminate a rep whose performance has deteriorated. Both fears are real and can be addressed in the representative agreement in an equitable manner.

If mutual success of the rep and the supplier is to be achieved, little fears on both sides must be dealt with in a manner that prohibits those fears from undermining performance. This paper addresses steps that can be taken to reduce fear on the part of both the manufacturers' representative and the supplier. By building protection into the representative agreement, two objectives can be accomplished: First, some natural fears can be either reduced or eliminated. By reducing the impact of some fears, performance of both the rep and the supplier can be enhanced. Second, when the time comes to dissolve the representative relationship, the same protections that were used to enhance performance can be used to unwind the relationship with less acrimony and legal action.

Well Written Agreements Reduce Fear
Suppliers have a natural fear of manufacturers' representatives. Simultaneously, manufacturers' representatives have a natural fear of suppliers. Any solution to this problem cannot be developed unless these natural fears are recognized. A solution, therefore, must identify some of the most obvious fears and work to minimize the impact of their realization. A manufacturers' representative might have a legitimate fear of being terminated if a small supplier becomes very successful and becomes acquired by a larger supplier. In most cases, the rep or the direct sales force of the surviving, (acquiring) supplier becomes the sales force of record and the rep of the smaller, (acquired) supplier is terminated. Termination is the result irrespective of performance.

Any manufacturer, large or small, may fear that the selected representative will not perform to expectations. If the gap between expectations and actual performance is too great, the manufacturer may need to change representation, but may feel trapped in a representative agreement that it feels cannot be changed easily or quickly. Well crafted representative agreements can relieve some of the fears of both reps and suppliers. We'll explore clauses that can be inserted to help protect both manufacturers' representatives and suppliers.

Protection for Manufacturers' Representatives
One common fear among manufacturers' representatives is that termination may come after months or years of hard work, but before significant commissions are generated. This a justifiable concern particularly where the supplier is relatively new and has no established customers. A rep must labor long and hard in order to create the first customers, designs and purchase orders. The world provides many examples whereby a small supplier signs up many reps that are required to provide several months of missionary work with customers before sales are realized. If the supplier provides a great product offering and executes well, its booming sales soon make it an attractive target of acquisition by a larger, more established competitor. During an acquisition, the sales organizations of the acquiring and acquired companies must be consolidated. Most often, the direct sales team or rep from the acquiring company survives, while the rep from the acquired supplier is terminated. Recognizing that history favors the reps of established suppliers, many reps are loath to adding start-up suppliers to their line card.

One solution that protects the manufacturers' representative for a small start-up supplier is the insertion of a clause that provides commissions beyond termination in the event of a change of ownership of the supplier. The rep may be offered six-to-twelve months of commissions after the effective date of termination if termination is the result of a change of ownership in the start-up supplier.

The mechanism calling for extended commissions is sometimes called a "double trigger." The term, "double trigger" is used in this case because two events must occur before the extra commissions are warranted: a) change of ownership, and b) termination of the representative agreement. If an acquisition occurs, but the rep is retained, there are no extended commissions. Similarly, if the rep is terminated, but there is no change of ownership, there are no extended commissions. When, however, termination occurs within weeks of a change of ownership, two conditions will have been "triggered" and the rep becomes entitled to extended commissions.

Inclusion of the "double trigger" clause removes the fear that reps might have when partnering with start-up suppliers. The expense of extended commissions become real to the start-up supplier only if it becomes very successful and simultaneously becomes acquired. The extended commissions can be easily justified and in addition, can be spread forward in time.

At first glance, extended commissions from a double trigger clause result to the benefit of the manufacturers' representative only. Upon deeper reflection, the start-up supplier benefits also. Without a double trigger clause, large and established rep organizations avoid start-up companies because of the risk that they represent. Without the clause, a start-up supplier might be forced to select a rep from among a group of smaller and less established rep organizations. Inclusion of a double trigger allows start-up suppliers to add powerful manufacturers' representatives to its sales team. Such an addition increases the suppliers' chances for success.

Protection for Suppliers
Suppliers seek the opportunity to exercise control over their own fate. Suppliers expect that control to extend over the sales organization. If that sales organization is composed of direct employees, hiring and firing is relatively straightforward. When the sales organization is a network of manufacturers' representatives, control may be muted. A supplier should be allowed, via the representative agreement, to add new reps and to terminate those reps that do not accomplish the objectives of the supplier. All representative agreements allow for termination under various scenarios. A supplier should ensure that it has the ability to terminate a rep both for cause and for convenience.

Most reps readily agree to termination for cause and the description of causes can be defined in the agreement. Some causes are obvious and may include gross malfeasance, change of ownership of the rep, and breach of the agreement. Very often, cause is disputed and leads to acrimony and legal action.

A representative agreement should include a clause allowing for "termination for convenience." In this case, the supplier may terminate the agreement without providing or proving cause. The supplier is provided the flexibility to change manufacturers' representatives if conditions warrant or change. A rep will not appreciate the opportunity to constantly fear termination for no reason at all. To encourage the rep to accept a "termination for convenience" clause, a provision is added to the agreement that adds extended commissions beyond termination, for a period of up to a full year after the effective date of termination. The period for extended commissions is often proportional to the length of service of the rep.

The Best Agreements Provide Balance
Inexperienced reps and suppliers sometimes attempt to insert clauses into representative agreements that favor one party at the expense of the other. Occasionally such too-clever attempts achieve their desired result. Unfortunately, most one-sided attempts fail to accomplish their objective. Too often, one-sided agreements achieve two undesirable characteristics. First, one-way clauses generally build mistrust into the relationship. Such mistrust acts as an anchor around the neck of both parties and prevents them from optimizing the results of the partnership. Second, agreements with one-sided clauses have a higher incidence of litigation when the relationship unwinds. Remember, representative relationships do not last forever. There is no "until death do us part" language. When a relationship unwinds, seasoned reps and suppliers agree that litigation should be avoided. Legal action is terribly expensive. It consumes vast amounts of human resources and management focus, and distracts both parties from their real agendas: growing sales, market share and profits.

Seasoned reps and suppliers agree that representative agreements should be written with attention given to balance. If a rep is allowed to operate in a certain manner, the supplier ought to be afforded the opportunity to operate in a similar manner. If a supplier may terminate the agreement without cause, the manufacturers' representative should be allowed to terminate for convenience as well. Balanced agreements help build trust between their partners. That trust adds to the productive energy applied by both partners. Greater trust and energy are two of many requisites for a successful representative relationship. Ensure that your agreements strive for a balance in the power between the representative and the supplier.

Conclusion
Entering into a new representative relationship can be a frightening experience. The consequences of entering into a representative agreement can be disastrous. By inserting protective clauses into the agreement, both parties can increase their chances of success and simultaneously reduce the likelihood of legal squabbling when the agreement comes to an end. Ensuring a theme of balance and fairness in the agreement further increases the opportunity for a satisfying representative relationship.

About the Author: Glen Balzer is a management and forensic consultant involved with domestic and international marketing and sales. He advises parties involved with contracts between suppliers, global customers, manufacturers' representatives and industrial distributors. He promotes conflict resolution between parties involved in representative and distribution agreements, serving as an expert witness. He has significant experience with integration and rationalization of merged and acquired companies. For 30 years, he has been involved in all aspects of creating and managing marketing and sales organizations throughout North America, Europe and Asia.

Where To Incorporate Your Business

2008-04-07T22:22:00.002+07:00

By Aaron Larson
Law Offices of Aaron Larson

Contents
Initial Considerations
Delaware Corporations
Nevada Corporations

Most businesses do not need to give much consideration to where they incorporate. They simply incorporate in the state in which they are doing business. But that may not be the right choice for you.

Corporations that do business in more than one state, or corporations that may eventually "go public", may wish to consider the benefits of incorporating in a state with more favorable corporate laws than the state in which they are headquartered.

A corporation that is incorporated in the laws of one state, but does business within another state, is considered to be a "foreign corporation" in that second state. Corporations must register to do business in each state in which they operate, and there are filing requirements and fees associated with registration.

Initial Considerations
When deciding if it will be beneficial to incorporate in another state, factors to consider include:

Tax Rates - What is the tax rate in your home state, as compared to the tax rate in the state in which you might instead opt to incorporate?

Costs & Fees - What are the costs and annual fees associated with incorporating in the other state, as compared to the costs and fees in your home state? If you will be doing business in more than one state, including the state in which you incorporated, what will be the cost of registering your corporation to do business in the other states?

Insolvency - If your corporation becomes insolvent, how are creditors treated under the laws of each state?

Simplicity - If you conduct business in only one state, it is almost always cheaper and easier to incorporate in that state. You also won't automatically be subject to litigation in the courts of a state in which you do not conduct business, by virtue of having incorporated in that state.

Delaware Corporations
Delaware is considered to have some of the most favorable corporate laws in the nation. Almost half of all corporations listed on the New York Stock Exchange are incorporated in Delaware, and it is a popular state for the incorporation of businesses which intend to eventually go public. Delaware is also a good choice for the incorporation of a business that has offices or operations in multiple states. Delaware's courts, legislature, and government are considered to be very responsive to the needs and interests of corporations.

Benefits of incorporating in Delaware include:

Low incorporation fees, and a low annual franchise tax;

Businesses do not have to identify or provide addresses for their initial board of directors on their articles of incorporation;

All corporate offices may be held by a single person;

Businesses which incorporate in Delaware but do not conduct business in the state are not required to pay Delaware's state corporate income tax;

For shareholders who are not residents of the State of Delaware, their shares of stock are not subject to either Delaware's personal income tax or its state inheritance tax;

Delaware maintains a separate court system, its "Court of Chancery", for businesses;

It is fast and easy to form a corporation.

A Delaware corporation must have a registered agent within the State of Delaware, but need not have any other offices or operations within the state.

Nevada Corporations
Nevada is also considered to have laws which are favorable to corporations.

Benefits of incorporating in Nevada include:

Shareholders can avoid having their identities being disclosed in the corporation's public records;

-Shareholders, officers and directors may be nonresidents of Nevada.;

-All corporate offices may be held by a single person;

-There is no state annual franchise tax, and no state corporate tax on profits;

-There is no state personal income tax;

-It is fast and easy to form a corporation.

A Nevada corporation must have a legal address and registered agent within the State of Nevada.

Ref : http://www.expertlaw.com/library/business/where_to_incorporate.html

Three Amazing Ways To Make Money From The Public Domain

2008-04-02T22:35:00.001+07:00

The Public Domain can be used to create works for countless media categories and category combinations, and sold singly as printed books, magazines, photographs, audio recordings, software, eBooks, films, audio tapes, video recordings, sheet music. Products can also be sold in combinations, such as printed book with CD, eBook with membership site, and more.

Let us look at just a few ways to turn Public Domain creative works into physical and digital products.

While reading this article please take time to seek ways to be individual, better still unique, and turn an item literally anyone can claim from the public domain into your own exclusive products, available only from you!

Let’s go with a few ideas:

* Reprint text and illustrations ‘as is’, in print format, without making any changes. The simplest way to do this is to obtain a physical version of an original document, say a report or book, and to scan or photocopy the information from which to create subsequent copies.

Note that, although this is the fastest and easiest way to recreate and sell public domain works, it really doesn’t take much effort to make a few simple changes to text or layout, or illustrations and pagination, for example. These few changes take very little time but they are highly significant in determining your rights in the book. This is because with a few changes, enough to make the item recognisably different from the public domain original, the new work becomes what’s known as a ‘derivative’ work and its creator is fully protected under copyright law. This means, if anyone copies your version of the product, they can be sued for damages.

Note that, if you take a book from the public domain and recreate it as individual shorter reports, without making changes to the text, your product is again a derivative and becomes your sole copyright.

* Reprint the text and illustrations ‘as is’ and convert to downloadable format. This involves laying out the pages as they were in the original format, by scanning, for example, or by rekeying an exact copy of the document. Subsequently you turn the document into pdf or other eBook format. Arguably, this change from print to digital copy is sufficient to make your product a copyright protected derivative work. But in reality it would be impossible to know if someone selling an identical digital item to yours has copied your work or created their own product from scratch just as you did. So at least make a few changes, design your own front cover, for example, or use a different font, add a few illustrations, create a contents sheet or index section where none existed before.

Note that some of the biggest public domain resource sites provide public domain works as ready to download text. So all you have to do is go to your preferred location – Gutenberg is most people’s favourite – you’re your title, download and add the text to a newly opened ‘Word’ document, choose your own font and size, repaginate the text so that all chapters begin on a new page, and so on. ‘Word’ can be changed into pdf format literally at a keystroke using several free and low cost software programs on the market today. Find them by searching google.com for ‘pdf + creator + free’ or similar.

* Recreate the text ‘as is’, in ‘Word’, PDF or similar fashion, and burn your eBooks on CD. This makes it easier for potential buyers who want your books but are unfamiliar with downloading or have a slow connection or who simply prefer physical media. It’s always a good idea to provide as many product formats as possible and optimise your market potential. You’ll also find that, certainly on eBay, buyers think they know how to download digital products, but later find they can’t, so they take out their temper on you and you receive negative feedback. Sellers of downloadable products can avoid this common scenario by informing buyers that a CD will follow shortly after they access their download links.

Claim Your FREE Copy of THE PUBLIC DOMAIN INFORMATION PROFIT PLAN Any Time of Day or Night at: http://www.public-domain.biz

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Avril_Harper

How To Copyright - Why Register Your Copyright?

2008-04-02T22:30:00.000+07:00

Anyone who has had their work stolen knows how frustrating, and often downright infuriating, it is when someone illegally uses their copyrighted work. With the prevalence of the internet in today's society, unfortunately, copyright infringement has become a very real problem for many writers, artists, and other creators.

According to U.S. law, copyright is legally established the moment a work is created. You, as the author of the work, are automatically the legal holder of the copyright when you create a piece of work, granted that the work is eligible for protection. Those works protected by copyright include literary, musical, dramatic, choreographic, sculptural, graphic, pictorial, audio visual and architectural works. Also covered by U.S. laws are pantomimes, motion pictures, and sound recordings.

However, you will not hold legal copyright if you have entered into a work-for-hire agreement to transfer all rights of a work you created to another individual or business. In such an instance, you will surrender all of your rights to the work, provided there is a written agreement signed by you or your legal representative agreeing to transfer copyright.

Even though you legally hold copyright when you create a specific work, you should still seriously consider officially registering your work with the U.S Copyright Office for several very important reasons:

1. Copyrighting your work gives you the legal ability to file a lawsuit against anyone who has infringed upon that copyright. You cannot take legal action against another until your work, provided it originates from the United States, has been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

2. Should you have to take someone, who has infringed upon your copyright, to court, you can also sue for statutory damages and attorney's fees if you meet one condition: You must have registered your work with the U.S. Copyright Office within three months of having published the work or you must have registered the copyright before the copyright theft or infringement occurred.

If you have not met either of those conditions, you can still take legal action, provided you register your work. However, you will only be eligible to receive actual damages should you win your suit.

3. When you register your work with the U.S. copyright office, the copyright becomes a part of public record.

4. After you've registered a copyright, you'll receive a certification of registration in hard copy form, making it easy to provide physical proof that you hold legal copyright to your work.

5. In addition to being protected against copyright theft and infringement in the United States, registering a copyright also provides you with protection in certain countries that have adopted a copyright agreement with the United States.

For full protection against copyright infringement and copyright theft, you must register your work with the U.S. Copyright Office, contrary to what some believe. Do not fall prey to the notion that a so-called "Poor Man's Copyright" - mailing a copy of your work to yourself then leaving the envelope unsealed - will protect you should your work be stolen or infringed upon.

According to the U.S. Copyright Office, "There is no provision in the copyright law regarding any such type of protection, and it is not a substitute for registration." Should you register your work before it has been published, you will not again have to register it once it has been published.

Even if you do not register your work, you are entitled to use the Copyright sign or Copyright symbol to provide notice to the public that you are aware of your rights in your work.

Learn more about how to copyright different kinds of works, how to use a copyright sign at http://www.how-to-copyright-it.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Kurt_Lehman

How To Copyright - How To Register a Copyright

2008-04-02T22:29:00.000+07:00

Creating a piece of work - whether it's a poem, a computer program, or a motion picture - requires significant time and effort on the part of the author. The moment a work is created it is protected by U.S. copyright law, ensuring that the creator has exclusive control over the work unless he has signed over all copyrights to another party.

While copyright is established from the moment a work is created, that copyright doesn't fully protect you against theft and infringement of your work. To ensure you have maximum protection, you must register your work with the U.S. Copyright Office.

Before you can register your work, however, you must ensure that it is copyrightable under the law. Those works that can be copyrighted include literary; musical; dramatic; pictorial, graphic, and sculptural; architectural, choreographic, and audiovisual works as well as sound recordings, motion pictures, and pantomimes.

When you register a copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office, your copyrighted work becomes a matter of public record, and registration gives you the ability to bring legal action against anyone who steals or infringes upon your copyright. Registering a copyright may also make you eligible for statutory damages and attorney's fees should you have to file suit against the offending party.

Registering a copyright is actually quite simple and requires only three simple steps:

Step One: Fill out an application form

Go to the U.S. Copyright Office and download a copyright application form. You can find them on the Web by searching for "Copyright Office". You can also fill out the form online. Be sure to fill out the application fully and accurately. Failing to completely fill out the application form will result in your application being returned.

Step Two: Pay the application fee

Enclose the appropriate nonrefundable filing fee. Currently, the fee for filing your copyright application online is $35. If you submit a paper copyright application, you'll be required to file a $45 application fee.

Step Three: Prepare your nonreturnable deposit

Prepare a copy, which is referred to as a nonreturnable deposit by the U.S. Copyright Office, of the work you want to register. You must adhere to the following general requirements when sending a copy of your work:

• For those works that were created prior to January 1, 1978, you must send two complete copies or phonorecords of your work as it was when it was first published in the U.S.

• For those works that were created in the U.S. on or after January 1, 1978, the U.S. Copyright Office requires two copies or phonorecords of the best edition.

• For those works that were not created in the United States, you must send a complete phonorecord or copy of the work as it was originally published.

Requirements - Special Deposits

There are some special deposit requirements of which you should be aware. Some of the most prevalent special deposit requirements are as follows:

• If you've created a work - literary, musical, or dramatic - that has only been recorded as a phonorecord, you must send the complete phonorecord.

• If you're applying for a copyright for either a published or unpublished computer program, you are required to send the first and last 25 pages of source code for the program. If your program is less than 50 pages, you must send the complete program.

If you're uncertain if your work requires a special deposit, the U.S. Copyright Office encourages you to write (address below) or call (202) 707-3000 and provide a description of your work Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. EST.

All three items - a complete application, the appropriate application fee, and a copy of the work you want to register - should be mailed in the same package. The only exception is if you opt to fill out an online application. If you're applying for separate copyrights, you should also send all of the relevant material in the same package, ensuring that you separately attach the application fee to each corresponding application.

Failure to send the required materials together will generally result in the materials being returned to you. When your package is complete, send it to the U.S. Copyright Office at:

Library of Congress
Copyright Office
101 Independence Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20559-6000

Learn more about how to copyright, and how to use the copyright sign.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Kurt_Lehman

Basics On Copyrighting Your Photographs

2008-04-02T22:28:00.000+07:00

This article is intended on providing only the basics about copyrighting your photographs within the United States (at this time of writing, 12-11-07). No legal advice is applied. For more detailed information you can visit the official Copyright website (URL below).

--As of March 1, 1989, copyright has been made automatic. The need to register with the Copyright Office is no longer required to provide protection. Once you create a picture, you own the copyright. A copyright notice (for example, a copyright symbol or watermark) is also no longer required to protect your photographs (excluding older works); however, many photographers continue to use to identify themselves and the date of creation.

--As a general rule, for works created on or after January 1, 1978 the copyright is legally yours throughout your life plus 70 years beyond that unless you decide to pass your rights on to another.

--Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration is necessary. Registered works (if registration occurs within 5 years of publication) serve as prima facie evidence (proof) of a valid copyright. Registered works may also be eligible for statutory damages and attorney's fees in successful litigation.

--If someone was to steal your photographs, they can be liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 ($150,000 if willful infringement is proven by the copyright owner) for each work infringed on and may also be liable for attorney's fees incurred by the copyright owner.

--Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.

--To register photographs you will use the Visual Arts form which you can find at the official Copyright website.

--The current fee is $45 per application. You may register a collection of photos on one application under one title.

--Registration takes effect the day all the required elements in acceptable form are received; however, it takes approximately 4 months to receive your certificate. I suggest sending your application requiring confirmation of delivery since you will not receive acknowledgment from the Copyright Office.

--You will be notified by the Copyright Office via a letter or a telephone call if further information is needed to complete your application.

--If your application is rejected, you will receive a letter explaining why.

--Works created on or after January 1, 1978, are not required to be renewed.

--Online registration is expected in the future.

--Unfortunately a copyright is not protected throughout the world. Not all, but most countries do honor each other's citizens' copyrights.

I hope you find this information helpful but be sure to visit the official Copyright website at www.copyright.gov before deciding whether or not you should register your photographs.

Diana Cooper specializes in nature and wildlife photography. http://www.dianasphotography.com and http://www.cafepress.com/dianasphotos

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Diana_Cooper

What Is Copyright?

2008-04-02T22:25:00.001+07:00

Copyright initially was conceived as a way for government to restrict printing. It is defined as the legal right granted to an author, composer, playwright, publisher, or a distributor for exclusively producing or publishing their original work. Work that is not copyrighted is known to be available in the public domain, and anyone is free to access such work and use it without seeking permission from the original creator.

Any piece of work protected by the copyright, is usually denoted by a 'c' with a circle around it (which is the symbol for copyright), or the word 'Copyright', followed by the name of the copyright holder and the year of first publication.

Copyright laws are governed by the Copyright Act of 1976 and the work granted with copyright (for any work created after January 1, 1978) is protected for the lifetime of the creator of the work plus fifty years after his or her death. But for any work created before January 1, 1978 (that is, prior to the enactment of the copyright act), the copyright starts from January 1, 1978, and extends up to December 31, 2002. Prior to the enactment of the Copyright Act, the common law granted copyright protection to all forms of unpublished works. However, after the enactment of the Copyright Act, the rights made available by the common-law stood abolished.

Many feel that to restrain the flow of knowledge based resource from one generation to another by using copyrights and patents is ethically and morally incorrect and that it reflects a monopolistic nature to uphold the commercial interests of the rich and the influential.

About Author: Pauline Go is an online leading expert in legal industry. She also offers top quality legal tips to investor like:
Free Information On How To Beat A Speeding Ticket , Constitutional Rights And Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs, Steps For Getting A Patent

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Pauline_Go

Who's who in Cyberspace Law World!?!?

2007-10-20T14:05:00.003+07:00

Legal Scholars in IT Law Arena
Henry H Perritt, Jr.
Jonathan Zittrain - -Berkman Center for Internet Law
Nicolas Terry- -Saint Louis University
Eugene Volokh - - UCLA
David Loundy- - His E-law web page is great!
Jane Kaufman Winn--E-Commerce Law Expert
Alan L Tyree--E-Banking Expert from Australia
Thomas Bruce_Co-founder of the LII, Cornell University
Michael Froomkin: Domain Name & IP Law Expert
Janet Rifkin: ODR E xpert
Ethan Katsh: ODR Expert
Christopher D. Hunter, The U of Melbourne, Australia
Walter Effross: Professor of Law, American University Washington
Stefan Bechtold, Tuebingen University, Germany
Prof. Dr. W. M?el, Tuebingen University, Germany
Gerd Bucerius-Stiftungsprofessur f?munikationsrecht, Rostock University, Germany
Benjamin Wright, expert in Electronic Commerce Law
Henry H. Perritt, Jr.'s : Dean and Professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law
Alan Davidson: Law Lecturer University of Queensland, Australia
Michael L. Rustad: Suffolk University (Technology Law)
Attorneys Practicing Computer Law
IVAN HOFFMAN, B.A., J.D. Attorney At Law
Dennis Kennedy
Wendy Seltzer--Berkman Center for Internet and Society
Lawrence Lessig: Stanford Law School
Bernt Hugenholtz, Professor of Law, University of Amsterdam
Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre - Reserach Associates, NSW University
Lee Bygrave,U. of NSW, Australia
Roger Clarke, Australian National University
Graham Greenleaf's Web, Professor of Law, U of NSW, Australia
Rodger Jamieson, U of NSW, Australia
Ron van der Meyden, Associate Professor of Computer Science, U of NSW, Australia

Privacy/ Data Protection Law

2007-10-20T14:05:00.001+07:00

Freedom of Information in Thailand
Official Information Act, B.E. 2540
APEC: E-com Legal Guide to Thailand
Data Protection Law of Thailand (Draft)
Freedom of Information in Thailand
Official Information Act, B.E. 2540
APEC: E-com Legal Guide to Thailand
Data Protection Law of Thailand (Draft)
Privacy Guide: Reports, Caslon Analytics
Privacy, Confidentiality, and Consumer Protection on the Internet
Links to other Privacy Sites, Australian Privacy Commission
LLRX -- CongressLine: EU Directive 95/46 - Privacy 101
EU and US Data Protection Law -- And Soon the Twain Shall Meet
Privacy working group: Chicago-Kent College of Law
Privacy debate aired in Texas - Tech News - CNET.com
Briefing Materials on the European Union Directive on Data Protection
Global Privacy Developments - February 2001
Electronic Privacy Information Center
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner. New Zealand
OPINION 1/99 concerning the level of data protection in the United States and the ongoing discussions between the European Commission and the United States Government
Privacy Initiatives, USA
Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF: Homepage
Internet Privacy and Self-Regulation: Lessons from the Porn Wars
BUBL LINK / 5:15 Internet Resources: Internet security
Online Privacy Alliance
Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA)
Privacy Stories Main Page.
Roger Clarke's Dataveillance and Information Privacy Pages
Internet Law, Ch. 05: Privacy
Internet Privacy Law
Self-regulation and privacy
Health Privacy - The Latest

Alternative Dispute Resolution Online

2007-10-20T14:04:00.003+07:00

http://www.internationaladr.comMediation Information and Resource Centre:
http://www.mediate.com

ADR Online
www.resolveitnow.com
www.icourthouse.com
www.clicknsettle.com
www.cybersettle.com
www.internetneutral.com
www.eresolution.com
www.squaretrade.com
www.intellicourt.com
more ODR links in 2004

Legal Systems Information

2007-10-20T14:04:00.001+07:00

Internet Law

2007-10-20T14:03:00.000+07:00

The determination of the law, which applies, to particular multimedia products or services, which may be in more than one jurisdiction. [Cyber-Jurisdiction]

Legal Basic Concepts In Relation to Jurisdictional Issues

@ Conflict Rules-Choice of Law is applied to answer these following questions:
What court has jurisdiction to resolve these disputes?
Waht law should be applied by the forum to resolve the disputes?
How can the judgment or remedy of the disputes be enforce?
What form of dispute resolution should be used?

@ Each country has its own rules for making the "choice of law" decision.
Choice of Law-Tort: There are two main questions to be asked by the court1) Where was tort committed?2) Where was the damage caused?
Considering choice of law in tort law based on Eanglish case: Phillips v Eyre (1870) LR 6 QB 1. Willes J held that:
"As a general rule, in order to found a suit in England for a wrong alleged to have committed abroad, two conditions must be fullilled. First, the wrong must be of such a character that it would have been actionable if committed in England.... Secondly, the act must not have been justifiable by the law of the place where done."

@ Restraints on Proceedings
Forum Conveniens- hear the case in the most appropriate forum or
Forum non conveniens- hear it elsewhere if that is more appropriate For example, the doctrine of forum non conviens can be raised where, in cases of service of a defandant outside Australia, the plaintiff seeks leave to serve or to proceed, or where the defandant, once served, applies to have service of process set aside.

@ The Problem of Forum Shopping
choosing the court is geographically the closest,
considering a higher standard of justice
offering better remedies
filing an action where the forum could be great inconvenience to the other party

@ Enforcement of Foreign JudgementThe Common Law will recognise a foreign judgement provided:
the foreign court's jurisdiction is recognised by the Australian court
the foreign judgement is final and conclusive
the parties are the same
Our Task: Seminar 2
Questions
1. What are the territorial nexus rules for determining the liability of traditional media publishers (print and electronic) for the publication of defamatory material in Australia? What impact would the application of those rules have on the liability of operators of Internet sites for the publication of defamatory material over the Internet?
2. What are the bases of jurisdictional competence on which courts have relied to provide those courts with jurisdiction over material published on a web site which is not located within, but which may be accessed from, the territory over which the court has jurisdiction?
3. In what circumstances will United States' courts refuse to enforce foreign judgements, which fail to satisfy the free speech protection accorded by the first amendment to the United States Constitution? What impact does the refusal by United States courts to enforce foreign judgments in such circumstances have on the ability of foreign jurisdictions to enforce their domestic legal systems on multimedia services which may be accessed worldwide but which are located, and have all of their significant assets, solely within the United States?
4. What are the conflicts of laws rules, which apply to Australian intra-state torts? What impact would the application of those rules have to determining the liability for defamation of the operator of a web site, the server for which is located in Victoria but which may be accessed throughout Australia? [Answers Q1-4]
LONDON MEETING DRAFTAchieving Legal and Business Order in Cyberspace:A Report on Global Jurisdiction Issues Created by the Internet*AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION GLOBAL CYBERSPACE JURISDICTION PROJECTReport of the American Bar Association ("ABA") Jurisdiction in Cyberspace Project empaneled in 1998 under the title, "Transnational Issues in Cyberspace: A Project on the Law Relating to Jurisdiction." The views expressed herein have not been approved by the House of Delegates or the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association and, accordingly, should not be construed as representing the policy of the American Bar Association. 1. SOLUTIONS FOR GLOBAL CONSIDERATION1.1. Jurisdictional Default Rules1.2. Contractual Choice of Law and Forum1.3. Hybrid Alternative1.4. The Future Global Agenda to Address Jurisdiction in Cyberspace2. IN SUPPORT OF THE SOLUTIONS:How Technology Has Changed Jurisdictional Paradigms2.1. The Relevance of Physical Location2.2. Targeting2.3. Power Parameters2.4. Contractual Choice2.5. The Intersection Between Jurisdiction and Substantive Liability for Intermediaries3. THE DOCTRINAL FRAMEWORK3.1. Personal Jurisdiction3.1.1. Classic Jurisdiction3.1.2. Jurisdiction Over Defendants Never Physically Present in the Forum3.1.2.(a). Jurisdiction Based on Indirect Economic Benefit3.1.2.(b). Jurisdiction Based on Intentional Causation of Effect3.1.2.(c). Jurisdiction Based on Intentional Affiliation3.1.3. Jurisdiction and the Interne3.1.4. General Jurisdiction3.1.5. Contractual Choice of Forum3.2. Prescriptive Jurisdiction3.2.1. Constitutional and Other Local Restraints3.2.2. The Restraint of International Law3.2.3. American and European Approaches to Choice of Law3.2.4. Torts3.2.5. Contracts 3.2.6. Consumer Contracts 3.2.7. The Internet and International Law 3.2.8. Choice of Law and Personal Jurisdiction 3.3.9 Enforcement Jurisdiction
Related Cases
Mecklermedia Corporation v DC Congress Gesellschaft mbH [1997] FSR 627.
Gorton v Australian Broadcasting Commission (1973) 22 FLR 181, 181-183.
Mink v AAAA Developments LLC 190 F 3d 333 (1999).
Telnikoff v Matusevitch 702 A 2d 230 (Md 1997).
Gutnick v Dow Jones & Co Inc [2001] VSC 305; [2001] ACL Rep 85
Yahoo, Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et L'Antisemitisme 169 F Supp 2d 1181; 2001 US Dist LEXIS 18378; 30 Media L Rep 1001 (ND Cal 2001)
Bensusan Restaurant Corporation v King 937 F Supp 295 (SDNY 1996).
"No jurisdiction over defendant in Missouri in declaratory trademark infringement suit brought in New York where defendant maintained mere passive Web site and had no commercial contacts with New York other than Web site."
Blumental v Drudge 992 F Supp 44 (DDC 1998)
Jurisdiction over defendant Matt Drudge in Califonia proper in defamation suit brought in the District of Columbia because defendant's Web site could be accessed in the District, the defendant also e-mailed the allegedly defamatory comment to 85,000 subsribers of his newsletter, some of whom resided in the District of Columbia , and the defendant traveled to Washington to be interviewed by C-SPAN. AOL , however, was protected from liability by the ISP safe harbor in the CDA.
iAccess Inc v WEBcard Technologies Inc (2002) US Dist LEXIS 1258 (United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Interactive Web site is not enough to support exerse of jurisdiction over foreign party:A court may not exercise personal jurisdiction over a foreign party that has an interactive Web site when that party has not intentionally targeted or has not interacted with consumers in the forum state.
Internet Doorway Inc v Parks 138 F Supp 2d 773 (2001 US Dist LEXIS 5128)
People of the State of New York v Lipsitz 663 NYS 2d 468 (Sup 1997).
"A New York court ruled that the defendant was subject to personal jurisdiction and liable for violaing New York consumer protection laws, although the defendant conducted its magazine subscription business generally in the Internet"

Playboy Enterprises Inc v Chuckleberry Publishing Inc (1996) 36 IPR 104, 36 IPR 114. .
Additional Links

Domain Name Articles, Cases and Issues
EU-Confederation of European Computer Users Associations
EU-Dr. E-commerce:Internet Governance@@@
WIPO- Barcelona.com case: Case D2000-0505@@@
ICANN Search Index of UDRP Proceedings@@@@@
.eu
Fortune 1000 Domain Registrations: An Alternative Perspective on Registrar Market Share
Registrars of Fortune 1000 Companies - Graphical Comparison
AU-whatsinaname.com.au: .au Registrar Price Comparison
Free Domains, URL and Email Forwarding by Name.Space, or Register your .Com
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center - Domain Name Disputes
Internet Society (ISOC) All About The Internet: Link to Other Interesting Sites
IANA Root-Zone Whois Index by TLD Code
Domains: Structure -- Alternative Roots
Forum New.net: Chat about DNS
Mobile TLD Domain Registry@@@
Thaiamazon.com case: WIPO Domain Name Dispute: Case D2001-01392
Yahoothailand.com case-WIPO Domain Name Dispute: Case D2000-1461

General Issues Related to Internet Law
A Critical Perspective on Thai Internet Policy Making
Censorship and the Internet
Internet Law Journal.com - www.TILJ.com@@@
UK-Journal of Information, Law & Technology:elj.warwick.ac.uk@@@@
William & Mary Journal of Online Law@@
Tech Law Journal: News, records and analysis of legislation, litigation, and regulation affecting the computer and Internet industry@@@@@
Censorship and the Internet
eLibrary - Ecommerce Law Links
Canadian IT Law Association/L'Association canadienne du droit des technologies de l'information
Andy Muleer-Maguhn: ICANN related materials

IP Law in Digital Age
American IP Lawyer Association
Welcome to ePatents
http://www.rpi.edu/dept/llc/intelprop/hp.html
Bill Summary & Status
Bechtold: The Link Controversy Page
Bechtold: The Link Controversy Page
WTO Intellectual property (TRIPS) - gateway
WIPO Internet Domain Name Process
UW Copyright Connection
Linking and Liability (BitLaw)
Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights:Berkeley Digital Library SunSite
The UK Patent Office - Notices: Managing Intellectual Property - A Guide for Managers
Judge Weighs Dismissal of Charges in Digital Copyright Case
CNN.com - Judge: U.S. has jurisdiction in DMCA case - April 3, 2002
BNA: Infringement versus fair use: Panel Debates Digital Copyrith Law at Security Conference
Why Copyright Law Could be Unimpotant on the Internet: Eric Schlarcher
A Summary of the New Digital Millennium Copyright Act: Dab L. Bagatell
Basic U.S. Patent, Trademark & Copyright Information
ALA Washington Office: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Multimedia Content and the Super Hightway: Rapid Acceleration or Foot on the Brake?: Fred Greguras et al.
Law Books: New-Media Business[Multimedia Law]
WWW Multimedia Law-Internet contracts,licenses
Potential Pitfalls in Multimedia Product Development... : Paul F. Norris et al.
Reforming Information Law in Copyright's Image: Jessica Litman

Intellectual Property in Digital Age

2007-10-20T13:59:00.001+07:00

Related Web sites resources: copyright in multimedia works, IP protection laws for works on the Net, Patent, Open Source Codes, Property Rights in Databases and Domain name and so on...

Shifting the Possible: How Trusted Systems and Digital Property Rights ...by Mark Stefin
The Copyright Grab: Pamela Samuelson
Stanford University Libraries: Copyright & Fair Use
Copyright in the New World of Electronic Publishing: William S. Strong
The Copyright Licensing Agency : The UK's reproduction rights organisation
Digital Future Coalition Home Page
UCLA: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Overview
Yale University Liblicense: Licensing Digital Information
Software Industry Issues
Virtual Recordings' Virtual Chronicle of the Digital Music Revolution
Virtual Recordings Home Page
CNN.com - Microsoft learns a lesson from competition - April 16, 2002
CNN.com - Open source subject to fiery debate - April 16, 2002
Open Source License Law Resource Center
*The Open Source Licensing Page
Open Source in Open Court: wired news by Heidi Kriz
Openlaw - Berkman Center, Harvard Law School e.g. Open DVD, Open Acess and Microsft Remedy
The Law and Open-Source Software: Sean Doherty
GNU General Public License - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)
Open Internet Wiretapping
Google Directory - Computers > Open Source > Licenses
OpenCode--Berkman Center for Internet and Society
Open Source Development Network: Terms of Service
Open Source alive and Well at O'Reilly P2P Conference: Russell Pavlicek
Jabber, Inc.: Jabber Open Source License
How Linux and open-source development could change the way we get things done: Nicholas Thompson
Law Prof Cajoles Dmitry Allies: Jeffery Benner, Wired News
O'Reilly Network: Open Source replacing Patent Law? [April 17, 2002]
Open source and copyright law
Chaining Open Source Software: The Case Against Software Patents
Open source: It's the law: J.S. Kelly, LinuxWorld.com
Free Software Matters: Free Software or Open Source?: Eben Moglen
The Open Source Initiative: OS Clarifies The Status Of The APSL
Free Patents: Protecting Innovation & Competition in the IT Industry
New Scientist: open-source Cola Cab and open-source software?
OpenDVD.org - Extending DVD
The passport to open code
InformationWeek > Open Source > Lawyers Threaten Open-Source Movement--Law Prof > August 29, 2001
Lawyer Lessig raps new copyright laws - Tech News - CNET.com
EFF Open Audio License v1.0 (Apr. 21, 2001)
Lecture Series: How Open Source Software is Revolutionizing Globla Markets... and Communities
TH-Draft Collecting Commission of IP and Performers' Rights Ac
Department Intellectual Property, Thailand
AU- copyright research sources *****
U.S. Copyright Office, Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention...
EU-Portal of the U. of Alicante on IP and Information Society: www.uaipit.com
EU-IPR-Helpdesk
GNU General Public License - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)
FLOSS final report index: Open source in EU@@@
Commission on Intellectual Property Rights@@@@@
The Great Panic: How Digitization is Deforming Copyright Law: Anne K. Fujita
American IP Lawyer Association
Welcome to ePatents
http://www.rpi.edu/dept/llc/intelprop/hp.html
Bechtold: The Link Controversy Page
WTO Intellectual property (TRIPS) - gateway
WIPO Internet Domain Name Process
University of Washington: Copyright Connection
Linking and Liability (BitLaw)
Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights:Berkeley Digital Library SunSite

E-Corporations

2007-10-20T13:57:00.003+07:00

E-Consumer Protection

2007-10-20T13:57:00.001+07:00

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)
Australian Securities and Investments Commission - Online Investors Protections
CNN.com - Technology - Consumer group: Online privacy protections fall short - January 26, 2001
Press Release - 25 January 2001
Consumers International - www.consumersinternational.org
Consumers Union: Nonprofit Publisher of Consumer Reports
US Federal Trade Commission: Working for Consumer Protection
FirstGov for Consumers: www.consumer.gov
www.fraud.org: US web site
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration Home Page
EU-Legal issues - Consumer Protection
US-New Jersey Office of Consumer Protection
Consumer Protection, Private International Law and Internet Contracts
Consumer Protection - European Consumer Infocentres (Euroguichet)
Protecting Yourself From Fraud: http://legal.firn.edu/safety/protect2.html
Consumer Protection-PIRG:www.pirg.org/comsumer/
Consumer Internet Privacy Protection Act of 1997
INTERNET SAFETY Menu - The Police Notebook
Advertising/Consumer Protection working group: Chicago-Kent College of Law
Maryland Attorney General - Consumer Tips and Publications
Consumer Protection Unit: Alaska Department of Law
Consumer Resources-Kentucky Office of the Attorney General
Online Shopping, Internet Retailing, & Consumer Protection: KnowThis.com
Useful external links, consumer protection sites.
Business, finance, economic, and consumer protection laws:www.LawGuru.com
Customer Protection
eConsumer.gov
QuickLinks - Consumer protection+EU
Regulating the Internet: EU & US Perspectives
Spam Laws: European Union:www.spamlaws.com/eu.html
Testimony on Green Paper on Consumer Protection
Consumer Law Center:www.hg.org
International Marketing Supervision Network
ISBA - The Voice of British Advertisers
International Counselor
Press Release from www.consumersinternational.org
E-Commerce News: EU OKs E-Commerce Dispute Law
Internet Law and Policy Forum - Consumer Protection Division
UK-The Consumer Gateway: e-Shopping
NZ - Consumers and Electronic Commerce
EU data protection overview - 14 Jun 2000
National Consumer Agency - Legal protection of consumer rights in relation to transnational digital networks
Consumer Issues in E-Commerce:www.it.bond.edu.au/law429
Fight Spam on the Internet!
Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue
EU PR 08/98: INFORMATION SOCIETY: COMMISSION PROPOSES INTERNATIONAL CHARTER
Personal Data Protection Sub-Working Group, Consumer Issues Working Group(ECOM Journal 1)

E-Commerce Law

2007-10-20T13:55:00.001+07:00

Interesting e-commerce sources: online contract, cyber jurisdiction and consumer protection...
@0nline Contract

Electronic Commerce Contracts@@@
Multimedia & Software Law Publications
Internet Legal Issues (Part 3): Internet Legal forms for Business Overview
Legal Articles:www.publaw.com
Russian law: legal researches & reviews of legislation
E-Commerce News: UK Legal Issues E-Commerce Int\'l Loophole Warning
To agree or not to agree: Legal issues in online contracting.
Legal Issues of Electronic Commerce: Activity Policies, Intelligent Agents and Ethical Transactions
@General Issues Regarding E-Commerce Law
Electronic Commerce and the EU Regulations and PoliciesWWW
The Stanford Program in Law, Scince and TechnologyWWW
Berkeley Center for Law and TechnologyWWW
Monash Law: Centre for Law in the Digital Economy/ CLiDEWWW
E-Business Research Center-Legal Issues and Government EffortsWWW
E-Commerce Law LinksWWW
Jane Kaufman Winn's Web siteWWW
CLA: 30 Years of Excellence in Technology Law!WWW
John Marshall University: Great Cyberspace Law IndexWWW
Ameritech.net: Legal ResourcesWWW.
CyBarrister Page: What Jurisdiction Controls?WWW
The National Conference of Commisioners on Uniform State LawsWWW
IAHC Home pageWWW
Baker & McKenzie: Global E-Commerce Law
@E-Commerce Legislation
UK-The Electronic Signature Regulations 2002
EU- Electronic Signatures Directive 1999/93/EC
UK-The Draft reguations implementating the E-commerce Directive
EU- The Council regulation on jusrisdiction and the regulation and enforcement in civil and commercial matters (replaced the Brussels Convention)

E-Banking and Payments

2007-10-20T13:54:00.001+07:00

Digital Management

2007-10-20T13:53:00.001+07:00

UK Patent Office - Notices: Managing Intellectual Property - A Guide for Managers
Judge Weighs Dismissal of Charges in Digital Copyright Case
CNN.com - Judge: U.S. has jurisdiction in DMCA case - April 3, 2002
Why Imposing Old Copyright Law on New Technology/ Will Not Work: Douglas J. Masson
UK Stands Firm on Domains: Mike Braceken
NSI Domain Dispute Resolution Policy Statment
Domain Names and Trademarks: At the Intersection
Case Against Playboy Model Could set Precedent: New York Times
Meta Tag Lawsuits: Danny Sullivan
IP Australia: Patents, trademarks and designs
KuesterLaw Technology Law Resource - Patent Copyright Trademark
Australian Law Online: Copyright and IP
Gray Cary. IP Online News
Register.com Corporate Services Division
practicallaw.com: Topic: IP, technology and telecoms
Managing the Digital Enterprise Intellectual Property on the Web
Copyright and trademark - The HTML Writers Guild
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer: IP/IT newsletters
Online Legal Issues @ Big Blog
Patents Online Business Newsletter - Volume 2 - Issue No. 5
IP Access - Topic - IP Access > Who? > Small to Medium Sized Enterprise (SME)
Online Information Provider Liability for Copyright Infringement
Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia- IPRIA@@@

Cyber Crime

2007-10-20T13:46:00.001+07:00

>>C Y B E R C R I M E:www.cybercrime.gov of US Dapartment of Justice@@@
>>Federal Computer Intrusion Laws
>>Cybercrime on the Internet
>>Electronic Evidence:www.willyancey.com
>>CNN - Cracking cybercrime - October 29, 1998
>>CERT®/CC: How the FBI Investigates Computer Crime
>>Transnational computer crime:www.undcp.org/palermo/cybercrime.html
>>CYBERCRIME 2002 :www.cybercrime2002.com
>>QuickLinks - Computer crime
>>AusCERT - Australian Computer Emergency Response Team
>>theage.com.au -Sharp rise in computer crime in Australia
>>UQ News Online: Survey finds Australian computer crime on the rise (May 20, 2002)
>>CRIME IN CYBERSPACE: TRENDS IN COMPUTER CRIME IN AUSTRALIA
>>6.805/STS085: How countries handle computer crime , by Michael Wl Kim
>>Internet and Computer Issues/Law Articles@@@
>>www.tomw.net.au/links:Australian Computer Crime
>>AU-Internet, Computer and Cyber Crime
>>AU-Security / Computer Crime: www.efa.org.au
>>Reporting Internet Crime across the Globe: www.ccmostwanted.com@@@
>>ABC News - Outlaws in Cyberspace
>>Computer Crime, cyber Crime and Cyber Terrorism Research Center
>>EU- Computer-related crime@@@@@
>>Privacy International - Cyber-Crime@@@
>>EPIC Data Retention Page: EU Data Retebtion
Computer Crime: Australian Resources :http://videlex.com
>>Internet related Policy Issues and developments following the Attacks on America on 11 Sept. 2001
>>EU-Cybercrime & Cybersecurity Communication
Norway-THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK
>>Criminal Justice Resources Resources: CyberCrime
>>AUSTRAC-Mutual Assistance and Electronic Crime
Infowar.com Law Section
>>Specific Types of Transnational Crime II
>>Overview of CoE Draft Convention
>>EURIM-Briefing No 30:E-CRIME-A new opportunity for partnership
>>Reflections on Enforcement Measures and Penalty Levels in Computer Misuse Legislation:by Indira Carr et al.
>>Cyber-Security Issues by Bernard Clements et al.

Broadcasting and Media

2007-10-20T13:45:00.001+07:00

Domain Names and Legal Issues

2007-10-20T13:40:00.001+07:00

Cybersquatter
The Register- World's most notorious cybersquatter arrested
James Bond Triumphs Over Notorious Cybersquatter
Domain Name Disputes FAQ - The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
John Zuccarini- Notorious cybersquatter liable under the ACPA
the Statement of SEN. Patrick J. Leahy, Ranking Minority Member, before the Senate Judiciary Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing On Cybersquatting And Consumer Protection Ensuring Domain Name Integrity
Remedies in Domain Name Disputes A Canadian Perspective
Fall 1999 Recent Developments In Trademark Infringement On The Internet And Remedies For Trademark Owners
How To Understand The Frustration of the Trademark Owner Over Domain Names And What You Can Do About It
INTA WHITE PAPER- The intersection of trademarks and domain names
WIPO Domain Name Decision D2003-0709- thairedbull.com
WIPO - Domain Name Disputes re Thai cases
WIPO Domain Name Decision D2000-1461- yahoothai.com
WIPO Domain Name Decision D2000-0436- Jim Thompson
IP Address to Hostname
Howstuffworks What is an IP address
How do I find out my IP address

UDRP Decisions
WIPO Domain Name Decision D2000-0735
Significant Internet Jurisdiction Cases
NAF Decision re Cornell University v. Steven Wells or cornellrentals.com
WIPO Domain Name Decision D2003-0262- Starbucks coffee

Domain Name Policies
Domain Name Registration provider in Thailand with web hosting and e-mail
InterNIC The Internet's Network Information Center
ICANN Resources for Country Code Managers
IANA .th - Thailand
THNIC-ccTGD manager
IANA .au - Australia
AUNIC Changes
DomainName.gov.au
AusRegistry
.au Domain Administration (auDA) Ltd
auDA .au Policy
auDA .au Dispute Resolution Policy (auDRP)
auDA Community Geographic 2LDs
IANA .my - Malaysia
WELCOME TO MYNIC WEBSITE
IANA .cn - China
China Internet Network Information Center
China Internet Network Infomation Center
IANA .sg - Singapore
SGNICs Web Site
Red Bull Extra - The official site for the X-generation

Internet Legal Issues: Metatags

2007-10-20T13:38:00.001+07:00

Introduction

During the past few years commercial use of the Internet has boomed to the point where publishing companies -- whether they be a Random House, a small niche publisher or a self-publisher -- look upon opportunities from owning their own website as a relatively inexpensive marketing cost for increasing company recognition, sales and profits for their individual titles and product lines. As publishers begin to more actively utilize the World Wide Web for promotion of their company and products they should become more knowledgeable of Internet issues that may affect their online marketing efforts.

The Internet Legal Issues series that is being launched with this article on "Metatags" will periodically discuss Internet legal topics that publishers should understand if they intend to use their website as a marketing vehicle.

Trademark, Unfair Competition Law & the Right of Publicity

One of the guiding principals of trademark and unfair competition law is the protection of the commercial value in trademarks and trade names. In addition the right of publicity protects the commercial value of the name or persona of a "famous" personality. Trademark, unfair competition and right of publicity legal actions generally result from infringement claims based upon conduct that confuses or misleads consumers to the commercial detriment of the owner of the trademark, trade name or personal name. This complained of activity is as pressing a matter in the physical marketplace as it is in the online marketplace.

What are Metatags?

Metatags are invisible hypertext mark-up language; commonly referred to as HTML code that is inserted in a website by the website owner. The metatags generally consist of key words and phrases that describe the content of the website. Their purpose is to enable an Internet search engine, such as HotBot, Infoseek or Alta Vista, to read the metatags and identify the website containing the respective meta-tag as a relevant website with respect to a particular search word or phrase.

An example of how a publishing company might use metatags is the following. XYZ Publishing has recently published a book on the subject of parenting, entitled How To Be A Better Parent, and one of its marketing objectives is to publicize this title on its website. In an attempt to attract more viewers to its website the promotional copy for How To Be A Better Parent contains numerous references to the word "parenting" and variations on that word such as "parent", "parents", and "parented". In addition the website programmers could also include invisible metatags that contain the word "parenting" and its variations in the website. If an individual performed an Internet search on the word "parenting" the respective search engine would look for the word "parenting" and its variations in the visible text of the XYZ Publishing website -- the promotional copy for How To Be A Better Parent -- as well as the invisible metatags.

By inserting the metatags the programmers are attempting to increase the likelihood that a particular website will be ranked higher than another website. Many search engines rank a website based upon the number of times a word or phrase is used in the website as well as on where the word or phrase is located on the web page, with greater importance being accorded if the word or phrase is used at the beginning of the web page. Therefore, it is more likely that an Internet search on the word "parenting" would result in finding the XYZ Publishing website and the book How To Be A Better Parent if the promotional copy frequently repeated the word "parenting" and its variations and if metatags using the word "parenting" and its variations were placed at the beginning of the web page as well as throughout the remainder of the web page. By using the metatags in this manner it is possible that a search engine would determine that the XYZ Publishing website was the most relevant response for a search on the word "parenting". By now you may be asking yourself is there anything wrong or illegal with the way XYZ Publishing used metatags in an attempt to increase the probability that the XYZ Publishing website would be found? The answer would be no and that the use of metatags was a good marketing strategy; that is unless the word "parenting" or one of its variations was a trademark owned by another entity.

Rule: Properly use metatags as part of your marketing strategy to bring web surfers to your website.

Invisible Infringement

It is also possible for XYZ Publishing in an attempt to increase the viewership of its web page to utilize other owner's trademarks or identifications in its metatags. This can be illustrated by once again using as our example the XYZ Publishing's promotion of the book How To Be A Better Parent. In this scenario the programmers could be instructed to incorporate metatags in the XYZ Publishing website of words, phrases or names that are readily recognized with respect to the subject matter of parenting such as "Parenting Magazine", "Dr. Spock", or the titles or names of well-known parenting books, programs, famous individuals or companies that the consumer identifies with the topic of parenting.

In this case if an Internet user searched on the name "Dr. Spock" it might result in their finding the XYZ Publishing web page and its book How To Be A Better Parent that was not authored by Dr. Spock. The Internet user is brought to the XYZ Publishing website through XYZ Publishing's use of another's trademark or identification. Since metatags are generally invisible to the viewer of the website when that page is opened by a web browser the Internet user may now be left wondering and confused why he/she is now looking at the XYZ Publishing web page and not at a Dr. Spock website.

Once again you may be asking yourself whether there was anything wrong or illegal with the way XYZ Publishing used the metatags in an attempt to increase the probability that the XYZ Publishing website would be found? This time the answer would be that it is highly probable that the inclusion of another owner's trademark or identification in the XYZ Publishing metatags may have constituted trademark infringement, dilution, false advertising or right of publicity violations.

Recently there have been a number of court decisions involving the issue of alleged misuse of metatags. In Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. AsiaFocus, Inc. a federal court in Virginia held that the inclusion of Playboy's "Playboy" and "Playmate" marks in metatags constituted trademark infringement and dilution. In Niton Corp. v. Radiation Monitoring Devices, Inc. a Massachusetts federal court ruled that Radiation Monitoring Devices ("RMD") use of Niton's metatag descriptions to attract Internet users to RMD's website was likely to result in consumers believing that RMD was also known as Niton, that RMD was affiliated with Niton and that RMD made the products marketed by Niton; the court enjoined RMD from using its website to imply any association between itself and Niton. Playboy Enterprises was also successful in Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Calvin Designer Label in enjoining the unauthorized use of Playboy's "Playboy" and "Playmate" marks in metatags, but was unsuccessful in Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles in preventing a former Playmate's use of the words "Playboy" and "Playmate" as metatags because her use was fair use on the basis that the marks were not being used to compete with or suggest endorsement by Playboy of her website.

Rule: Do not misuse metatags by using trademarks, trade names or names of personalities owned by another without their permission.

Conclusion

Legitimate metatag use will continue to play a growing and more significant role in marketing a publisher's books by enabling web surfers to more easily find the publisher's website and information on a particular title, but it is also likely that the deceptive use of trademarks, trade names and names of personalities will also increase. Although the misuse of metatags may be illegal it is frequently difficult to catch. Therefore, as a means of caution a publisher who has important trademarks or trade names should periodically perform a search engine search of their trademarks or trade names to detect any misuse.

http://www.publaw.com/legal.html

Internet Legal Issues: Linking

2007-10-20T13:36:00.001+07:00

One of the basic mechanisms of the World Wide Web is the use of links from the "Linking Page" to another Web page that is frequently referred to as the "Linked Page". Linking (or "hyperlinking" as it is sometimes known) is a powerful tool for enabling the Internet user to quickly shift to related content sources. The "link" is usually highlighted in a different color than other content on the Linking Page and acts as an "active" or "hot" zone on the Linking Page. The link may be represented by text or images and permits the viewer on the Linking Page to immediately gain access to the Linked Page simply by clicking on the text or image. This eliminates the need to type in the full and sometimes lengthy address of the Linked Page since the text or image that replaces the underlying code for the link acts as the address of the Linked Page. When the user activates the link, the user's Web browser accesses the Linked Page and displays the Linked Page to the user.

The ease of linking however brings with it legal risks. A Web site owner should be aware that their are a number of legal issues raised by including links on your Web site to Web sites owned by third parties and that many of these legal issues have still not been resolved. These legal issues may include copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition, commercial misappropriation, defamation and the right of publicity.

Legal Issues Involving Linking

It has been the usual practice for Web site owners to have linked their Web pages with other Web pages without requesting or obtaining permission from the owner of the Linked Page. The Web culture viewed such links as having "significant" value to the user and to the respective owners of both the Linking Page and Linked Page. However, the increased commercial importance of Web sites may be altering the traditional Web culture of permitting links without permission.

The disputes involving linking have generally been of three types. (1) The Linking Page uses copyright or trademark protected text or images from the Linked Page. Examples of this would include using an image of the "Coca Cola" bottle or using Nike's phrase "Just Do It" or using a photograph of an artist's artwork as the "hot" zone on the Linking Page that when clicked on by the user accessed Coca Cola's, Nike's or the artist's Web page. (2) The Linking Page does not link to the Linked Page's "Home Page" but instead links to an internal page of that Web site. (3) The Linking Page links to Web sites that carry defamatory material or display and distribute infringing copies of copyrighted works.

Guidelines for Linking to Other Web Sites

1.Links to third party Web sites should be as simple as possible.

It is suggested that you do not use more than plain-text names for the "hot" zone to link to another Web page. You should not use a third party's logos, product designs, slogans or trademarks as the "hot" zone to their Web page since this could lead viewers of your Web page to believe that the Linking Page endorses or is affiliated with the Linking Page. In the event you believe you must use as the hot zone, an image such as the Coca-Cola bottle and not the plain-text name Coca-Cola, then to preclude any possible liability it would be advisable to obtain permission from the Coca-Cola Corporation.

It is also advisable not to describe the Web sites to which you provide links. This will prevent the owner of the Linked Page from alleging that your description of the Linked Page was inaccurate or misleading.

2. Link directly to the Home Page and not to the internal pages of Web Sites.

Controversy involving links to the internal pages of a Web site has revolved around two major issues. The first concerns user contacts as it relates to "advertising revenue" and the second involves bypassing the Web site's "policies and terms and conditions" governing usage of the Web site that are often are only accessible from the Home Page.

Advertising that is only available on a Web site's Home Page is bypassed when a link is not to the Home Page but to an internal page. This may have a harmful effect on the linked to Web site's potential advertising revenue as such revenue is usually based on the number of "hits" to the page that contains advertising.

One lawsuit, that has recently been settled, involved the Ticketmaster Corporation and the Microsoft Corporation. Ticketmaster filed suit against Microsoft for improperly using the Ticketmaster name and logo on its, "Seattle Sidewalk" Web page. Ticketmaster alleged that Microsoft's actions resulted in the dilution of Ticketmaster's trademarks, misrepresentation, unfair competition, unfair business practices, and misleading statements.

Microsoft's use of "deep" hyperlinks permitted a user of the Seattle Sidewalk Web site to bypass the policies and service information provided on Ticketmaster's homepage and allowed the user to go directly to a Ticketmaster internal Web page to purchase tickets for upcoming events. If the Microsoft links from its Seattle Sidewalk Web page had been links to the Ticketmaster homepage instead of to one of the internal pages within the Ticketmaster Web site Ticketmaster's policies and service information could not have been bypassed by the user. Ticketmaster alleged that deep linking, permitting the user to bypass Ticketmaster's Home Page, enabled Microsoft to benefit from Ticketmaster's trademarks and name.

It was also interesting to note that before the suit began, the companies were in discussions regarding links from the Sidewalk Web site to the Ticketmaster site; suggesting Microsoft was concerned about the legal implications of such linking. However, once the negotiations failed Microsoft unilaterally established deep links to the Ticketmaster site.

It may therefore be advisable, to preclude any potential liability, that the Web site desiring to link to an internal page of another Web site consider contacting the owner of the Linked Page before initiating such link and obtaining permission from the owner of the Linked Page to link to an internal page and not the Home Page.

3. Your Web Site should have a "Link Disclaimer".

Every Web site should have a "Terms and Conditions" statement that governs the usage of its Web site. This Statement should include among other information the Web site's policies with regard to the company's copyrighted content and trademarks that are included on its Web site, its "privacy" policy, guidelines for third party Web sites that may want to link to your Web site and a Link Disclaimer that specifically addresses the issue of links to and from other Web pages.

In the case where your Web site will be the Linked Page you may want to establish guidelines that specifically address the issues of (1) the use of your logos, designs, slogans or trademarks, (2) links to internal pages, (3) under what circumstances you will not permit links to your Web site, and (4) under what circumstances your permission is required before linking to your Web site.

When your Web site is the Linked Page your "Link Disclaimer" should address the issues that your Web site cannot control the content of third party owned web sites that link to your Web site and inform the user of your Web site that if they visit your Web site through a link from a third party Web site and find the content of that Web site inappropriate or offensive that they should contact you so that you may evaluate this matter. On the other hand, when your Web site is the "Linking Page" you should notify your Web site users that they may find links from your Web site to third party owned Web sites that contain content that they may find to be of interest. You might also want to inform your Web site users that you initially visited these third party Web sites before linking to them but that they must understand that you do not control their content and that such content frequently changes.

Conclusion

Linking from your Web site to third party Web sites can be a powerful marketing tool for your company. Linking creates added value for your Web site in that your users will return to your Web site not only for its content but also for the knowledge that you will link them to other valuable information that can be found on the World Wide Web. Is there a better way by which you can obtain repeat and loyal users of your Web site? One important guideline to always remember is that you should only "link to other Web sites in the same manner that you would like them to link to your Web site".

http://www.publaw.com/legal.html

Internet Legal Issues: Framing

2007-10-20T13:34:00.001+07:00

A technique frequently used on the World Wide Web is "framing". Framing permits one to create a composite Web page that consists of one or more separately addressed elements. A Web page that includes framing will consist of specifically identified areas, i.e. "frames", on the computer page. Another way of looking at this is by referring to the frames as multiple windows on the computer screen.

The frames may contain either highlighted URL addresses of other Web pages that are intended to be "selected" by the framing page user or other pages within the same Web site. When the framing page user clicks on a framed URL address the user's browser immediately transmits the content of the selected URL so that the content of each frame appears on the user's screen not as if the user had accessed a new URL page directly, but instead the content appears within the portion of the screen designated as its frame. Each frame functions independently, therefore the information that is downloaded into one frame will fill up only that frame, and it will not overwrite or affect the contents of the other frames on the computer screen.

Through hyperlinking frames enable a user to simultaneously view different Web site locations within a framed area on a single computer screen and without losing the user's connection to the framing page site. Furthermore, the URL address contained in the user's browser continues to display only the address of the framing page. It is also important to understand that the content being framed is only temporarily on the framing Web site, a result of clicking on the content's URL, while the content's permanent location continues to be the framed site. This is because framing technology works by directing the user's browser software to the URL containing the content and does not import the content into the framing page.

Frames and framing technology offers Web site owners with unique opportunities because each frame functions independently and permits the information to be displayed in only one frame on the computer screen without overwriting the content that is displayed in other frames on the computer screen. This permits the Web page owner to capitalize on the design layout of their web site by keeping advertising and certain web site material fixed within a particular frame. This frequently occurs by placing advertising in one section of the screen and a navigation bar that may include an index to the Web site or the contents of a page in a scrollable frame. These framing techniques have proven popular to Web site owners in that it has increased the commercial value of their Web site by keeping their advertising in sight of the user while displaying the content from another URL or by increasing a user's convenience of visiting their Web site by having a navigation bar always in view or a scrolling window that contains a table of contents to assist the user in locating particular content materials on their Web site.

As with other Internet techniques, such as linking and meta-tags, the ease of framing brings with it legal risks. A Web site owner should be aware that their are a number of legal issues raised by framing and including frames on your Web site and that many of these legal issues have still not been resolved. These legal issues could include copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition, commercial misappropriation, breach of contract, tortious interference, fraud, defamation, right of privacy and right of publicity.

Legal Issues Involved with Framing

The use of framing technology was a central issue in the Washington Post v. TotalNews case that was settled a few years ago whereby several prominent news organizations, including The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and CNN brought a lawsuit against the Web-based news gathering site TotalNews. TotalNews was using frame technology and hyperlinking to display the news organizations' information on the TotalNews Web site and was surrounding the frames with its own advertising.
The news organizations alleged that the TotalNews Web site by its use of framing and hyperlinks to the news organizations' own Web sites changed the manner in which one read their Web sites because the TotalNews' frame contained paid advertising of TotalNews' advertisers instead of the advertising that was incorporated on the new organizations' web sites. The new organizations asserted the following claims against TotalNews:

Misappropriation.
The news organizations claimed that the TotalNews site "unfairly misappropriated valuable commercial property" by "[taking] the entire commercial value of the news reported at each site and literally selling it to others for TotalNews' own profit."

Federal trademark infringement and dilution.
The news organizations under both federal and state laws claimed that the TotalNews site "dilute[d] and detract[ed] from the distinctiveness of [the news organizations'] famous trademarks." They also alleged that the TotalNews site was "likely to cause confusion and mistake and to deceive customers as to the source or origin of the content and advertising depicted at [TotalNews'] Web site."

Copyright infringement.
The news organizations claimed that the TotalNews site violated "several . . . exclusive rights . . . belonging to the [news organizations] as owners of the copyrights in their respective content and Web sites, ... ."

There are a many ways by which framing could constitute copyright infringement of a linked site's copyrightable material. The reproduction right may be infringed when a linked page is locally cached for the purpose of framing without the copyright owner's permission. The adaptation right could be infringed if the framed work is an unauthorized derivative work of the linked page. The public distribution, display and performance rights could also be infringed because the linking site in an unauthorized manner has altered the distribution, display or performance of the linked site's content by framing that content.

TotalNews may have been most at risk with regard to potential copyright infringement liability for its creation of a derivative work that distorted and altered the way in which users viewed the news organizations' content in the following manner: (1) The TotalNews frame did not display the entire news organizations' computer screen as would have been the case if that screen had been accessed directly and not through the TotalNews Web page by the user, (2) the TotalNews frame surrounded the news organizations' content with TotalNews' own advertising and logo and (3) the Total News URL and not the news organizations was retained in the browser address field when the news organizations content was displayed on the TotalNews page.

Violation of advertising laws; deceptive practices; and unfair competition.
The news organizations claimed that the TotalNews 's site was "likely to cause and [had] caused consumers mistakenly to believe that ... [TotalNews had] an affiliation with [the news organizations], or [was] sponsored or approved of by [the news organizations], or [was] otherwise associated with or [had] obtained permission from [the news organizations]."

Tortious interference with business relationships.
The news organizations claimed that the [TotalNews'] site "made [the news organizations] performance of their advertising contracts more burdensome and . . . interfered with the benefits that [the news organizations'] advertisers bargained for when they purchased space on [the news organizations'] sites."
The TotalNews lawsuit was settled and the terms of the settlement provided, among other things, that TotalNews would stop framing the news organizations' Web sites, and that TotalNews would only link to the news organizations' sites with permission.

GUIDELINES FOR FRAMING

Framing is a very powerful Internet technology but its use must be carefully evaluated especially when that use involves displaying the content from another Web site. Many of the legal issues that were raised in the TotalNews case are still unsettled and therefore legal guidelines as they relate to framing have not as yet been established. Therefore, if you intend to use framing technology on your Web site you should evaluate its use and you may want to take the following precautions.
Do not frame a linked page within your Web sites advertising.
Obtain permission to frame the content from another Web site on your Web site.
Be careful about using your URL in the address portion of the browser if the content that is being displayed is from another Web site.

http://www.publaw.com/legal.html