On March 1, 2024, a lower Alabama federal court held that the Corporate Transparency Act, which requires certain businesses to file a BOI Report with FinCEN that includes information about their beneficial owners, is unconstitutional. Importantly, this ruling DOES NOT affect the legal obligation of entities formed in California, Nevada, or Delaware (among other states)
On March 1, 2024, a lower Alabama federal court held that the Corporate Transparency Act, which requires certain businesses to file a BOI Report with FinCEN that includes information about their beneficial owners, is unconstitutional. Importantly, this ruling DOES NOT affect the legal obligation of entities formed in California, Nevada, or Delaware (among other states) to file their BOI Report within the timeframes specified in the chart below at this time. We are monitoring the development of this and similar court actions across the nation and will continue to provide information about them to those who have indicated a desire to receive this information from us.
The Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”), a new federal filing requirement for many business entities, became effective on January 1, 2024. The CTA was enacted as part of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 to provide Federal and State enforcement agencies with more comprehensive information about small and shell companies to help control money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The database of information provided by the CTA Reports will not be available to the general public but will be accessible by Federal and most states’ criminal and financial law enforcement agencies.Continue Reading Important Notice Regarding the Corporate Transparency Act Filing Requirements (Updated 3/4/2024)
By: Weintraub Tobin Summer Associate Josh Concepcion
The Ninth Circuit recently revisited the issue of “embedding” content by a website and its implication for copyright infringement claims. On July 17, 2023, the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Hunley v. Instagram, LLC, and affirmed the trial court’s ruling that Instagram, a social media platform, could not face liability for secondary infringement under the “Server Test” because plaintiffs could not prove infringement of their copyrighted photographs since the third-party news platforms had “embedded,” but did not store, the copyrighted photos on their own websites. The Court ultimately reasoned that because the plaintiff posted their photos on Instagram and essentially stored a copy of those images on Instagram’s servers, Instagram did not violate or infringe on the plaintiff’s rights since Instagram had a sublicense to display photos posted onto their platform and the third-party news sites had “embedded” the content in their articles.Continue Reading Social Media Giants and Copyright: Instagram’s Ninth Circuit Win Sets Precedent Against Photographers
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Andy Warhol’s portraits of music legend Prince did not qualify as fair use under copyright law.
Continue Reading SCOTUS Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Portraits Are Not Fair Use
A dispute has emerged between the NFL, the Las Vegas Raiders, and the Dimopoulos Law Firm over the NFL and the Raiders threatening to sue the firm for trademark infringement.
Continue Reading The NFL, the Raiders, and A Law Firm: A Tale of Two Colors
