Mobile Content Providers Settle Unauthorized Billing Class Action

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 17:00:00 GMT

While the FCC has taken an interest in mobile marketing by carriers -- most notably with investigations of carrier early termination fees and proceedings examining wireless consumer "bill shock" -- it also is helpful to remember that the mobile content providers are subject to enforcement for deceptive marketing practices. Our colleagues at the Ad Law Access blog covered a recent settlement of a class action lawsuit by several mobile marketers. They remind marketers to clearly and conspicuously disclose costs so that consumers know what they are obligated to pay. Mobile service providers should ensure that their billing and collection agreements impose such an obligation on the content provider and that the carrier properly polices compliance.

Read the Ad Law Access story here.

HTML5 Video - Oh the possibilities!

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:06:09 GMT

Normally, we here at ATLB try and bring you legal issues relevant to the Austin tech world, but I recently stumbled across and my first interactive, multi-window HTML5 video, and despite the lack of legal issues, I had an overwhelming desire to share it. Showcased as a "Chrome Experience," Google and Chris Milk teamed up with the band Arcade Fire to produce an extremely creative music video to the song, "We used to wait" (a great track). The site, The Wilderness Downtown, provides a look into the future of not just music videos, but a videos across the board. An interactive multi-window experience allows the user to connect with the music, the story of the video, and provides some serious nostalgia for someone who hasn't been home in awhile (my then teary-eyed girlfriend can attest to that).

I look forward to the next generation of videos and the creative music and film directors that will no doubt utilize this new format. I can already hear myself 6 months from now, "I can't believe I was so amazed by that Arcade Fire video."

More Bad News for James Hardie and Its Asbestos Compensation Fund

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:26:33 GMT

Managing legacy liabilities is never easy. For some, it can be a nightmare. Thus, James Hardie and its asbestos compensation fund took yet another hit yesterday through the loss of a tax appeal. The loss is described here in mass media in Australia. The mass media is focused on the fund's long term survival prospects in light of the adverse ruling and the continuing slumps in the building sector that buys product from James Hardie entities.

The company issued a statement yesterday (go here to investor relations page), but did not include a link to the opinion. According to the statement. the loss will result in a charge of about $ 330 million (US) unless there is a successful further appeal. The company also says it will not violate loan covenants by taking the charge.

lennyesq

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 02:07:50 GMT

Rapportive | About Rapportive shows you everything about your contacts right inside your inbox. You can immediately see what people look like, where they’re based, and what they do. You can establish rapport by mentioning shared interests. You can grow your network by connecting on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and more. And you can record thoughts [...]

Rapportive | About

Rapportive shows you everything about your contacts right inside your inbox.

You can immediately see what people look like, where they’re based, and what they do. You can establish rapport by mentioning shared interests. You can grow your network by connecting on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and more. And you can record thoughts for later by leaving notes.

Imagine relationship management built into your email. For free.

Rapportive will identify your browser and offer you an extension to install, which will add Rapportive to your Gmail, where the ads used to be.

Personalized Service

KMAdvice@gmail.com (Mary Abraham) — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:43:03 GMT

We marked a major milestone in the life of our family by having dinner at an extraordinary restaurant this evening. The restaurant was Blue Hill at Stone Barns. This restaurant is exceptional in many ways: it’s located in Pocantico Hills, in the beautifully renovated old barns of the Rockefeller estate outside New York City; [...]

Now, you might reasonably expect a memorable meal in a restaurant like this, and you would be right. However, it was the menu that made this restaurant unusual. What was so special about the menu? There is no menu. Every night is culinary improvisation. Instead of a menu, the restaurant provides you with a list of some of the fantastic ingredients available in the kitchen and then asks you if you have any food allergies or aversions. Once you’ve provided the necessary information, the chef tailor makes a menu for you based on the best available ingredients. Your only decision concerns the number of courses you’d like in your meal. That’s it.

Having given the chef our minimal requirements, we sat back and enjoyed the meal as it unfolded. Every dish was a work of art, every mouthful a revelation. But beyond the food, much of the fun was in watching the delight on the faces of all around as various courses were presented and tasted. No two tables received the same dinner, but every diner was patently happy.

On the way home from dinner, I found myself wondering what it would be like if we approached law firm technology and law firm knowledge management in the same way as the chef at Blue Hill? What would we need in place in order to offer this level of personalized service? What would be required to provide a comparable level of user delight? As we move towards user-selected tools and user-defined services, law firm IT and KM departments will be pushed to provide customized work environments and support. In fact, we may well be approaching the end of a one-size-fits-all approach to law firm IT and KM. If this is so, the challenge will be to stretch beyond the bare minimums to a level of personalized service, care, consideration and user delight comparable to that of Blue Hill. Are you ready?

CEO Finally Admits that Genzyme is Up for Sale...At the Right Price!

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:51:04 GMT

The Boston Globe reported today that this morning Henri Termeer, the embattled CEO of Cambridge, MA based Genzyme acknowledged for the first time that company was indeed up for sale. However, he was quick to point out that the $69 per share or $18.8 billion takeover bid from Sanofi Aventis was insufficient.

Over the past few days, Sanofi Aventis’ CEO Christopher A. Viehbacher turned up the heat on Termeer; forcing him to possibly take Sanofi’s latest offer directly to Genzyme shareholders. While Termeer acknowledged that the company was for sale, he hinted that other companies may join the bidding war to get the $75 per share price that the Genzyme board is seeking.

The Sanofi Aventis-Genzyme situation is beginning to resemble the Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)-ImClone standoff of two years ago. As you may recall, Jim Cornelius—BMS CEO at the time—publicly and repeatedly offered a “low-ball” price ($62 per share) to purchase ImClone despite admonishments from Carl Icahn, ImClone’s Chairman. As negotiations stalled, Icahn told Cornelius that there were other suitors who were willing to pay a higher price to acquire ImClone. Surprisingly, rather than continuing to negotiate in good faith, Cornelius decided to call Icahn’s “bluff.” In less than a week, Eli Lilly purchased ImClone for $70 per share ($6.5 billion); the price that Ichan had previously and publicly asked for to purchase the company.

Many of you already know that Icahn holds a substantial minority Genzyme stock position and is represented by two current Genzyme board members. That said, if I were Sanofi’s Viehbacher, I would proceed with extreme caution in future negotiations. Like him or not, Icahn is a financial genius and second-to-none negotiating M&A deals.

Maybe Viehbacher ought to contact Cornelius for advice? Oh yeah...Cornelius retired as CEO earlier this year but he is still Chairman of the BMS Board of Directors. Maybe it is worth a call?

Stay tuned for new developments as the saga continues.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

New York's Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:38:28 GMT

Little covered other than by environmental and waste industry trade journals, New York's legislature earlier this year passed the NYS Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act (the “Act”), which was signed into law by Governor Paterson. The Act amended various provisions of the NY Tax Law as well as adding Article 27, Title 26, Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse, to New York's Environmental Conservation Law. It contains some potential surprises for manufacturers, retailers and consumers of "covered electronic equipment."The manufacturer's internet website must, in addition to any other required information, provide a listing of locations within New York where consumers may return electronic waste as part of the manufacturer's electronic waste acceptance program. Further, those for manufacturer's providing computers, hard drives and other "covered electronic equipment" containing internal memory where personal or other confidential data can be stored, the manufacturer must provide consumers with instructions for destroying such data before they surrender the product for reuse or recycling.

The bulk of the Act, effective as of April 1, 2011, serves to impose various new mandates on “manufacturers” [ECL §27-2601(11)] and ”retailers” [ECL §27-2601(16)] geared toward increasingly stringent goals for recycling of “covered electronic equipment” (“CEE”) [ECL §27-2601(5)] , as well creation of associated systems for the collection and recycling/reuse of electronic waste at no cost from consumers under NYS Department of Environmental Conversation ("DEC") oversight. To this end ECL §27-2605 requires manufactures to register with the DEC, at a one-time cost of $5,000, and supply detailed information on the sales and total weight of CEE sold by the manufacturer in New York.

Manufacturer Requirements:

The Act defines “manufacturers” broadly to include any person or entity that: "(a) assembles or substantially assembles covered electronic equipment for sale in the state; (b) manufactures covered electronic equipment under its own brand name or under any other brand name for sale in the state; (c) sells, under its own brand name, covered electronic equipment sold in the state; (d) owns a brand name that it licenses to another person for use on covered electronic equipment sold in the state; (e) imports covered electronic equipment for sale in the state; or (f) manufactures covered electronic equipment for sale in the state without affixing a brand name.” ECL §27-2601(11).

Excluded from the sweep of "manufacturer" are those persons and entities who sell “less than one thousand units of covered electronic equipment annually” in New York or “whose primary business is the sale of covered electronic equipment which is comprised primarily of rebuilt, refurbished or used components.”

The Act also imposes joint and several responsibility and liability on those that jointly manufacture a product qualifying as a CEE, noting “any such person may assume responsibility for obligations of a manufacturer of that brand under this title. If none of those persons assumes responsibility for the obligations of a manufacturer under this title, any and all such persons jointly and severally may be considered to be the responsible manufacturer of that brand for purposes of this title.” ECL §27-2601(11).

In addition, ECL §27-2605(5)(b) requires a manufacturer, as part of its required electronic waste acceptance program (“EWAP”), to provide “information on how consumers can destroy all data on any electronic waste, either through physical destruction of the hard drive or through data wiping” while ECL §27-2605(5)(c) mandates as part of the EWAP a public education program to inform consumers about the manufacturer's electronic waste acceptance program, including at a minimum:

"an internet website and a toll-free telephone number and written information included in the product manual for, or at the time of sale of, covered electronic equipment that provides sufficient information to allow a consumer of covered electronic equipment to learn how to return the covered equipment for recycling or reuse, and in the case of manufacturers of computers, hard drives and other covered electronic equipment that have internal memory on which personal or other confidential data can be stored, such website shall provide instructions for how consumers can destroy such data before surrendering the products for recycling or reuse.”

The manufacturer's internet website must also, in addition to any other required information required above, provide a listing of locations within New York where consumers may return electronic waste as part of the manufacturer's EWAP. Further, those manufacturers providing computers, hard drives and other CEE containing internal memory where personal or other confidential data can be stored, are required to give consumers instructions for how to destroy any data contained before they surrender the product for reuse or recycling.

Lastly, manufacturers must also maintain records on site to demonstrate compliance with the Act, and make them available upon request by the DEC for a period of three years. See www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/66845.html

For purposes of the Act, “personal or other confidential data” is not expressly defined in the otherwise very detailed definitions section. For example, the definition of “covered electronic equipment” under ECL §27-2601(5), includes a wide variety of equipment, notably all of the following:

computers [as further defined at ECL §27-2601(2)];
computer peripherals [as further defined at ECL §27-2601(3)];
small electronic equipment [as further defined at ECL §27-2601(19)];
small-scale servers [as further defined at ECL §27-2601(20)];
cathode ray tubes [as further defined at ECL §27-2601(1)]; and
televisions [as further defined at ECL §27-2601(21)].

The definition of "covered electronic equipment" expressly excludes a:

“motor vehicle or any part thereof; camera or video camera; portable or stationary radio; household appliances such as clothes washers, clothes dryers, refrigerators, freezers, microwave ovens, ovens, ranges or dishwashers; equipment that is functionally or physically part of a larger piece of equipment intended for use in an industrial, research and development or commercial setting; security or anti-terrorism equipment; monitoring and control instrument or system; thermostat; hand-held transceiver; telephone of any type; portable digital assistant or similar device; calculator; global positioning system (GPS) receiver or similar navigation device; a server other than a small-scale server; a cash register or retail self checkout system; a stand-alone storage product intended for use in industrial, research and development or commercial settings; commercial medical equipment that contains within it a cathode ray tube, a flat panel display or similar video display device, and is not separate from the larger piece of equipment; or other medical devices as that term is defined under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.”

Interestingly, as can be seen above, “telephone[s] of any type” and “portable digital assistant[s] or similar device[s]” are expressly exempted from the definition of CEE. As a result, the mandates of the Act do not apply to any PDAs, cellphones or smartphones, all of today generally can and do contain gigabytes of personal and potentially confidential data. Such devies are, however, otherwise within the scope of the New York State Wireless Recycling Act, effective January 1, 2007, whereby all wireless telephone service providers offering cell phones for sale in New York are required to accept at no charge to consumers cell phones for reuse or recycling.

Retailer Requirements:

A different section of the Act, ECL §26-2607, specifies new requirements imposed on "retailers," as defined under ECL §26-2601(16)]. As of April 1, 2011, retailers of CEE must “at the location of sale” provide buyers of CEE information “about opportunities for the return of electronic waste that has been provided to the retailer by a manufacturer.” ECL §26-2607(1).

All New York “retailers” are flat-out banned by this new section 26-2607 from the sale or offer for sale in New York of any CEE unless the “the manufacturer and the manufacturer's brands are registered with the NY Department of Environmental Conservation” as specified in ECL §27-2605. This is a significant and burdensome requirement on retailers, who have no ability to require manufacturers to conform with the new mandates of the new Title 26 of Article 27, other than as may be specified in the parties' supply contracts or purchase order terms and conditions.

In partial recognition of the onerous results that may befall retailers due to this section, the sub-section (2) provides a safe harbor of sorts where any CEE purchased by a retailer from a manufacturer who “fails to register by [] [Jan. 1, 2011], or prior to the date the manufacturer withdrew its registration or the registration was revoked by the department” may continue to be sold until 180 days after April 1, 2011 or 180 days from date the manufacturer's registration was withdrawn or revoked. Continued sales of CEE, that may not otherwise be offered for sale in New York pursuant to this section, to retailers or others outside of New York is arguably not within this ban as written. In addition, such a ban applied to non-New York parties in interstate commerce could potentially implicate dormant commerce clause issues that are beyond the scope of this posting.

Penalties:

According to the DEC, the Act “except to the extent otherwise required by law” immunizes manufacturers or the operators of any from “any responsibility or liability for any data in any form stored on electronic waste surrendered for recycling or reuse, unless such person misuses or knowingly and intentionally, or with gross negligence, discloses the data.” http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/66845.html

Manufacturers: However, under the Act, manufacturers that fail to comply with the data security notification requirements may receive a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for a first violation; up to $2,500 for a second violation; and up to $5,000 for the third and any following violations within a 12-month period. §71-2729(1)(c)(ii). Manufacturers are subject to a fine of $1,000 per day for any failures to submit required reports, registrations, fees or surcharges. §71-2729(1)(c)(i).

Retailers: that violate the Act may be fined up to $250 for a first offense; $500 for a second offense; and up to $1,000 for a third and any additional offense within a 12-month period. §71-2729(1)(d).

Owners/operators of a electronic waste collection site, electronic waste consolidation facility or electronic waste recycling facility are liable to $250 fines for each offense of the Act with no maximum aggregate fine. §71-2729(1)(b).

Finally, consumers who violate the provisions of the Act are subject to a civil penalty up to $100 maximum for each violation. §71-2729(1)(a).

Sports: just the most obvious indicator

scrawford@scrawford.net (Susan Crawford) — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:15:49 GMT

Here’s another key reason why DOJ is interested in the possibly anticompetitive activities of the country’s two or three giant cable companies: sports. As Richard Sandomir of the NY Times reported yesterday, the Tennis Channel (serving up the US Open) is having trouble reaching broad audiences - because large cable providers won’t distribute the Tennis Channel [...]

Here’s another key reason why DOJ is interested in the possibly anticompetitive activities of the country’s two or three giant cable companies: sports.

As Richard Sandomir of the NY Times reported yesterday, the Tennis Channel (serving up the US Open) is having trouble reaching broad audiences - because large cable providers won’t distribute the Tennis Channel broadly. The cable systems (who don’t, by and large, compete with each other) will distribute the Tennis Channel, but only on an expensive, additional-cost, additional digital sports tier. That’s Siberia if you’re looking for a good seat with a big audience that allows you to sell a lot of advertising.

Let’s consider the Tennis Channel’s complaint about Comcast. Placement on a digital sports tier - which reaches only about 11% of Comcast’s subscribers - means the independent Tennis Channel can’t grow. At the same time, Comcast puts sports channels in which it has equity (MLB Network, NHL Network, NBA TV) on a much more highly-penetrated tier - and it carries its own Versus and Golf channels on a tier that reaches nearly 100% of its 25 million subscribers.

As Sandomir says, “[I]t is reasonable to ask: if Comcast owned the Tennis Channel, would it make it broadly available on its systems or make customers pay extra for it on a sports tier?”

You can’t overstate the amount of fear most people have in dealing with the giant cable networks. Programmers are terrified. In particular, Comcast remembers and holds on to grievances. Programmers may even be unwilling to speak to the Department of Justice, because there’s a risk the information they give about Comcast’s practices will leak over to the FCC and become public. Comcast does not forget.

That’s why it’s so remarkable that the Tennis Channel is willing to speak up.

This isn’t just a squabble about tiering and channeling. It’s not even, really, a tussle over contractual terms of carriage. Nor is this a story about regulating the “speech” of Comcast - although they would undoubtedly claim that it is.

This is much a deeper issue. When Comcast controls a dominant pipe into the home for all communications - voice, data, entertainment, interaction, you name it - in the areas in which it operates, it will be able to decide what goes quickly, what goes slowly, and how much Comcast gets paid for everything that passes over its lines. That’s enormous power. And if Comcast can keep rivals small so that they can’t constrain Comcast’s pricing power, there will be nothing stopping prices for its services from creeping steadily - even if slowly - upwards.

Much of this power already exists. Comcast has 61% of the Chicago market; 63% of Philadelphia; 58% of San Francisco; 59% of Miami. This power will be increased by the addition of NBCU content - particularly sports content.

The sports story is a good crystallization of Comcast’s power as a distributor. Comcast carefully and jealously protected its distribution pipeline when it was dealing with the NFL Network in 2006 - when Comcast didn’t get exclusive distribution rights from the NFL Network, it moved the NFL Network to a (you guessed it) special sports tier. The sports teams learned their lesson. When the MLB Network was launched it immediately gave equity to Comcast. No one needs to be crushed twice.

With the NBCU content, Comcast could put all of its sports online behind the Versus brand and behind an authentication wall so that you have to have a cable subscription to see it. It would be a grand strategy to protect and grow Versus and avoid commoditization of the cable pipe. No rules apply to this online strategy, at least at the moment.

So - don’t just think white flannels and genteel announcements when you hear about the Tennis Channel. It’s blood and guts stuff. The Tennis Channel shouldn’t be an isolated example, and in fact they probably aren’t. They’re just the people willing to talk.

Good News for Jobseekers (sort of): Pharma Job Losses Slow in August

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:59:28 GMT

The Pharmalot Blog reported today that a survey conducted by the outsourcing firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas shows that only 200 pharmaceutical employees lost jobs in August. This compared with the 2,023 jobs lost in July, 830 in June and the 6,943 in May. According to the post, this year’s job loss tally is 37,265 as compared with 53,004 in 2009. Since 2007, it has been estimated that over 180,000 life sciences employees have lost their jobs.

While the slowing layoffs are encouraging, there are no signs that companies are going to be hiring in 2011 (unless you are willing to relocate to Asia). Further, while layoffs are slowing a big pharma companies, the number of scientists losing their jobs at biotechnology companies because of insufficient capital or merger and acquisition activities remains steady and will likely increase if Sanofi-Aventis purchases Genzyme and other biotechnology companies are purchased. For example, Pfizer announced today that it was purchasing FoldRx for an undisclosed amount. FoldRx’s pipeline contains preclinical and clinical candidates for investigational new drugs that treat diseases caused by protein misfolding. The acquisition is consistent with Pfizer’s intention to move into the orphan drug market.

From an historical perspective, the early 2000s was the golden age for life sciences employees in most Western countries. Unfortunately, the golden age has ended for Western employees and it appears that a new era for pharmaceutical and biotechnology employees is beginning in the Asia, South America and Africa!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

lennyesq

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:35:01 GMT

People v. Jose Garcia, 4050-06 Adhering to the strict requirements of Padilla, Supreme Court, Kings County, Part 33 holds that where, as here, defendant is found in fact to have been misled by bad advice from a so-called retained specialist and by a lack of advice from his defense attorney, the Court’s general warning will [...]

People v. Jose Garcia, 4050-06

Adhering to the strict requirements of Padilla, Supreme Court, Kings County, Part 33 holds that where, as here, defendant is found in fact to have been misled by bad advice from a so-called retained specialist and by a lack of advice from his defense attorney, the Court’s general warning will not automatically cure counsel’s failure nor erase the consequent prejudice.Under both the federal two-prong Strickland standard and the New York rule of meaningful representation, defendant has succeeded in establishing his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

Read full text of decision. (Requires free registration)

Navigating a Difficult Job Market

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:11:53 GMT

We are now three years into one of the worst economic downturns in the history of the US. While the job market will eventually recover, don’t expect things to be the “way they were” before the recession. In other words, the job market has undergone a paradigm shift and new job seeking rules have replaced the old ones.

To that end, I recently found an article written by Liz Wogemuth of US News and World report entitled “5 Strategies for Surviving the ‘New Normal’ Job Market.” The post is well crafted and offer fresh insights into the new rules and behaviors that ought to help guide job seekers for the foreseeable future.

They are:

1. Be patient

These days, companies are slower to invest and slower to hire. Even rockstar employees will have to work harder to convince companies to bankroll ambitious projects. "For those people who do have the big idea, [return on investment] is going to be absolutely critical," says Brad Karsh, president of JB Training Solutions, a management and business skills training firm. Given their extreme uncertainty about the near future, companies will likely be more amenable to making an investment that pays off in seven months than one that pays off in seven years.

Most companies are also no longer doling out annual raises or annual promotions, which mean workers, need to be patient about advancement in earnings and position. One thing that's slowing down the process: Upper executives aren't moving around as much as they used to. "It used to be you'd lose 25 percent of your [vice presidents] every year, let's say, because they'd go to other companies or start their own," Karsh says. "Well, more people are like, 'I don't want to leave.'" Even top employees are turning down offers from outside companies because they fear taking a risk on a new employer in such an uncertain economy, Karsh says.

Workers who are on the market should be prepared for a longer interview process. Companies are increasingly asking candidates to interview with multiple people at the company and asking them to return for multiple rounds of interviews. "One thing I tell people is, 'don’t take this personally,'" Karsh says. "It's just a function of the economy." Even though the process can be grueling and frustrating, it's critical that job seekers stay fresh and enthusiastic--still smiling and prepared with questions at the eighth interview. Some may be frustrated with companies that can't make a decision, perhaps feeling that the company is giving them the runaround. Employers need to be forthright with candidates about their plans, capabilities, and timetable, Karsh says.

2. In your job search, take the time to tailor

Some job seekers are applying to hundreds of jobs, but if inundated hiring managers can't easily spot the relevance of your experience to the position they're filling, they'll breeze right past. Career expert Ellen Gordon Reeves often speaks to groups of job seekers and says she is still finding that many people are not presenting themselves well--making no effort to tailor their resumes and cover letters to the jobs they are applying to. "Everybody fears rejection, so they don't really pitch themselves," Reeves says. Her advice: Put yourself in the hiring manager's shoes. Imagine what you would think of your resume if you were hiring for this position. Would the job experience listed look relevant to you? If not, spend some time recasting your work history and your skills. "Write for the job you want, not the jobs you've had," Reeves says. If you're doing this well, with your resume and cover letter, it should take at least a day (if not more) to apply for a single position. But it's so much more effective than blindly submitting your resume that it's worth the time it takes.

3. Leverage your relationships to find openings

Unfortunately, many job openings are impossible to find with your computer. Companies are skipping posting openings online so they can fill positions without scavenging through the onslaught of (often ill-matched) resumes. A new survey from ExecuNet found that companies and executive search firms are posting fewer executive position openings online this year. Firms said that only 22 percent of positions paying $200,000 or more are being posted on job boards or websites, compared with 30 percent in 2008 and 24 percent last year. In a different survey of recruiters, 92 percent reported that they believe in a "hidden market" for executive positions. Recruiters are relying more on their networks, as well as searching internal databases and doing their own research.

4. Look to add value constantly

As an employee, whether you're bringing in new money or you're saving money, you need to be adding value monetarily, Karsh says. "If you work in sales and you can say, 'I increased my client list by 25 percent, I increased my sales by 50 percent,' that's the sort of thing that employers are looking for right now--anything that can affect the bottom line," Karsh says. "If you're not in sales, you can affect it by saving the company money." Find savings opportunities by refining a process, or even suggesting a cheaper way to, say, buy or use office supplies. One tip: Put your suggestions in an E-mail so you are sure to get credit for them.

5. Find fresh advice

There are a lot of people in the world offering career advice better suited for the job market of the previous decade. In this markedly different economy, old advice may very well cause damage. Sometimes the changes are minor, but they can make you look out of touch. For example, adding the line "References available upon request" can make your resume or cover letter look out of date. "It goes without saying that your references are available upon request," says management consultant and U.S. News contributor Alison Green. "It would be really odd if they were not."

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

Job Interviewing Etiquette

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:11:53 GMT

Jena Ellis who works over at onlinecertificateprograms.org sent me a well written treatise on interviewing etiquette. While I have made similar recommendations in the past, the post entitled “Top 10 Interview Etiquette Tips” adds a few tips that I didn’t mention in earlier posts.

I highly recommend that folks preparing for a face-to-face job interview read this before their interviews! As most seasoned jobseekers will tell you, it is the little things during the interview like handshakes, eye contact, politeness etc that can make a difference between a job offer or not!

Top 10 Interview Etiquette Tips

Interviews are similar to first dates – intimate, intimidating and generally uncomfortable. Even some of the most confident, smooth-talking people get sweaty palms and tongue-tied during interviews. Nerves are one thing, but tardiness, bad manners and distracting behavior are completely avoidable. Just like it’s rude to put your elbows on the dinner table and swear in front of a lady, the same kind of etiquette should be followed during an interview. In order to make the best possible impression and let your qualities shine through, you’ll want to follow these top 10 interview etiquette tips to seal the deal:

1. Be early

Arriving 10-15 minutes before your interview demonstrates punctuality and responsibility. It also shows that you take the interview seriously and value the interviewer’s time. Being early is always better than being late, but be sure to give the interviewer enough time to prepare and don’t catch them off guard with your presence.

2. Use a firm handshake

A handshake is commonplace before and after an interview. Shaking the hand of you interviewer is both polite and respectful, but it also shows confidence and openness to the interviewer. With that being said, a flimsy, weak handshake can send the wrong message and make you seem nervous or unprepared. If you’re worried about the grip, strength and overall feel of your handshake, practice beforehand with a friend or family member who can adjust your shake.

3. Dress accordingly

Dressing for an interview can be tricky if you don’t know what the normal dress is for employees and really depends on the company, occupation and formality of the interview. To be on the safe side, it’s advised that you wear semi-formal business attire because it’s better to be a little overdressed than underdressed in an interview. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t wear jeans, flip flops or any other casual wear to an interview, unless noted. In addition, avoid distracting clothes, jewelry, hairstyles or makeup that will detract from you and your job qualities.

4. Turn off your cell phone

If your cell phone goes off in the middle of an interview, you can pretty much kiss the job goodbye. Not only is this incredibly rude, but it may ruin what could have been a good interview. Even if you say you’re waiting on an emergency call and try to sugarcoat it, the interviewer may not approve and you could lose a potential job offer. When in doubt, always silence or turn off your cell phone – you can survive without it for 30 minutes.

5. Make good eye contact

Eye contact is one of the most basic and telling nonverbal communication signals that take place in an interview. Making good eye contact with the interviewer shows your attentiveness and interest in the conversation taking place. Whereas, wandering eyes or poor eye contact make you seem disinterested or uncomfortable in what is being talked about.

6. Tone down your nervous habits

You may pop your knuckles, twirl your hair and bite your nails when you’re nervous, but these fidgety gestures can be overly distracting in an interview. You don’t want the focus to be taken off of you and directed towards your bitten pen or shaking leg. To ease your nerves, take deep breaths and relax your body so you won’t feel anxious and revert back to your bad habits.

7. Don’t chew gum

Bottom line – chewing gum during an interview is unprofessional and shouldn’t be done. If you’re chewing loudly, smacking your gum and blowing bubbles, that’s all the interviewer will be able to focus on because it’s incredibly distracting and bothersome in a serious scenario. If you need to freshen your breath, have a mint or use mouthwash before the interview.

8. Say your please and thank yous

Good manners are always a plus in an interview. If the secretary or interviewer asks if you want a drink, always respond with a please and thank you. When the interview is over, be sure to thank the interviewer for his or her time and giving you the opportunity to interview. You can never say thank you enough.

9. Think before you speak

Even if the interview is relaxed and takes a humorous turn, don’t slip up by telling jokes, talking about religion or politics or using profanity during an interview. You may be tempted to impress or say something memorable, but it’s best to act professionally the entire time and think before you speak. You don’t want an offensive joke to be the only thing they remember from your interview and risk losing a great job opportunity.

10. Send a thank-you notes

Immediately following the interview, you should send a handwritten thank-you card or e-mail to show your gratitude. Not only is this a polite thing to do, but it also gives you an opportunity to remind the interviewer of who you, what position you’re interested in and what you talked about during the interview. This will help you stand out in their memory and possibly give you a leg up in the job standing.

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

Late-Filed Forms Update: Airband Seeks Review of FCC Denial

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 13:15:32 GMT

Last week, we posted an entry about the tough stance the FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau is taking on late-filed Universal Service Forms submitted by contributors. One of the parties whose USF appeal was denied, Airband Communications, has filed an application for review of the Bureau decision. The Commission yesterday asked for comment on the request. Comments are due September 30 and October 15.

The FCC's quick action is unusual in one sense: the deadline for petitions for reconsideration or applications for review of the Denial Order is not until September 14. Other parties to the same order may file additional petitions on the same issue.

Blogging: Why do it?

dab@foleyhoag.com (dab@foleyhoag.com) — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 12:00:00 GMT

Fred Wilson posted a short and interesting video interview he gave some years ago in which he discusses the role of his blog in his life professional life. This caused me to think about why I started, and continue to host this blog now that a number of years have passed.

Unlike Fred, I can’t say that I have a single cogent reason for it. My reasons range from marketing thinks I should to I learn a lot from writing to I think the ecosystem may benefit from the perspective of someone, who is neither a VC nor an entrepreneur, who works closely with many start-up companies,, to I enjoy the writing.

With respect to the marketing motive, one thing I have learned is that marketing alone is not a valid reason to blog. I probably spend between 2 and 4 hours per week on this blog (that translates to 150 hours per year (round numbers)). I am pretty sure that I have not directly acquired a single client because of this blog. Compare this performance to the book I wrote some years ago or an article I wrote on SEC issues related to sales of stock by insiders in public companies, each of which produced many very good clients. But, I admit, I would not have started if marketing (and one of my partners) had not convinced me to give it a try.

With respect to learning, a lot of those hours I spend are used reading what other bloggers have to say, in effect, keeping up with the topics of the day. I would be doing much this even if I weren’t writing, but when I read blogs now I consider them in terms of why is this person saying whatever they are saying and what would I say about it. Strangely enough, this can make a difference in the daily practice of law. (For example, I have formed opinions about the merits (or not) of VC seed notes and my clients have benefitted from these views.)

With respect to the ecosystem, blogging in this space is dominated by VCs (Fred Wilson, Brad Feld, etc.) and certain entrepreneurial types (Dharmesh Shah, Nivi and Naval, etc.). Each of these groups has a vested point of view in, say the VC seed note debate, and almost all other topics. I am not invested (and I use that word advisedly) in this debate (or most of the others) and there are times when a less committed point of view is useful.

Finally, as with everything in life, there is no excuse for not having fun. You can think of tons of reasons to blog. Leveraging your time (as Fred Wilson does), selling (as marketing would like to do), learning, etc. but in the end, it has to be fun.

Germany to Pass Privacy Law to Limit the use of Facebook when Hiring - Will Ireland Follow?

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:25:38 GMT

The German Government has presented a draft law governing workplace privacy. The bill includes a proposal which restricts prospective employers from viewing Facebook profiles of potential candidates and would make it illegal for them to become a Facebook friend with an applicant in order to view their private postings.

Facebook has about 10 million users in Germany and there are currently no rules in place that regulate the use by companies of Facebook data.

Under the bill, employers would still be permitted to conduct a search for publicly accessible information about prospective employees on the internet. They would also be entitled to access information on job networking sites (as opposed to purely social networking sites) such as LinkedIn.

The German Interior Minister acknowledged that some of the new regulations might be complicated to enact and stated that if an employer turns down an application from a potential employee it might be difficult to prove that the reason for doing so was on foot of the content of Facebook postings.

The penalties proposed under the bill are substantial: A rejected job applicant who proves they have been rejected for a position based on violation of the new law could take a company to court claiming damages and fines of up to €300,000 could be imposed on employers that become friends with prospective employees in order to glean personal information from their postings.

Peter Schaar, the German Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, endorsed the proposal stating it was “a substantial improvement on the status quo in dealing with employees’ data”. That may be the case, however it is difficult to see how this new law will be enforced.

The bill will go to the German Parliament to be debated when we will see how it develops. There are no similar proposals in Ireland but it is interesting to see how other EU countries are tackling this issue - if it succeeds there will no doubt be a political will for similar protections in Ireland.

Light Bulbs in Las Vegas [#ILTA10]

KMAdvice@gmail.com (Mary Abraham) — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 04:51:27 GMT

How many light bulbs are in Las Vegas casino lights? According to WikiAnswers, 9,000,000 light bulbs per floor. Last week, however, the International Legal Technology Association’s 2010 annual conference resulted in a great deal more light in Vegas as one informative session after another caused “light bulbs to go off in my head.” There were [...]

Ron Friedmann, Gerard Neiditsch and Jeffrey Rovner presented a compelling case for analyzing more carefully the business of law as practiced by most firms. Their session provided a practical way to take some of the provocative ideas presented by Richard Susskind at ILTA 2009 and make them a reality. The key take away: different business models may require different technology and business processes, and a mismatch can lead to great inefficiencies. Do you understand the business drivers at your firm? (For more information on this session, see the presentation slides and a summary by Andrew McLennan-Murray.)
Paul Domnick, CIO of Freshfields, described the viral way some of their social media initiatives behind the firewall have taken off. Most striking is how they have been willing to stretch and experiment to achieve fantastic results. In one experiment, they replaced their traditional intranet with a wiki. That wiki now receives an amazing 1,000,000 page impressions per day. Further, they did this using Atlassian’s Confluence — NOT SharePoint. In explaining his team’s approach, Paul said: “We need to be the broker between the art of the possible and the real needs of the organization.” (For more details on this session, see the presentation slides and David Hobbie’s terrific notes.)
Kingsley Martin’s astonishing KIIAC software is able to analyze precedent documents and generate a form automatically in a matter of hours. This will transform the creation of model documents and the role of practicing support lawyers. Above all, if this software allows firms to generate an “at market” form of a complex agreement at the push of the button, what will that do to the practice of law?
Keynote speaker Jason Jennings reminded conference attendees that “the right [corporate] culture is the ultimate competitive advantage.” His research indicates that companies achieve and sustain success by engaging their employees in a “shared, noble purpose.” This is an interesting litmus test for both companies and law firms.
From a fantastic session on developing a social media policy by Julia Montgomery and Karen Sheehan: Education is the key to a social media policy. Without education, it’s difficult for employees to understand both the opportunities and dangers presented by social media.
In a session on Supporting Alternative Fee Arrangements, Jason Epstein of Baker Donelson said that most firms were already doing AFAs in one form or another, but most likely weren’t doing them well. As a result, these firms were probably losing money on them. In his view, AFAs should be “a spur to make the practice of law better.”
From my notes on the Matter-Based Budgeting Session: “Budgeting is an iterative process. Once the lawyer puts a draft budget on the table, that opens up an important ongoing conversation with the client.”
Major General Clyde Tate (of the US Army’s JAG Corps) on dealing with massive change: Perseverance is key. “Bureaucrats love it when you give up…your job is to wear them down.”

What were your “light bulb moments” at ILTA 2010?

[Photo Credit: Zetson]

lennyesq

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 02:29:14 GMT

CiteStack – Overview CiteStack is an extension to Google’s Chrome browser. In order to run CiteStack, you must first install Chrome. When you do legal research using Google’s Scholar site, CiteStack interacts with Scholar to save your results. For example, if you highlight a selection in a case, CiteStack automatically captures the selection and generates a pincite for [...]

CiteStack – Overview

CiteStack is an extension to Google’s Chrome browser. In order to run CiteStack, you must first install Chrome. When you do legal research using Google’s Scholar site, CiteStack interacts with Scholar to save your results.

For example, if you highlight a selection in a case, CiteStack automatically captures the selection and generates a pincite for you. You determine whether and where to add the selection and its pincite, and you can save an annotation as well. Nothing is saved unless you chose to add it to the Stack.

You can try it for free; but a one-year license is $69.00.

Facebook Continues To Prompt Responsible Employees To Act Irresponsibly

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:58:44 GMT

Hospitals and the Israeli military are the latest organizations grappling with employees posting sensitive, private information that they learn at work on their Facebook pages. Hospitals, which are required under various federal laws to take precautions to prevent the disclosure of patient information and address breaches of it, are increasingly dealing with staff posting personal comments and photographs of patients being treated at their facilities. Recently, a Detroit hospital worker was fired after posting a comment about a man she treated who was accused of killing a police officer. Her Facebook post said that she had come face to face with a cop killer and hoped “he rotted in hell.” The Israeli military apparently had to contend with protests after an Israeli soldier posted photographs of herself in front of handcuffed, blindfolded Palestinian prisoners on her Facebook page with the heading “Army—The Best time of My Life”.

Such incidents highlight the freewheeling attitude of many users of Facebook and other social networking sites today and illustrate how even those with responsible jobs seem to develop amnesia regarding company policies when they use such media. The business and legal consequences that can ensue from such employee posts serve as a reminder of the importance of creating and enforcing policies regarding employee use of social networking sites.

Such policies and practices should take into account the marketing benefits that can come to the organization from its own use of social media but also put in place reasonable restrictions to minimize the risks from employee misuse of it. As to the latter issue, such policies should prevent the disclosure of confidential information and trade secrets, prevent legal claims against the employee and employer, control productivity, and protect the image of organization.

BioJobs: So You Think You Want to Be a Regulatory Affairs Professional?

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:22:09 GMT

Regulatory affairs professionals (RAP) are by far some of the most important employees at pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices companies. Without RAPs, the requisite regulatory documents would not be filed and new drugs and devices would not be approved for marketing and sale.

Unlike other life sciences disciplines, a career in regulatory affairs is highly industry- specific and rarely taught at most academic institutions. In other words, if you are considering a career in regulatory affairs, don’t expect to get the training that you need in a PhD or postdoctoral training program; you will have to get it elsewhere!

A recent report compiled by the Regulatory Affairs Professional Society (RAPS) entitled the “2010 Scope of Practice & Compensation Report for the Regulatory Affairs Professional” highlights the growing value and importance of regulatory affairs personnel in the life science industry. The report was compiled from the results of a survey of nearly 3000 regulatory affairs employees in 55 different countries.

The results show regulatory professionals are taking on a wider range of responsibilities, including becoming increasingly involved in critical business functions. Despite the economic downturn since the previous survey in 2008, overall compensation continued on an upward trend, although it grew at a slightly slower pace. The report also points to the continuing globalization of the profession, increased involvement with multiple product types and 6% higher compensation for professionals with Regulatory Affairs Certification (RAC).

Other important findings included in RAPS’ report include:

US respondents with the RAC credential reported average total compensation that was 6% higher than their peers without the RAC. Forty-four percent of all survey respondents are RAC certified.
The percentage of RACs is especially high in Canada (54%) and the US (47.2%). A little more than 21% of European-based respondents reported having the RAC.
Overall, about 34% of respondents said they were involved in comparative effectiveness research and reimbursement, up from 23% in 2008.
Half of all senior-level respondents reported being involved in government affairs.
About 70% of respondents said their work is either global in nature or focused on multiple regions of the world.
More than 68% reported involvement with multiple product types, a 6.3% increase from 2008.
Overall, just 5.7% reported working with biosimilars, a product category that was added to the survey for the first time, but 22% of respondents from Asia and Latin America reported involvement with biosimilars.
Nearly all respondents have a university degree; many have advanced degrees. The percentage of respondents whose highest degree earned is a master’s is up to 37.5%, a 17.2% increase from 2008. The percentage of respondents with MBAs and postgraduate certificates also increased.
Respondents reported significant professional experience outside regulatory, an indication that many have transitioned into regulatory from another, related field. Most have educational backgrounds in life sciences, clinical sciences or engineering.

If this sounds like a career option for you, I highly recommend that you visit the RAPS website. If you already have a PhD, masters’ degree or even a bachelor’s degree, getting RAC certification will certainly increase the likelihood of landing a regulatory affairs job in the life sciences industry. One caveat: the RAPS courses are not inexpensive and may require a substantial amount of time in order to pass the RAC examination.

If the RAC route doesn’t seem realistic or reasonable, try getting an entry-level job with the US Food and Drug Administration. Being an ex-agency employee will guarantee employment in the life sciences industry until you retire!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

BioEducation: Vaccines, Drugs and Risk

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 18:33:08 GMT

Despite a court ruling last week that dismissed the bogus link between vaccination and autism, I continue to receive comments from so-called “non-vaccinators” about a post that I published last week about New Jersey’s dismal vaccinations rates. Most of the comments are anecdotal and suggest that childhood vaccination was the likely culprit for their children’s autism, brain damage or other ailments. While I feel their pain, the notion that children should not continue to be vaccinated is misguided and has serious negative public health implications.

There is ample public health and scientific information that suggests that childhood vaccination has worked well to reduce the incidence of morbidity and mortality in Western nations. Ironically, if it wasn’t for mandatory childhood vaccinations, the death and lasting physical or neurological damage caused by many preventable diseases like smallpox, measles, mumps, diphtheria and whooping cough would be much higher. Unfortunately, we Americans have been lead to believe —intentionally or not—that there should be no side effects associated with drugs, vaccines and other medicines. The bottom line is that all drugs, vaccines and medicines have side effects; some more serious or noticeable than others! Further, the decision to develop new drugs and vaccines is always based on a risk to benefit ratio. Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies will only develop products to address unmet medical needs when the benefits of these products clearly outweigh the potential risks. However, in some cases, most notably cancer drugs, the risk to benefit ratio becomes less obvious. There is no question that most cancer drugs have serious and potential life threatening side effects. Nevertheless, the benefit—survival and not death—far outweighs potential downstream risks!

Like it or not, the medical benefits of vaccination far outweigh the risks associated with them. As many of you may know, there is currently a whooping cough epidemic in California. California health officials assert that the epidemic likely started among unvaccinated individuals and then spread to the larger population. The observation that many of the patients with whooping cough were previously vaccinated against the disease in childhood suggests that either their immunity to whooping has declined over the years or that the causative bacterium, Bordetella pertussis has become more virulent.

The former hypothesis is more likely than the later mainly because Bordetella infections were almost non-existent until increased immigration and the non-vaccination movement began in earnest about 15 years ago! Students of infectious diseases will tell you that virulence of infectious agents tends to increase as they are passed from one infected individual to the next. Consequently, the lack of any significant B pertussis outbreaks (until very recently) suggests that changes in the underlying virulence mechanism of the bacterium are not responsible for the current outbreaks.

Again, as a parent, I understand the pain and suffering of those whose children may have experienced debilitating effects coincident with childhood vaccination regimens. However, as more parents continue to eschew vaccination against childhood disease, the incidence of death and children with serious life long debilitating effects associated with many common childhood diseases is certain to rise. With this in mind, I will continue to write and post articles that support childhood vaccinations. I will gladly stop posting these articles when someone can provide me with scientifically accurate and valid data that suggest that vaccination does more harm than good!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

Recent Articles in Technology from LexMonitor

Mobile Content Providers Settle Unauthorized Billing Class Action

HTML5 Video - Oh the possibilities!

More Bad News for James Hardie and Its Asbestos Compensation Fund

lennyesq

Personalized Service

CEO Finally Admits that Genzyme is Up for Sale...At the Right Price!

New York's Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse Act

Sports: just the most obvious indicator

Good News for Jobseekers (sort of): Pharma Job Losses Slow in August

lennyesq

Navigating a Difficult Job Market

Job Interviewing Etiquette

Late-Filed Forms Update: Airband Seeks Review of FCC Denial

Blogging: Why do it?

Germany to Pass Privacy Law to Limit the use of Facebook when Hiring - Will Ireland Follow?

Light Bulbs in Las Vegas [#ILTA10]

lennyesq

Facebook Continues To Prompt Responsible Employees To Act Irresponsibly

BioJobs: So You Think You Want to Be a Regulatory Affairs Professional?

BioEducation: Vaccines, Drugs and Risk