Get updates by email

Select Specific Blog Updates

Paul Zimmerman
pzimmerman@mrllp.com
310.299.5500

Showing 12 posts by Ronald R. Camhi.

Photo of M&R Blog

Dmitriy Shironosov © 123RF.com

Force Majeure Clauses in Commercial Real Estate Contracts

You may be hearing the phrase “force majeure” being thrown around quite a bit in response to the upheaval caused by the coronavirus. But what does this archaic phrase mean for you and your real estate contracts? In short, a force majeure clause operates to excuse performance obligations in an agreement or to extend time of performance when an unforeseeable event, or one that is "beyond the contractor's control," causes one or more parties to be unable to meet their contractual obligations. Given that the coronavirus may well qualify as a triggering event for purposes of a force majeure clause in one of your contracts, we offer the following information, which is geared toward commercial real estate. (Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

© tranmautritam

An Important Message From Michelman & Robinson About California Governor's Statewide Stay-At-Home Order

The entire state of California has essentially been placed on lockdown as Governor Gavin Newsom has called for a statewide stay-at-home order to combat the spread of the coronavirus, which causes COVID-19. Governor Newsom’s move, which impacts nearly 40M people, comes on the heels of various “shelter in place” and similar orders that have already been issued throughout the state, including the “Safer at Home” emergency order declared in Los Angeles earlier today by Mayor Eric Garcetti. (Read More

Photo of M&R Blog

© Pixabay

A Message From Michelman & Robinson About "Shelter in Place" Orders

With several counties in California’s Bay Area ordering residents to “shelter in place” for at least three weeks to keep coronavirus from spreading across the region, and Orange County (California) now following suit and preventing private or public gatherings, it seems quite possible that other jurisdictions may take these drastic measures as well. Whether you are located in an area now subject to a “shelter in place” order, or are somewhere that has yet to restrict movement, it is helpful to understand the scope of these new mandates, especially as they relate to your business.

(Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

Vacclav © depositphotos.com

M&R Deciphers the Families First Coronavirus Response Act Just Passed by the Senate and Signed Into Law by the President

Today, in an effort to ward off economic calamity, the U.S. Senate passed its second economic relief bill this month in response to the coronavirus pandemic—the Families First Coronavirus Response Act ("Act"). The Act, which passed by an overwhelming 90-8 vote and was then quickly signed into law by President Trump, expands emergency paid sick and family leave for certain workers, expands unemployment insurance assistance, includes nutrition assistance, and guarantees free diagnostic testing for the coronavirus. Michelman & Robinson addresses common questions about the Act in this alert, which supersedes our discussion of the bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives last week. Note that our analysis is based on the bill’s language as of March 18.

(Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

FCC Approves New Privacy Rules for Broadband Providers

On October 27, 2016, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved new rules for internet service providers' (ISPs) use and sharing of customer data. By a 3-to-2 vote, the FCC passed regulations requiring broadband providers to obtain express permission from subscribers to gather and give out data on their web browsing, app use, location and financial information.  As we have noted in previous blog posts, the proposed regulations proved to be quite divisive within the media industry, leading to a very volatile public comment period. (Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

bluebay © 123RF.com

Coalition of Ad Industry Orgs Asks for More Time to Review FCC Privacy Proposal

Update (4.29.16)The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has rejected the ad industry's request to extend the comment period on proposed privacy rules that would limit some forms of behavioral targeting. The decision means that initial comments on the controversial privacy proposal are still due by May 27, 2016.

Originally Published April 25, 2016

The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) privacy proposal targeting internet service providers is continuing to draw a strong response from the advertising industry. Recently, the FCC voted 3-2 to move forward with Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would require broadband providers to obtain subscribers' explicit consent before using data about their online activity to serve them targeted ads. A coalition of advertising industry organizations, including, among others, the Interactive Advertising Bureau, American Association of Advertising Agencies, Direct Marketing Association, and the self-regulatory group Network Advertising Initiative have argued in a new filing that they need more time to gather input from their members, and to evaluate the FCC’s proposed regulations. This comes on the heels of a similar request from the Association of National Advertisers, lodged in early April. The public comment period on this unprecedented privacy provision will no doubt garner significant attention from advertisers, brands, technology companies and consumer advocates. (Read more)

Photo of M&R Blog

Illia Uriadnikov © 123RF.com

Advertising Industry Asks for More Time to Weigh in on Controversial FCC Proposal

The Association of National Advertisers (ANA) has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for an additional two months to comment on proposed privacy rules that would limit broadband providers' ability to engage in online behavioral advertising. The FCC proposal recently cleared a key hurdle when, in a 3-2 vote, the commission adopted the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, thereby initiating a public comment period. A key provision in the proposed privacy rules requires broadband service providers to obtain affirmative opt-in consent for the use and sharing of data that has not been specifically collected for the purpose of providing communications-related services. The ANA wants more time to interface with its members and develop an organized and comprehensive response to the FCC’s unprecedented proposal. (Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

Samantha Craddock © 123RF.com

Divisive Broadband Privacy Proposal Clears Key Hurdle

Recently, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) previewed new broadband privacy rules that would require internet service providers (ISPs) to obtain consumers’ express consent before collecting and sharing data regarding their online activity. I detailed this significant proposal in a related blog post highlighting the contentious nature of the FCC standards, namely the complex regulatory patchwork resulting from inconsistent federal privacy standards. Now, in a 3-2 vote, the FCC has adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would establish privacy guidelines for ISPs. The proposed rule will now enter a public comment period, and amendment phase, before a final vote. In the coming weeks, consumer privacy advocates, federal regulators, and communications companies will no doubt weigh in on this controversial proposal. (Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

Illia Uriadnikov © 123RF.com

FCC Proposes New Privacy Rules for Internet Service Providers

On Thursday, March 10, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) previewed new broadband privacy rules that would require Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to disclose how customer data is being used, take reasonable steps to protect such information, and notify affected customers within ten days of detecting a data breach. This step follows the FCC’s still-contested vote to declare ISPs a public utility, placing them under tighter regulatory scrutiny. This sets up what promises to be a dynamic dialogue involving consumers, privacy advocates, ISPs and industry associations exploring the scope and workability of potentially inconsistent federal privacy regulations. (Read More)

Photo of M&R Blog

arcady31 © 123RF.com

Foisting Patent Assertion Entity Indemnity Risk on Agencies Ignores Economic Realities

Patent Assertion Entities (PAE’s) commonly assert ownership status of methods and technologies, and seek to enforce infringements when the alleged “infringer” has failed to attain proper authorization (i.e., paying licensing fees). Patent trolls focus on aggressive litigation tactics, often threatening to sue hundreds, even thousands, of companies and create shell companies so defendants find it difficult to even know who is suing them. Patent troll lawsuits constitute the majority of all patent infringement claims, and exploit the fact that it is often difficult to discern the difference between a new technology’s function, versus the method by which that function is actually accomplished. Hence, these assertions are frequently vague and tend to claim ownership over common marketing methods in online and mobile marketing. For good reason, patent trolls have been the source of discussion and concern in the technology, media and advertising industries for many years.  (Read more)