From the category archives:

!Latest Posts

We are all keeping our eye on the public and private initiatives surrounding the Brooklyn Tech Triangle.

President of Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, Tucker Reed, has in essence, proposed a reverse eminent domain of City owned buildings in Downtown Brooklyn to fuel the area’s need for startup real estate:

“With a footprint of over 1.2 million square feet of commercial space surrounding Cadman Plaza, municipal-owned and occupied buildings such as the Brooklyn Municipal building at 210 Joralemon Street, 65 Court Street and the U.S. Post Office and Courthouse at 271 Cadman Plaza East could be repurposed to create a new urban campus for entrepreneurs and start-ups as well as new retail opportunities to activate the ground level experience. By reactivating these assets, government could avoid having to spend additional money to renovate these aging facilities, while modernizing its footprint in newer, more efficient buildings built by partners in the private sector.”

{ 0 comments }

Andrew Greenstein, counsel at Knight Capital, suggests in his
Three Quick Steps To Avoid Startup Death By Trade Secret Misappropriation Lawsuit“, the following:

CHECKLIST AND CERTIFICATION FOR NEWLY-HIRED EMPLOYEES

1. I hereby confirm that I have not retained any documents or information relating to the business of any of my prior employers, in any form (including personal email and electronic files), that I obtained in my role as an employee of my prior employers.

Confirm  Unable to Confirm 

2. I hereby confirm that I have performed a search of my home computer, hard drives, USB drives, email, and paper files to confirm that I do not possess the information described above.

Important: If you need to perform a search before completing this document, please inform [NAME] so that you can do so.

Confirm  Unable to Confirm 

3. I hereby confirm that I have not disclosed or used, and that I will not disclose or use, any non-public documents or information relating to the business of any of my former employers during my work at [COMPANY].

Confirm  Unable to Confirm 

4. I hereby confirm that I am not subject to an agreement that prohibits me from working for a competitor of any prior employer.

Confirm  Unable to Confirm 

{ 0 comments }

HealthTechAn 108 Slide and Graphic driven presentation that is packed with information and packaged with acute organization.

{ 0 comments }

My latest post on Hague Child Abduction practice here, with full text of December 13, 2013 marked up for emphasis.

Of particular importance:

Mr. Medina argued that the United States is the children’s “habitual residence” because the amount of time that the children have spent here is a substantial part of their lives. Mr. Medina clearly cannot rely on the length of the children’s stay in the United States after their allegedly wrongful retention on February 2, 2013, as establishing that the United States is their “habitual residence.”

{ 0 comments }

RT @RezaC1: 5 Secrets to Landing the Perfect Partnership: http://t.co/vCqFWSBveK #startups #hl74 add solid legal docs

{ 0 comments }

As reported in the Huffington Post:

“It’s estimated that New York’s startup community consists of at least 200 active startups founded by Israelis alone, including Conduit, Taboola, Kaltura and Fiverr. The majority of these Israeli-founded startups have raised at least $10 million in funding each: Conduit raised $110 million, Taboola raked in $40 million, Kaltura $68 million and Fiverr counts $20 million under its belt. With Israel on the fast track to revolutionizing the tech landscape, in the next decade we can expect to see even more cash flowing into Israeli startups – and importantly, their counterparts in NYC.”

{ 0 comments }

MT @marksbirch: A comprehensive NYC list

{ 0 comments }

RT @AlleyWatch Structuring Your Financing as the Purchase and Sale of Convertible Notes: http://t.co/wiVCIK3LS3 #startups #hl74

“Generally, if the company and investors can agree on the pre-money valuation and therefore the price per share, there is no reason not to do an equity financing. You should be able to get through the other terms; valuation is often the most difficult term to negotiate. Convertible notes can be very useful when there is great disagreement between the company and the investors over the pre-money valuation of the company. It allows the company and investors to bridge the valuation gap. The valuation is not set, and so the company and the investors can still do a deal.”

{ 0 comments }

A recent client inquiry caused me to read again this excerpt from a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit:

llbeandrake“Our reluctance to apply the anti-dilution statute (Maine trademark law) to the instant case also stems from a recognition of the vital importance of parody. Although, as we have noted, parody is often offensive, it is nevertheless “deserving of substantial freedom — both as entertainment and as a form of social and literary criticism.” Berlin v. E.C. Publications, Inc., 329 F.2d 541 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 822, 85 S.Ct. 46, 13 L.Ed.2d 33 (1964). Accord Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432, 437-38 (9th Cir.1986)(“`Destructive’ parodies play an important role in social and literary criticism and thus merit protection even though they may discourage or discredit an original author.”);Pring v. Penthouse International, Ltd., 695 F.2d 438 (10th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1132, 103 S.Ct. 3112, 77 L.Ed.2d 1367 (1983) (defendants’ bawdy “spoof” and “ridicule” of Miss America pageant entitled to full range of first amendment protection); Groucho Marx Productions v. Day and Night Co., 689 F.2d 317, 319 n. 2 (2d Cir.1982) (noting “the broad scope permitted parody in first First Amendment law.”); Elsmere Music v. National Broadcasting Co., 623 F.2d 252, 253 (2d Cir.1980)(“in today’s world of unrelieved solemnity, copyright law should be hospitable to the humor of parody….”). It would be anomalous to diminish the protection afforded parody solely because a parodist chooses a famous trade name, rather than a famous personality, author or creative work, as its object.[5]”

L.L. BEAN, INC. v. DRAKE PUBLISHERS, INC., 811 F.2d 26 (1987) (1st. Cir 1987)

{ 0 comments }