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 }

From a op-ed today in the New York Times:

“”Did anyone in the White House or the N.S.A or the C.I.A. consider flying to Hong Kong and treating Mr. Snowden like a human being, offering him a chance to testify before Congress and a fair trial? Maybe he would have gone with President Vladimir V. Putin anyway, but at least he would have had another option.”

Information and knowledge will always seek its own distribution. That is how the machine works. All should consider reading again “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.”

{ 0 comments }