Stay Tuned In

with any of our feed subscriptions

Bloglines MyMSN Newsgator MyYahoo Google Reader MyAOL
Toggle
Friday, March 12, 2010

Your Source for Legal Blogs,
Podcasts & News Feeds

Blawg's Blog

Blawg's Sunday Paper, 4 - 15 - 07

Blawg's Sunday Paper, a quick spin through the blawgosphere and the week that was.

Paul Ohm, guest-blogging at The Volokh Conspiracy asked Do Blogs Influence SSRN Downloads?  In his post, Mr. Ohm outlined some analysis he has completed, and concluded Yes. In fact, yes, they do.  Among his conclusions, perhaps not surprisingly, is that Blogging about an article at the Volokh Conspiracy appears to be a good way to increase SSRN "Abstract Views" and "Downloads."  

Professor Gordon Smith at Conglomerate wrote about the The Difference Between Revlon and the Business Judgment Rule:

Vice-Chancellor Strine's opinion in In re Netsmart Technologies, Inc. Shareholders Litigation was issued a month ago, and I have been pondering it ever since. This case has a lot of interesting features, and I hope to blog about some others later. For this post, however, I concentrate on Leo's attempt to distinguish the Revlon standard from the business judgment rule...[read more by clicking The Difference Between Revlon and the Business Judgment Rule ]

Larry Bodine's Law Marketing Blog pointed out Four Hot Trends in Marketing outlined by Silvia L. Coulter,  managing director of CoulterCranston, Inc.

Meanwhile, Marianne Richmond at Resonance Partnership Blog, which covers Social Media, Word of Mouth Marketing, and Branding, spent some time creating topical link lists worth exploring links for 2007-04-15, links for 2007-04-14, and links for 2007-04-13.

Out of the Jungle reflected on one of the week's news items in the post Laptops in class -- again! with a discussion of the conversation that followed among law faculty.

The BLT: The Blog of the Legal Times gave notice of a recent interview, A Senior Justice Official Speaks Out, in a post from Friday:

In an interview with our Tony Mauro, Daniel Metcalfe, a longtime senior lawyer at the Justice Deparment, says Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has “shattered” the department’s tradition of independence and politicized its operation more than any other attorney general in more than 30 years. Gonzales is slated to go before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week to provide further testimony in the burgeoning U.S. attorney scandal. Metcalfe, a former career official at the department, retired in January, before the current controversy over the firing of U.S. attorneys erupted. He views the episode as an “awful embarrassment” that has only worsened already-low morale at the department, especially among career attorneys.  [Click A Senior Justice Official Speaks Out to read more and find links to the full article ]

LexLibris wrote a brief post on the news that Law.com Launches Legal Web Search Engine, citing TVC Alert which in turn, cited Robert Ambrogi.  

V.U. Lawcity, the Valpo Law Blawg, reported Survey says Google draws 64 percent of U.S. search queries.

Freedman Consulting's Law Practice Management asked Are You Ready for the New Postal Regulations and a Whopping Increase in Costs?

New postal regulations go into effect on May 14, 2007. It’s called Shape-Based Pricing. There are a few decent sites on the internet for information at this point.

This is probably one of the most under-reported events I have experienced in recent years, particularly when it may result in an increase in postage costs of as much as 50% overall to an uneducated law firm. We’re not talking about just an increase of 2¢ per letter. We’re talking about a whole new labor-intensive mailing process, and some significant price increases in actual postage for the bulk of mail which is sent by a law firm. In fact, for most firms the most significant price increases aren’t even on the radar screen. I know they weren’t on mine. But I attended a seminar today presented by ITS Mailing Systems, an authorized dealer for Hasler. And it was an eye-opener.

The Harvard International Law Journal Digest highlighted an international border dispute, Peru to Take Chilean Border Issue to the ICJ:

The president of Peru, Alan García, announced over the weekend that the country will turn to the International Court of Justice in the Hague to resolve its maritime border controversy with Chile. Peru says that this border has never been legally set, while Chile sees as binding a pair of treaties signed by the two countries in the 1950s. President García’s announcement followed a highly charged protest near the coastal border organized by nationalist groups last Thursday.

Mark Beese at Leadership for Lawyers reported that

Earlier this month I had a chance to interview Chris Marston, founder and CEO (not managing partner) of Exemplar Law Partners for an article that will appear in the ezine, The Complete Lawyer.  Marton is a thirty-something entrepreneur who started a law firm with a unique approach, characterized by flat-fee only billing, hiring only entrepreneurial lawyers, creating cross-functional teams from the beginning of a matter, and an obsession for client service. 

Read Mr. Beese's full post on the subject here: Chris Marston Interview

Duke Law and Technology Review’s iBlawg offered a post on The Federal Circuit and Administrative Law Principles:

Recently, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., No. 06-1261 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 22, 2007), invalidating one of Pfizer’s patents on Norvasc, U.S. Patent No. 4,879,303 (“the ‘303 patent”). Chief Judge Michel, writing the opinion, included a discussion on the appropriate level of deference given to findings by patent examiners, but under the specific facts of the case, the court’s holding resulted in an interesting twist. [click link to find out more about this 'twist']

Noric Dilanchian at IP Lightbulb Blog wrote about the  Top 50 trade marks in the UK in 2006

And, finally, to end as usual on a lighter note, Court TV's weblog Stupid Crimes & Misdemeanors gave its Awards of the Week under the category "Another day, another burglar."

Enjoy your Sunday...


Feedback

 re: Blawg's Sunday Paper, 4 - 15 - 07

Do Not Mail Opt-Out Law would be fair to everyone.

The proposed recent "Do not mail" is an Opt-Out law. Only those not desiring advertising mail need opt-out. Anyone desiring advertising mail can do nothing - and continue to receive it. Why deny those wishing to avoid advertising mail the power to do so?

I do not consider handling unwanted advertising placed against my will on my personal property to be a civic obligation!

The US Supreme Court said in the Rowan case in 1970, ““In today's [1970] complex society we are inescapably captive audiences for many purposes, but a sufficient measure of individual autonomy must survive to permit every householder to exercise control over unwanted mail. To make the householder the exclusive and final judge of what will cross his threshold undoubtedly has the effect of impeding the flow of ideas, information, and arguments that, ideally, he should receive and consider. Today's merchandising methods, the plethora of mass mailings subsidized by low postal rates, and the growth of the sale of large mailing lists as an industry in itself have changed the mailman from a carrier of primarily private communications, as he was in a more leisurely day, and have made him an adjunct of the mass mailer who sends unsolicited and often unwanted mail into every home. It places no strain on the doctrine of judicial notice to observe that whether measured by pieces or pounds, Everyman's mail today is made up overwhelmingly of material he did not seek from persons he does not know. And all too often it is matter he finds offensive.”

Furthermore, the Supreme Court said, “the mailer's right to communicate is circumscribed only by an affirmative act of the addressee giving notice that he wishes no further mailings from that mailer.

To hold less would tend to license a form of trespass and would make hardly more sense than to say that a radio or television viewer may not twist the dial to cut off an offensive or boring communication and thus bar its entering his home. Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit; we see no basis for according the printed word or pictures a different or more preferred status because they are sent by mail.”

We need a nationwide “Do Not Mail” law to create a one-stop, convenient place for homeowners to give senders the aforementioned affirmative notice that we do not want certain kinds of mail sent to our homes.

http://www.newdream.org/emails/ta19.html

Signed,
Ramsey A Fahel 4/16/2007 8:51 AM | Ramsey Fahel

# xxx videos free

rvC27t0 | <a href="http://pregnant-teens-nude.ispfaq.info">pregnant teens nude</a> 11/14/2007 8:57 AM | http://xxx-videos-free.fashionbuzz.info

# Teen anal.

Anal sex. Anal stimulation. Anal cum. Anal fist. Anal fisting. 8/9/2008 11:03 AM | Anal.

Comments have been closed on this topic.

 Subscribe in a reader

Subscribe to Blawg's Blog by Email