Podcasts about fenwick west

Hey there - are you thinking of selling your business someday? If so, this episode of Potential to Powerhouse, is vital for you to hear.  Sarah Chambless, powerhouse M&A mega star, brings you a goldmine of insights, she is a corporate partner at Fenwick & West. This conversation is a must-listen for entrepreneurs, especially those looking to scale, exit, or simply plan ahead for their business's future. Sarah's no-nonsense approach to navigating the complex world of M&A, private equity, and exit strategies will leave you feeling informed and hyper vigilant!  Sarah's personal journey from aspiring musician to high-stakes lawyer is a testament to the power of pivoting and following your passion. With her wealth of experience guiding fast-growing startup founders is her true passion; Sarah offers invaluable advice on preparing your business for success—whether you're planning for an exit or simply laying the groundwork for long-term growth. Episode Highlights: The Inevitable Exit: Why every business owner needs to think about their exit strategy—sooner rather than later. Yes, every single business will exit. The question is how, for how much $$$, and when… plan for it to make it the best exit possible. M&A Playbook Unveiled: A breakdown of private equity deals, rollovers, capital calls, and avoiding retrades. Women in Business: Sarah's passion for empowering female founders to take control of their financial destiny. Legal and Financial Essentials: How to prepare your business with audited financials and the right legal counsel. Avoiding Common Pitfalls: Why time kills deals and how to keep the upper hand during negotiations. Building Generational Value: Creating lasting value for your family and community through smart exit planning. Key Takeaways: Guess what?!? EVERY business will face an exit—whether it's through a sale, IPO, or wind down. Sarah Chambless emphasizes the importance of preparation, from clean financials to solid legal advice, and how female founders, in particular, can set themselves up for success. The earlier you start planning, the more control you have over your business's future. Sarah's insights are a wake-up call for any entrepreneur who hasn't yet considered their long-term exit strategy. Connect with Us: Subscribe to our Newsletter: Potential to Powerhouse Follow us on Instagram: @PotentialToPowerhouse Loved this episode? Don't miss out on future powerhouse conversations! Subscribe to "Potential to Powerhouse" on your favorite podcast platform, and don't forget to leave a rating and review. Share this episode with your friends and join us on social media for more updates and insights.  High five, you've got this!

This Day in Legal History: Congress Permits Voting Machines in Federal ElectionsOn this day in legal history, February 14, 1899, Congress marked a significant technological leap in the electoral process by approving the use of voting machines for federal elections. This decision opened a new chapter in how votes were cast and counted, moving away from the traditional paper ballots towards a more efficient and potentially more reliable mechanical method. The introduction of voting machines was seen as a revolutionary step forward, aimed at reducing fraud and errors that marred earlier elections. Like swapping a horse-drawn carriage for an automobile, this shift promised to propel the American electoral system into a new era of speed and precision, ensuring that the will of the people was registered and reported with unprecedented accuracy. This legislation not only reflected the innovative spirit of the age but also underscored a commitment to refining and advancing democratic processes.In a Bloomberg Law exclusive, Fenwick & West is laying off nearly 10% of its attorneys and staff amid challenges in the tech-focused legal market. The decision, communicated by firm chair Richard Dickson, comes after an evaluation of both current and anticipated future demands, affecting just under 10% of the firm's professionals. Fenwick & West, a key player in Silicon Valley legal circles with clients like Apple, Oracle, and Meta Platforms, is responding to a downturn in transactional markets that has similarly impacted other tech-centric law firms such as Cooley and Goodwin Procter. The firm had ramped up hiring from 2020 to early 2022 to meet a surge in demand, but the subsequent slowdown in transactional activity has led to misalignment between the firm's talent levels and client needs. Despite the layoffs, legal recruiter Summer Eberhard remains cautiously optimistic about the future of corporate transactional practices. Affected employees will receive a minimum of 13 weeks of base pay and health benefits, with the longest-tenured staff eligible for up to 40 weeks of compensation. Fenwick & West Laying Off Nearly 10% of Attorneys, Staff (2)A recent judicial decision has created significant ripples within the litigation financing sector, particularly impacting Burford Capital Ltd and its involvement in price-fixing lawsuits alongside plaintiff Sysco Corp. Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty ruled against the substitution of a Burford Capital affiliate as the plaintiff in pork and beef price-fixing cases, a move that challenged the firm's $140 million funding arrangement with Sysco. This decision underscores the tension between the objectives of litigation funders and the public policy against financial speculation on legal claims. The case has drawn attention to the broader litigation financing industry, valued at $13.5 billion, especially in the realm of antitrust claims, where the costs of litigation are notoriously high and outcomes uncertain.The clash between Sysco and Burford has ignited debate over the influence of third-party funders in litigation and prompted calls for increased transparency within the industry. Critics, including the US Chamber of Commerce, argue that such funding arrangements can unduly influence the course and outcomes of legal proceedings, pushing for legislation that would require disclosure of financing agreements in legal cases. Meanwhile, proponents of litigation finance see the judge's decision as a specific instance rather than a systemic problem within the industry, emphasizing its role in enabling costly antitrust litigation to proceed.The ruling, pending review, has not only put a spotlight on the practices and impacts of litigation finance but also sparked discussions on potential regulatory responses. As the industry navigates this challenging landscape, the case between Sysco and Burford may serve as a catalyst for reevaluating the balance between the needs of litigants for financial support and the integrity of the judicial process.Judge's Order Deals Blow to Sysco, Burford Capital in Pork SuitsAlphabet and Microsoft have diverged from the Nasdaq's recommended format for reporting board diversity, opting instead for a more visual representation using dots and check marks, while Tesla and Amazon have adhered more closely to the suggested templates. Since Nasdaq's rules requiring annual diversity disclosure took effect in 2022, companies listed on the exchange have adopted varied approaches to reporting, complicating direct comparisons between them. The regulations also mandate Nasdaq-listed companies to maintain diverse boards or explain the absence of diversity, a requirement that has withstood legal challenges from conservative groups. Despite the differences in reporting styles, experts like Amy Augustine of Boston Trust Walden Co. view the overall trend towards disclosure as progress, providing investors with crucial information previously unavailable. The use of symbols for disclosure, as seen in Alphabet and Microsoft's reports, is defended by some as offering more detail than Nasdaq's templates, though it presents challenges for analysis, particularly by computers. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)'s move towards machine-readable data in proxy statements, such as requiring XBRL for pay-versus-performance data, contrasts with the less standardized board diversity information, which is not required to be XBRL-compliant. This discrepancy highlights the ongoing challenge of making diverse corporate disclosures more accessible for automated analysis. By way of very brief background XBRL, or eXtensible Business Reporting Language, is a global standard for digitally sharing financial and business information. Think of it as a translator, turning human-readable reports like financial statements into machine-readable data. This data is tagged with specific meanings, allowing computers to easily understand and analyze it. XBRL benefits everyone: companies save time and effort, investors gain deeper insights, and regulators get better data for analysis. It's revolutionizing the way business information is shared and used.As the SEC contemplates broader board diversity disclosure requirements for all public companies, the landscape of corporate reporting on board composition is poised for further evolution. This movement reflects a growing recognition of the importance of diversity in corporate governance and the need for transparency to support investors' decision-making processes.Alphabet, Microsoft Pivot From Nasdaq Diversity Reporting FormatElon Musk has vocalized concerns that Delaware, a jurisdiction chosen by a majority of large public companies for incorporation due to its predictable legal system, is attempting to thwart companies from relocating, particularly in light of a court decision that invalidated his $56 billion Tesla compensation package. Musk's reaction, notably on social media, suggests an urge for companies to consider moving their incorporations out of Delaware, citing the state's alleged efforts to "lock the doors," as exemplified by the Tripadvisor case.The TripAdvisor case revolves around the company's desire to relocate its incorporation from Delaware to Nevada, a move that reflects broader corporate discontent with Delaware's legal environment, despite its reputation for business-friendliness. TripAdvisor's move, endorsed primarily by chairman Greg Maffei despite opposition from a majority of minority shareholders, aims to benefit from Nevada's more lenient laws on self-dealing, where directors face fewer legal challenges. This case not only underscores the tension between corporate interests and shareholder protections but also signals a potential shift in the landscape of corporate registrations, with states like Nevada and Texas vying to attract businesses away from Delaware. The outcome of TripAdvisor's attempt to move could set a precedent affecting Tesla's and other companies' relocation plans, amidst ongoing debates about the balance between corporate governance and shareholder rights.Delaware's legal framework, historically favored for its specialized Chancery Court and non-jury trials, has been perceived as facilitating rather than obstructing corporate moves to other states. Recent legislative adjustments in 2022 have simplified the process for companies wishing to reincorporate elsewhere, allowing such moves with majority shareholder approval, a shift from the previous requirement for unanimous consent. This modification ostensibly makes Delaware more accommodating for companies contemplating relocation.However, the Delaware Court of Chancery's ongoing examination of reincorporation efforts, especially those potentially advantageous to controlling shareholders, introduces a layer of complexity. The Tripadvisor litigation highlights this scrutiny, with allegations that a planned move to Nevada could enable easier self-dealing by significant stakeholders, suggesting Delaware's courts may critically evaluate such transitions to ensure they do not undermine minority shareholder interests.The situation with Tesla underscores a broader dialogue on corporate governance, shareholder rights, and the legal mechanisms in place to safeguard these interests. While Musk's significant influence at Tesla has been acknowledged by Delaware courts, the specific dynamics of Tesla's proposed shift to Texas—where legal protections differ from Nevada—might not directly align with the concerns raised in the Tripadvisor case.The impending ruling in the Tripadvisor case is anticipated with interest, as it will offer further clarity on Delaware's stance towards companies seeking to relocate, especially those with intricate shareholder structures. This decision will be pivotal, potentially setting precedents on the degree of judicial oversight Delaware will exercise over such moves, and elucidating the balance between corporate autonomy and the protection of shareholder interests.In summary, while Delaware has been characterized by Musk as obstructive, the state's legal amendments and judicial attitudes suggest a more nuanced approach, aiming to balance the flexibility for companies to reincorporate with the need to protect minority shareholders. The outcomes of ongoing legal deliberations, including the TripAdvisor and Tesla situations, will likely contribute significant insights into the evolving landscape of corporate governance and relocation.Explainer: Did Delaware 'lock the doors' to stop companies from leaving, as Musk claims? | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On this day, June 22nd, in legal history, the Supreme Court handed down their decision in Escobedo v. Illinois, which held that suspects have the right to an attorney when they are questioned by the police.The decision established that defendants have the right to counsel even before they are formally charged with a crime. The impact of the Escobedo decision was overshadowed by the subsequent Miranda decision two years later. Although later court decisions limited the application of Escobedo, the Supreme Court never directly overruled it.The case involved Danny Escobedo, who was initially arrested for the murder of his brother-in-law but released after consulting his lawyer. When he was rearrested ten days later, his repeated requests to contact his attorney were denied. Escobedo's lawyer arrived at the police station and requested to see him but was refused permission. The police informed Escobedo that his alleged co-conspirator had confessed and implicated him. Escobedo demanded to confront his co-conspirator and, in that confrontation, made an incriminating statement. Based on this admission, the police obtained a written confession, leading to Escobedo's conviction for murder.The Supreme Court's decision in Escobedo came shortly after the Massiah v. United States case, which ruled that the right to counsel attaches once an individual has been indicted. In Escobedo, the Court reached a similar result with a 5-4 decision. Justice Arthur Goldberg, writing for the majority, stated that Escobedo's right to counsel did not depend on a formal indictment. The Court overturned Escobedo's conviction, declaring that his right to counsel had been violated. Goldberg laid out several benchmarks for determining when a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated.Many believed that the Escobedo decision would establish a broad right to counsel whenever a suspect is in police custody. However, two years later, the Supreme Court shifted direction in Miranda v. Arizona. The Miranda decision utilized the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and held that statements obtained during incommunicado interrogation without full warning of constitutional rights were inadmissible. Miranda focused on whether a defendant was in custody or significantly deprived of freedom, rather than the "focus of investigation" test used in Escobedo.Perkins Coie, a law firm based in Seattle, is postponing the start dates for some of its first-year associates to January 2024, following a trend among law firms facing a slowdown in demand. In a memo from managing partner Bill Malley, the firm explained that the move is a response to challenging market conditions affecting various areas of legal practice. The deferred associates, with the exception of those in the intellectual property practice, will now begin on January 16, 2024. Those joining the intellectual property group will start on September 18, 2023. To assist the deferred associates, Perkins Coie is providing a $15,000 stipend to cover their living expenses. Other law firms, such as Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, Cooley LLP, and Fenwick & West, have also delayed the start dates for their incoming associates due to the sluggish demand for legal services. Some firms have implemented cost-cutting measures, including layoffs of attorneys and staff. The legal industry as a whole is navigating through the challenges posed by reduced dealmaking and a slowdown in the demand for legal work.Perkins Coie Delays Starts for Some First-Year Associates (1)A new analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation suggests that the United States could face significant revenue losses if it does not enact a 15% global minimum tax alongside the rest of the world. A global minimum tax is a proposal aimed at imposing a minimum tax rate on corporate income worldwide through international agreement. In October 2021, 136 countries and jurisdictions endorsed a proposal by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for a two-pillar solution to address tax avoidance practices and the digitalization of the global economy. The first pillar would redistribute over $125 billion in corporate profits annually for taxation in jurisdictions where the profits were earned, while the second pillar would generate an estimated $150 billion by applying a 15% minimum tax rate to corporate income. Implementation of the global corporate minimum tax requires each country to incorporate the rate and rules into its tax system. The United States, as a party to the agreement, needs to adopt the two-pillar plan and impose a 15% minimum corporate tax that aligns with the OECD model. The recently enacted Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 in the US introduced a 15% alternative minimum corporate tax, which brings the US closer to the OECD tax structure. However, further amendments may be required to ensure conformity with the OECD tax rules. If the US corporate minimum tax does not meet the standards of the global corporate minimum tax, Congress would need to pass amendments to the Internal Revenue Code, and bilateral and international tax treaties would also require modifications. Treaties in the US necessitate approval by the Senate and the president.If the US fails to act while other countries implement the minimum tax in 2025, tax revenue in the US could decline by $122 billion over the next decade. On the other hand, if the US does enact the tax, its tax revenue could still decline by $56.5 billion. These estimates are based on a comparison with a baseline scenario where neither the US nor the rest of the world enacts the minimum tax. The analysis predicts that the US would lose revenue when other countries tax the foreign-source income of controlled foreign corporations and when other countries tax US income. However, depending on how companies respond to the new tax regimes and shift their profits, there are scenarios where the US could gain as much as $224 billion in revenue over the next decade. Conversely, the US could lose up to $174.5 billion if multinational corporations allocate their low-taxed profits to jurisdictions applying domestic minimum top-up taxes. The report emphasizes the level of uncertainty in predicting the outcomes and does not represent a likely outcome. The analysis was requested by Senate Finance Committee ranking member Mike Crapo and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, who criticized the Biden administration's handling of the global minimum tax negotiations. The report comes as Republicans remain skeptical of the international agreement signed by nearly 140 countries to establish a minimum tax rate of 15% for multinationals worldwide. In response, the Ways and Means Committee introduced a bill to impose retaliatory taxes on the US income of foreign investors and businesses in countries that impose minimum tax rules on US multinationals.US Could Lose Billions Under Global Minimum Tax, JCT Report SaysJCT: U.S. Stands to Lose Revenue Under OECD Tax DealLegislation that would ban employee noncompete agreements in New York is heading to Governor Kathy Hochul's desk for review. The measure, similar to a recent law enacted in Minnesota, would apply to contracts signed or modified after it becomes effective. Noncompete agreements, which currently cover about one-fifth of the US workforce, have faced criticism from federal and state policymakers. The Federal Trade Commission is in the process of finalizing a nationwide ban on such contracts, and the National Labor Relations Board's general counsel has stated that noncompetes violate federal labor law in most situations. While business groups argue that noncompetes are necessary to protect trade secrets, policymakers and worker rights advocates argue that they are often misused and hinder low-wage workers from seeking better job opportunities. The New York legislation would still allow employment contracts that protect trade secrets and confidential client information, as long as they don't unreasonably restrict competition. The bill has already passed the state Senate and Assembly.New York Ban on Employee Noncompetes Heads to Hochul's DeskThe U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is set to argue in federal court for a preliminary injunction to temporarily block Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard, the videogame maker. The FTC wants the deal to be put on hold until its in-house court rules on whether the merger would harm competition in the video game industry. The agency is concerned that without intervention, the combined company could alter Activision's operations and give Microsoft access to sensitive business information. The administrative hearing within the FTC is scheduled to begin on August 2. Microsoft has asserted that a temporary block could jeopardize the deal, but courts typically do not consider real-world consequences in their decisions.FTC to argue Microsoft's deal to buy Activision should be paused | ReutersA group of Credit Suisse AT1 bondholders has filed a class action lawsuit accusing three former CEOs of the Swiss bank, Thomas Gottstein, Tidjane Thiam, and Brady Dougan, along with other executives, of being responsible for the bank's collapse. The lawsuit, filed in a New York court, alleges that the executives engaged in excessively risky trades to achieve short-term returns and bonuses, disregarding sound risk management and compliance with the law. The collapse of Credit Suisse led to the decision by Switzerland's regulator to render around $18 billion of the bank's Additional Tier 1 (AT1) debt worthless, which sparked numerous lawsuits. The class action suit highlights the loss of trust in the bank and the culture of prioritizing profits and self-dealing over responsible risk management.Three former Credit Suisse CEOs accused of excessive risk-taking -court filing | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On this day, June 14th, in legal history, the Supreme Court issued its decision in West Virginia State Board v. Barnette, holding that students cannot be compelled to salute the American flag or recite the Pledge of Allegiance in public school.When issues of compelled patriotism are discussed, advocates of compulsion generally frame these issues as unique “problems” of modernity. So you may be surprised to hear that the Barnette decision was handed down on this day in 1943. In the midst of World War II, no less.In the case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, the Supreme Court made a significant ruling: they declared a compulsory flag salute law in public schools unconstitutional, affirming that students have First Amendment rights.The Court determined that mandatory flag salutes violated the First Amendment. The decision was made on Flag Day and overturned a previous case, Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940). The West Virginia statute in question imposed harsh penalties on children and their parents if the children refused to comply, including expulsion and fines of $50 or even imprisonment for parents.In the Gobitis case, two Jehovah's Witness schoolchildren were expelled for refusing to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The Supreme Court recognized the state's interest in promoting national cohesion and considered mandatory flag salutes as a permissible means of fostering patriotism.However, in Barnette, the Court shifted its focus. It highlighted that the central issue was not whether the children could be excused from the flag salute due to religious beliefs, as in Gobitis. Rather, it examined whether the state had the power to enforce the flag salute on all schoolchildren.The Court emphasized that the compulsory flag salute and pledge required an affirmation of belief and an attitude of mind. It noted that Congress had recently recognized the Pledge of Allegiance as voluntary, indicating that compulsory salutes were not necessarily the most effective way to cultivate patriotism.Justice Robert H. Jackson's opinion in Barnette reevaluated the role of public schools in educating young citizens. The Court asserted that public education should not stifle free thinking or teach youth to disregard essential principles of government as mere platitudes. Instead, education should enable students to make informed choices.The Court, echoing Congress, concluded that patriotism is strengthened through voluntary participation rather than compulsion. Justice Jackson emphasized that no official, regardless of their position, could dictate orthodoxy in matters of politics, nationalism, religion, or other opinions, or force citizens to confess their faith in those matters.This landmark ruling in Barnette established the principle that students possess First Amendment rights, including the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression, within the context of public schools.In the latest sign BigLaw is in a bit of a holding pattern, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, a San Francisco-based law firm, is laying off approximately 90 attorneys and staff members and delaying the start date for its incoming class due to reduced demand and market uncertainty. The layoffs will affect 40 associates and 50 staff members, amounting to around 6% of the firm's global workforce. The firm has decided to postpone the start date for its first-year class until January 16, 2024. Orrick will provide a $15,000 stipend and additional funds for health insurance to its class of 2023. The firm attributes these actions to reduced client demand in certain areas and the impact of technology and evolving work environments on the firm's operations. Orrick joins other prominent law firms such as Cooley, Gunderson Dettmer, Kirkland & Ellis, and Fenwick & West in implementing workforce reductions and start date delays in response to sluggish demand for legal services.Orrick Lays Off 90 Lawyers and Staff, Delays Start DatesA U.S. judge has granted the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) request to temporarily block Microsoft's acquisition of video game maker Activision Blizzard and scheduled a hearing for next week. The judge set a two-day evidentiary hearing on the FTC's request for a preliminary injunction for June 22-23 in San Francisco. Without a court order, Microsoft could have closed the $69 billion deal as early as Friday. The FTC had asked an administrative judge to block the transaction in December and an evidential hearing in the administrative proceeding is set to begin on August 2. The federal court will decide based on the late-June hearing whether a preliminary injunction is necessary during the administrative review of the case. Microsoft and Activision must submit legal arguments opposing the preliminary injunction by June 16, with the FTC's reply due on June 20. The FTC argues that the deal would give Microsoft's Xbox exclusive access to Activision games, potentially excluding Nintendo and Sony consoles. Microsoft has stated that accelerating the legal process will bring more choice and competition to the gaming market.US judge temporarily blocks Microsoft acquisition of Activision | ReutersAs the indictment is being reviewed and ingested, and experts are weighing in, it seems clear: Former U.S. President Donald Trump is facing significant challenges in defending himself against charges of illegally retaining top-secret documents after leaving the White House in 2021. Yesterday, Trump pleaded not guilty to the 37 counts, which include violations of the Espionage Act, obstruction of justice, and making false statements. Experts noted that the indictment contains a wide range of evidence, such as documents, photos, text messages, audio recordings, and witness statements, making a strong case for the prosecution's allegations. The conspiracy to obstruct justice charges may pose the greatest risk for Trump, carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. Legal experts believe the evidence suggests Trump knew about the documents and refused to turn them over, instructing his lawyers to mislead the FBI. Obstruction of justice is challenging to defend against and can have significant public backlash. Trump's alleged efforts to conceal documents over the years likely played a role in the decision to indict him. The classification status of the documents may be irrelevant, as the Espionage Act criminalizes the unauthorized retention of national defense information, regardless of classification. While Trump has potential defense strategies, such as challenging witness accounts or blaming others, the case could be delayed until after the 2024 election, and opinions vary on whether he could pardon himself if he wins.Here's what happens next in the case against Donald Trump. It could be a year or more before a trial takes place and all indications are Trump will continue to seek to win back the presidency. Federal prosecutors will begin handing over evidence to Trump's lawyers, including years of correspondence related to the documents in question. Trump's lawyers are expected to file a motion to dismiss the case, citing reasons such as his claim that he declassified the documents before taking them. However, motions to dismiss in criminal cases rarely succeed.The trial timeline will likely be extended as the parties review evidence and argue legal disputes. Trump testifying in the case would be his decision, but it is unlikely as defendants often choose not to testify. If Trump were to win the 2024 presidential election, it is unlikely that the prosecution would proceed due to the Department of Justice's policy of not prosecuting sitting presidents. However, in extraordinary circumstances, the policy can be deviated from with the approval of the U.S. attorney general. But that would almost certainly be Trump's attorney general. So it is clear to me, as it is probably clear to Trump, that his best chance at kicking this can down the road will be to delay the trial long enough to win back the presidency and pardon himself. 2024 is going to be a helluva year. Trump faces difficult odds in documents case | ReutersTrump documents case: what happens now that he pleaded not guilty? | ReutersIllinois has become the first state in the United States to pass a law aimed at curbing book bans in public libraries. The legislation comes in response to the growing trend of conservative efforts to suppress books addressing topics such as race, history, and LGBTQ issues. Governor J.B. Pritzker, a Democrat, signed the law, which will go into effect on January 1, 2024. Under the new law, Illinois public libraries will only be eligible for state grants if they adopt the American Library Association's Library Bill of Rights, which prohibits the removal of materials due to partisan or doctrinal disapproval. The push to ban books has intensified during the 2021-2022 school year, particularly in conservative Republican-dominated states like Florida and Texas. According to the American Library Association, there were 67 attempts to ban books in Illinois alone in 2022, with many of the targeted books focusing on LGBTQ people or people of color. Critics of book bans argue that librarians should be the ones selecting books, not politicians, and that such bans infringe on freedom of expression. The Illinois law is seen as a step in the right direction by supporters who believe that books in libraries should be chosen by professionals, not extremist politicians.Illinois becomes first state to pass law curtailing book bans | ReutersThe European Commission, Europe's top antitrust regulator, has announced that it may pursue the breakup of Google's ad-tech business. The commission has charged Google with abusing its dominant position in the online advertising technology industry. It alleges that Google used its control over the buying and selling of online ads across third-party websites and apps to favor its own advertising auction house. The commission's preliminary view is that Google must divest parts of its ad-tech business to address the inherent conflicts of interest. Google will have an opportunity to respond to the complaint, and if found guilty, it could face a fine of up to 10% of its annual worldwide revenue. This move by the European Commission aligns with the ongoing antitrust scrutiny Google is facing in the United States and would mark a major sea change in the online advertising space. EU Says It May Seek Breakup of Google's Ad-Tech Business - WSJ Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On this day, June 8, in legal history James Madison first proposed the Bill of Rights. On June 8, 1789, James Madison presented the proposed Bill of Rights to the House of Representatives. Initially, Madison included more amendments than what eventually made it into the final version. The House agreed on a Bill of Rights with 17 amendments, but later the Senate consolidated them to 12. Ultimately, in December 1791, 10 out of the 12 amendments were approved by the states, becoming the Bill of Rights. One of the rejected amendments, regarding congressional pay, was later ratified as the 27th Amendment in 1992. Madison also suggested a two-part Preamble for the Constitution, incorporating part of Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence. However, this proposal was not adopted.Madison emphasized the need to assert the equal rights of conscience, freedom of the press, and trial by jury in criminal cases for all states. Madison also wanted to clarify the distinct roles of each branch of government, ensuring they did not encroach upon one another's powers. However, these provisions did not pass the congressional review process.Madison's proposed Article VII, highlighting the separation of powers, did not make it into the Constitution. However, the second part of that article survived as the Tenth Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states. Additionally, Madison's version of the Second Amendment recognized the right to bear arms in the context of a well-regulated militia.Madison desired to interweave the Bill of Rights within the Constitution, but this idea faced resistance due to concerns of appearing to rewrite the Constitution. Consequently, the Bill of Rights was appended at the end of the document. Despite these alterations, many of Madison's core ideas were incorporated into the ratified version of the Bill of Rights. Madison aimed to bolster the rights of the people and earn their confidence by protecting them against government encroachments.On this day: James Madison introduces the Bill of Rights | Constitution CenterCooley LLP, a Silicon Valley-based law firm, has asked some incoming first-year associates to delay their start dates for another year, offering them a $100,000 stipend in return. The firm reached out to incoming corporate associates, providing them with three options. They can defer their start dates and receive a stipend, stick to their original January start dates in the corporate group, or switch to another practice area with more available work. These measures are being taken to reduce the size of Cooley's incoming corporate class due to a slowdown in demand. The firm had already postponed the start date for its first-year class from November to January 2024. Cooley laid off 150 attorneys and staff in late 2022 as a necessary response to decreased workload. Despite being a top recruiter during the pandemic, the firm is now facing reduced demand for corporate and deals work, leading to the need for workforce adjustments. Fenwick & West, another law firm, has also decided to postpone the start date for its first-year corporate and technology transactions associates to January 16, 2024.Cooley to Delay Some First-Year Associate Start Dates by YearBack-to-back legal industry news. Law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell is implementing a four-day office work-week for its lawyers, joining a trend of firms adopting more in-person work policies as the pandemic recedes. Starting after Labor Day, the firm will require its U.S. lawyers and business services professionals to work in the office from Monday through Thursday. As always, the claim is the move is aimed at facilitating mentorship, training, and relationship-building opportunities that are believed to be more effective in an in-person environment – none of these announcements ever admit it's just to bring associates to heel. Davis Polk will also introduce a new remote day "bank" that allows employees to choose 16 days per year to work from home. Other law firms, such as Skadden and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, have also made adjustments to their work policies, with some offering more flexibility for remote work.Law firm Davis Polk adopts four-day office work-week, joining Skadden | ReutersFlorida Governor Ron DeSantis has signed a new privacy law, S.B. 262, aimed at giving consumers more control over their data and addressing concerns about tech giants' alleged censorship of conservative views. The law, known as the "Digital Bill of Rights," includes provisions common to other state privacy laws, granting consumers rights over their data collection, storage, and sharing.However, it also requires search engines to disclose whether political ideology influences search results and prohibits government-mandated content moderation on social media platforms. The law provides additional protections for children under 18 years old. Florida is the ninth state to enact comprehensive privacy legislation, and it targets only the largest tech companies, subjecting them to significant fines. The law will take effect in stages, with the social media moderation section starting this July and the bulk of provisions going into effect on July 1, 2024. Consumer advocacy group Consumer Reports has called for stronger measures in the law, citing limited applicability and potential loopholes that could leave personal information unprotected. The law applies to companies with more than $1 billion in gross annual revenue and over half of their revenue coming from online ads. It also covers companies operating smart speakers and those running app stores with at least 250,000 available applications. Violations of the law could result in penalties exceeding the maximum fines imposed by other state privacy laws. The attorney general will have sole enforcement power and can seek civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation, which may be tripled under certain circumstances. Consumers will have the right to access, correct, and delete their data, as well as opt out of processing for targeted advertising or profiling purposes. Businesses will be required to reasonably secure consumer data and conduct assessments to evaluate data collection risks and benefits. The law also prohibits state and local government entities from requesting the removal of content or accounts on social media platforms based on "unfair censorship" concerns.DeSantis Takes Swing at Big Tech in New Florida Privacy Law (1)Federal prosecutors have informed former U.S. President Donald Trump's attorneys that he is the target of an investigation into his handling of classified materials, according to a person familiar with the matter. The notification from the Justice Department does not necessarily mean Trump will be charged but gives him an opportunity to present his own evidence before a grand jury. The news comes just days after Trump's attorneys met with Justice Department officials to discuss the case. Trump's legal team was notified on Monday, although the timing of such notifications does not indicate when charges might be brought. Trump, who is currently campaigning for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has dismissed the investigations as politically motivated. One federal grand jury is investigating Trump's retention of classified materials after leaving the White House, while another criminal investigation is focused on alleged efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. In August 2022, investigators seized around 13,000 documents from Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, some of which were marked as classified. Trump's legal troubles have expanded, including a civil lawsuit in which he was ordered to pay damages for sexual abuse and defamation, as well as a criminal investigation in Georgia related to his efforts to reverse the 2020 election results.Trump lawyers notified that he is the target of classified documents probeA Hollywood actor is the latest January 6th rioter arrested – I guess you can tell by the way I'm introducing this you're not going to have heard of them.Jay Johnston, an actor known for his roles in TV shows like "Arrested Development" and "Bob's Burgers," has been arrested for his involvement in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot. Johnston is the latest individual to be charged in connection with the incident, which aimed to keep Donald Trump in the White House. He was charged with various offenses, including interfering with law enforcement officers, entering a restricted building, disorderly conduct, and impeding passage through Capitol grounds. Johnston surrendered to the FBI in Los Angeles, where he resides. An FBI affidavit stated that he was seen wielding a stolen U.S. Capitol Police riot shield and participating in the mob that clashed with officers near a tunnel leading into the Capitol building. Online amateur investigators reportedly identified Johnston from FBI-released images seeking public assistance in identifying participants in the riot. Trump had encouraged his supporters to disrupt the certification of Joe Biden's electoral victory. Johnston has appeared in numerous films and TV shows, often playing law enforcement roles, and he voiced a character in the animated series "Bob's Burgers" until he was reportedly banned from the show following his association with the Capitol mob.Hollywood actor becomes latest arrested in Jan 6 Capitol assault | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

We have a patent anniversary to acknowledge today as our “this day in legal history” entry. On this day in 1869, Thomas Alva Edison was granted a patent for an electric voting machine to be used by Congress. The “Vote Recorder” was Edison's first patented invention and was specifically designed for legislative bodies like Congress. His motivation for creating this device came from reports in the Telegrapher, stating that the Washington, D.C., City Council and the New York State legislature were considering the installation of electric vote recorders. Edison's system involved each legislator moving a switch to indicate a "yes" or "no" vote, which transmitted a signal to a central recorder. The recorder had two columns of metal type labeled "Yes" and "No," where the names of the members were listed. A recording clerk would then place chemically prepared paper over the columns and roll a metallic roller over it, creating imprints of the names through chemical decomposition.The machine also had dials on its sides to record the total number of "yeas" and "nays." Edison was granted U.S. Patent 90,646 for this invention on June 1, 1869. A fellow telegrapher named Dewitt Roberts bought a share in the invention for $100 and brought it to Washington, D.C., to demonstrate to a committee of Congress. However, the chairman of the committee was unimpressed with the device's speed in recording votes and stated that it was not something they wanted. The traditional roll call voting process, although slow, allowed members to filibuster or persuade others to change their votes, leading to the vote recorder's ultimate disuse.Like so many great ideas, Edison's invention died in committee. Rutgers - Vote RecorderThe House of Representatives passed a debt-limit legislation proposed by President Joe Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy. The bill, approved with a 314-117 bipartisan vote, aims to impose spending restraints until the 2024 election and prevent a potential U.S. default. The agreement garnered support from two-thirds of House Republicans, boosting McCarthy's position as speaker. More Democrats voted in favor than Republicans and conservative critics argue that the deal was unfavorable. The bill now moves to the Senate, where approval is expected. The legislation suspends the debt ceiling until January 1, 2025, while Democrats agreed to cap federal spending until then. The agreement is seen as a rare moment of bipartisan accord in a divided Washington. Investors have already shifted their focus to other factors influencing growth, such as potential Federal Reserve interest rate increases and the weakening Chinese economy.Debt-Limit Deal Wins House Passage, Easing US Default ConcernsTwo members of the far-right Oath Keepers militant group are facing sentencing for seditious conspiracy and other crimes related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of then-President Donald Trump. Prosecutors are requesting a 17-year prison sentence for each defendant. If the judge follows this recommendation, it would be among the longest sentences for anyone charged in the Capitol attack. The Oath Keepers founder, Stewart Rhodes, was recently sentenced to 18 years in prison, the longest sentence so far. The defense attorneys for the defendants argue that the evidence against their clients is weak and that the blame should be shifted to Trump for misleading his supporters.More Oath Keepers convicted of sedition in US Capitol attack face sentencing | ReutersSam Bankman-Fried, the former chief executive of FTX cryptocurrency exchange, is seeking documents from Fenwick & West, the law firm that advised his defunct exchange, as he faces fraud charges. Bankman-Fried believes that the documents could help prove he relied on legal advice and did not knowingly break the law. The requested documents relate to matters central to the government's case, such as FTX's use of disappearing messaging services and failure to properly register with regulators. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty to multiple charges, including fraud and conspiracy. Prosecutors have opposed his request, stating that his claims are meritless.Bankman-Fried seeks documents from former FTX law firm in crypto fraud case | ReutersRetired NYPD Sergeant Michael McMahon and two individuals accused of being Chinese agents are standing trial in Brooklyn for their alleged involvement in a plot to repatriate a former Chinese government official residing in New Jersey. This case is part of Operation Fox Hunt, an initiative by the Chinese government to coerce Chinese nationals living abroad to return to China through tactics such as harassment and threats. The defendants are the first to be tried in the United States in connection with this operation. McMahon, along with Yong Zhu and Congying Zhen, allegedly used the elderly father of their target as bait to warn him about the consequences of not returning to China. McMahon, hired as a private investigator, is accused of surveilling the target, while Zhen is accused of harassing the target and his daughter. The prosecution argues that each defendant played a role in the Chinese government's efforts to intimidate and threaten the victim. McMahon has pleaded not guilty, claiming he was unaware of the true intent behind the scheme. The trial is expected to last two to three weeks, and if convicted, McMahon could face up to 10 years in prison.Ex-NYPD Sgt., others accused of harassing and intimidating Chinese dissidents in US - ABC7 New YorkPet supply retailer Chewy Inc has won a challenge to a fine imposed by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) over a forklift accident that resulted in the death of a warehouse worker. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that Chewy did not violate federal workplace safety law because it had complied with a specific rule governing forklifts. OSHA had fined Chewy around $13,000 in 2019 following the accident in Florida, but the court found that the company had provided the required training and that the OSHA rule on forklifts applied, preempting the general duty to protect workers. The court's decision highlighted that the retail industry generally does not consider eliminating "under-rides" necessary and that doing so could actually increase the risk of accidents. For those that don't moonlight as forklift operators, an “under-ride” is when a forklift operator reverses towards a storage rack with the forks trailing. If the operator extends the forklift too far, causing it to pass beneath the horizontal crossbar, it creates an "under-ride" situation. In such cases, the crossbar can enter the operator's compartment and result in injury. Essentially, it is running a fork-lift backwards such that the front safety mechanisms are not the first thing to hit a shelf – you are. So now you know. Pet goods supplier Chewy wins challenge to OSHA fine over worker death | ReutersStandup Forklift Under-ride Hazards Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

VLOG May 31: Miles Guo appeals bail denial; SBF on bail wants Fenwick & West info. Bragg files in Trump case for June 27 hearing [book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C4WZG4D3 June 2024 trial for FBI McGonigal. UN Guterres corrupt, on Uganda & North Korea https://www.innercitypress.com/ungate1dprkguttedicp053023.html

On episode 20, we kickoff our “Lawyering in a Recession” series with Morgan Beller, a General Partner at the venture capital firm, NFX, and Jordan Roberts, a partner at Fenwick & West.  Morgan and Jordan discuss dealmaking in a recession from the venture investor's point of view, how our current bear market has influenced deal terms and the evaluative process for venture investors, and how venture investors are approaching their portfolio companies. They also discuss how lawyers interested in the venture capital space can position themselves to make a potential pivot. Follow and connect with us at our LinkedIn and Instagram More on HLEP at clinics.law.harvard.edu/hlep

On episode 8, we speak to Jordan Roberts & Ran Ben-Tzur, partners at Fenwick & West. We learn about public exits, what an Initial Public Offering timeline looks like, and the types of considerations that companies need to make in preparation to go public. Jordan & Ran also share about the capital markets practice area. Follow and connect with us at our LinkedIn and Instagram More on HLEP at clinics.law.harvard.edu/hlep

Jacob Wittman, General Counsel at Pixel Vault, was the first C-suite hire by GFunk. His expertise in regulatory dynamics, venture capital planning, and DAO structures - gained while working at Fenwick & West, a leading Silicon Valley law firm - provides unmatched competency from an in-house resource.   The group discusses DAOs broadly and the Founder's DAO and UPDAO specifically. Jacob provides his thinking on PV's relationship with the DAOs, the benefits of legal wrapped entities, and the potential for distinct personalities within the United Planets.  It's a fun, free flowing conversation. Thanks to Jacob for coming on the pod!  Thoughts? Suggestions? Email us! Reach out to Mike aka SpaceWalk via Twitter and read the latest MetaVault Newsletter here. Reach out to Brad via Twitter and listen to his latest ChooseFi podcast here.  Music: The Virtunaut Artwork: Pinballer

Jon talks with with Dave Johnson, 15 years' general counsel for several Silicon Valley tech cos. Lecturer, Stanford Law School and Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford (a/k/a the d.school). Teaching Adv. Negotiation/Transactions, and Negotiation by Design. David Johnson has been teaching Negotiation at SLS annually since 2006, in conjunction with his full-time practice of law in Silicon Valley from 1996 to date. In addition, he is a Lecturer in the Hasso Plattner School of Design (a/k/a “the d.school”), where he has recently completed the third instance of his new course, Negotiation by Design. He has testified before the California Assembly on legislation addressing software liability. Thereafter he appeared before Congress, as lead counsel for the Business Software Alliance in hearings before the House Subcommittee for Science and Technology. He currently serves on the California State Bar Executive Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution, and its subcommittee on Education and Inclusivity. David is a regular speaker at conferences, seminars and panels on various subjects in law, science and technology, as well as negotiation. David brings to his teaching a unique blend of breadth and depth in the practice of law. He began his career in the courtroom, with over 20 civil trials, jury and bench, state and federal. He has briefed and argued a dozen state appellate matters, with 6 opinions issued, including one state Supreme Court argument challenging the prima facie constitutionality of a sales tax on commercial speech. More recently, he was appointed as Special Assistant Attorney General for the State of Washington in order to appear for the State before the Alaska Supreme Court in a case of first impression directly impacting all of Washington's state-owned hospitals. In Silicon Valley, he has litigated scores of patent, copyright, trade secret, trade dress, antitrust, and business cases, and worked on corporate transactional and governance matters. First with Fenwick & West, and thereafter Morgan/Lewis, he represented an array of technology and business clients such as: Apple, Brøderbund, Cisco, Electronic Arts, Go Remote, Homestore.com, Intuit, Juniper, McKesson, Merrill-Lynch, Micron, Rambus, Sankyo Pharma, Sun, Symantec, Tibco, and The Computer History Museum, pro bono. David's first General Counsel role was with Internet pioneer, AllAdvantage, blending online advertising, social media and user-data capture & mining. A Credit Suisse portfolio company pre-IPO, AADV ultimately fell victim to the crash. Thereafter, he took the reins as COO and GC of Palo Alto-based innovation accelerator MG Taylor, negotiating to closing their joint-venture-to-acquisition with Vanderbilt University Medical Center to create the nation's first Healthcare Innovation Center, installed and operating at Vanderbilt's Center for Better Health. Remaining in Silicon Valley, David moved next into biotech, as Deputy General Counsel for Xenogen (NYSE: XGEN), which coupled innovations in genetic engineering and in vivo biophotonics, invented by Chris Contag, Stanford Professor of Microbiology, to create breakthrough improvements in cancer research. David co-managed Xenogen's public-public merger with Caliper Life Sciences (NYSE: CALP), a global microfluidics and lab instrumentation developer. Upon closing, he was brought over as Caliper's Deputy General Counsel. Several years hence, David took another leadership position as a Principal and General Counsel of former client Triage Consulting Group, a privately-held revenue-cycle consultancy for academic, children's and other hospitals nationwide. For the last three years, David has served as General Counsel for a non-profit foundation operating a WASC-accredited STEM graduate university in Silicon Valley. For his JSM degree in Law, Science & Technology, David's interdisciplinary research and writing proposed that both object-modeling technique (OMT) and fuzzy set theories, as proven design schemas in computing, should therefore find applications in law, policy, and decision-making; eliciting from his faculty advisor the observation that he was “one of the most widely-read people I know.” In addition to reading, David is an avid skier and golfer, and a diligent but decidedly average tennis player. Connect with Jon Dwoskin: Twitter: @jdwoskin Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jonathan.dwoskin Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thejondwoskinexperience/ Website: https://jondwoskin.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jondwoskin/ Email: jon@jondwoskin.com Get Jon's Book: The Think Big Movement: Grow your business big. Very Big!   Connect with Dave Johnson: Website: https://law.stanford.edu/directory/david-johnson/ Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/Johnson_DavidW Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/Johnson_DavidW LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/djohnsonllc/

Joining us on the show is the founder and CEO of The Inertia, Zach Weisberg. The Inertia is a new media platform that has emerged as the definitive digital voice of surfing and the outdoors.In this episode, Zach and I relived our experience in Kelly Slater's surf ranch in central California for an event called Making Waves- a premium event at Kelly Slater's Surf Ranch in Central California. It was an intimate retreat of investors, entrepreneurs, and service providers from the LA Tech Startup Community sponsored by Hunt Club, Crosscut Ventures, Fenwick & West, Artium, & Pacific Western Bank.We dove into how the Surf Ranch "created the conditions for the magic" and how the power of imagination combined with follow-through is the key for bringing new businesses into market, with the Surf Ranch being one of many examples.We also press rewind and survey Zach's early career, where he worked as a freelance journalist for The New York Times, Esquire, his time as online editor at Surfer Magazine - the seminal print publication- from 2007 through 2010, plus a fascinating story on why he left Surfer Magazine to found The Inertia in September 2010.Zach also completed the MBA Program at USC Marshall School of Business, and Zach shares an unexpected insight about an important lesson he learned at USC that was deeply insightful, and useful- that relationships are the key.This show has a lot to offer for anyone interested in surfing, story telling, online communities, the Los Angeles Tech Community, and moreKey Takeaways:Surf Ranch discussion around the whole experience from going to the venue to actually ride the wavesJack Dangermond - above the line (context vs. content) conceptEducation background in USCEarlier experience in Journalism at NY TimesImpact of surfing on Zach's careerWhat is "The Inertia" and the idea behind the voiceTransformation from idea to realityEpisode Quotes:"I'd like to create that sort of magic and opportunities like that for other people too, the fact that the surf ranch exists and it was built. Anyone who goes through there is leaving. Happier, they're leaving feeling better. They're leaving, feeling fulfilled. They're leaving thinking what the possibilities might be. How could they translate that into their own life? What plays to make that kind of impact. And it's so just kind of got me sitting, like how can I help create magic like that in this world? That's my biggest takeaway was. And strive for that. Try to, because that was not a possibility, not very long ago, but now it is." - Zach Weisberg"I feel that those are often the most exciting time when you're making a pretty big change. That also in my view is kind of a fun zone to live in, and maybe not constantly, but that's when you would learn a lot, you question a lot what's going on and you make some big decisions and you see how they shake out.""An insight that one of my mentors, duke stump, quotes frequently is that we can't create the magic but we can create the conditions for the magic. And that's definitely what the surf ranch has achieved, are the conditions for the magic." - Kurt Daradics"Jack Dangermond, my former boss, over at Esri had that idea of living above the line and above the line is having context and below the line is having content. And he would talk about that frequently and say that part of the reason for his success is he would always try to sort of step back and look at the big picture and not get so caught up in the automatic stimulus-response function, but try to have some space" - Kurt Daradics Links Mentioned:Kurt's TwitterKurt's InstagramKurt's LinkedInKurt's newsletterRate the podcastZach's LinkedInZach's InstagramZach's TwitterThe Inertia's InstagramThe Inertia's Website

Hear about monetizing traditional marketing content and distributing it via tech platforms. Learn about disruptors in the tech industry, their intensive business models, and the need to protect not only various IP rights but also, in the case of many celebrities, the investment and participation in these initiatives. Explore: How is the convergence of tech with traditional industries changing the way people are consuming products? What effect might these convergences have on individuals and larger communities? Vejay Lalla ‘93 is a Partner in the technology transactions group at Fenwick & West and acts as outside general counsel to venture-backed companies across numerous industries including media-tech, blockchain, fintech, proptech, augmented and virtual reality, artificial intelligence and machine learning, gaming, fashion, retail, beauty, and consumer product companies during their entire life cycle.

Possibly the hottest market in legal tech today is contract lifecycle management, and one of the most talked-about companies in that market is Ironclad, a six-year-old startup that recently raised a $100 million Series D – at a reported valuation of $1 billion – and that just made its first acquisition, of the clickwrap transaction platform PactSafe.  What makes Ironclad different than other CLM companies, says cofounder and CEO Jason Boehmig, is that it is not just building incrementally better workflows, but is creating a new standard of digital contracting that will drive the businesses of the future.  Boehmig is today’s guest on LawNext. In 2014, he left his job as a corporate at law firm Fenwick & West to co-found Ironclad with CTO Cai GoGwilt after realizing that contracting was still mired in the analog age. He built Ironclad one log at a time, he tells host Bob Ambrogi, and is now looking ahead to eventually taking the company public.   Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out.  Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, and MerusCase, and e-payments platform Headnote. Everlaw, the cloud-based ediscovery platform for law firms, corporations, and government agencies.  Law Insider, producer of the show Contract Teardown, where they analyze the contracts that others are talking about.  A reminder that we are on Patreon. Subscribe to our page to be able to access show transcripts, or to submit a question for our guests.

Our guests are lawyers from prominent tech law firm Fenwick & West. Evan Bienstock and Jennifer Stanley. Evan is a Startup/Venture Capital and Corporate partner and Jennifer leads Fenwick's copyright, games industry group, and co-chairs the firm's digital media and entertainment, consumer technologies and retail industry groups. We chose the 1987 movie Wall Street because the movie romanticizes deal-making. In reality, Tech companies, financing deals, M&A, IPO are incredibly unromantic. They are often just plain and simple hard work - especially where there are complex data issues at play.

Think attorneys are just the Harvey Spector's of the world who say things like, "Objection your honor"? Well think again! In this episode, Albert Tawil explains to us what a transaction lawyer does, and how dealing with intellectual property laws can be just as exciting as battling it out in the courtroom. Albert is an attorney specializing in intellectual property and commercial agreements at a Silicon Valley firm called Fenwick & West. Fenwick's clients include tons of startups and other tech companies, as well as larger Fortune 500 tech companies such as Amazon, Facebook, and Peloton.  As a transaction lawyer, Albert works on transactions (think contracts and related advice, NOT litigation/lawsuits or courts), helping clients by drafting and negotiating agreements, and providing other advice. These transactions/contracts focus on: - Licenses for intellectual property (such as software/technology licenses, trademark/branding licenses, content/copyright licenses) - General commercial agreements (such as agreements for services, partnerships, physical goods, etc) - Mergers and acquisitions (by negotiating certain pieces of the purchase agreement and doing legal due diligence into the company our clients are looking to acquire or sell) - App/website terms of service and other online policies -Other related issues outside of the contract, such as branding issues, copyright/content, digital media/advertising, and many others. Special thanks to Frieda Sutton and Rachel Zalta for editing this episode

As we move to our first non-PG podcast and channel our inner Chauncy Gardner with signature line, “I like to watch”, Tom and Jay continue to brave the surge in Covid cases by staying safe at home. They are back to look at top compliance articles and stories which caught their eye this week. What is monitoring and oversight? Matt Kelly draws compliance inspiration from Jerry Falwell who (allegedly) likes to watch his wife having sex with another man. What is risk-based due diligence? Financial regulators opine. Mengqi Sun in the WSJ. Bank/government partnership to fight financial crime. Dylan Tokar in WSJ. Why fraud matters, the Steve Bannon indictment. Mike Volkov. Why does the Palantir S-1 appear to be like the children of Lake Wobegon — stronger, better-looking, and above average? Francine McKenna explains on The Dig. Lucenda Shen sees a flag-waving, in Term Sheet. How bad was the sexual harassment on the Washington Football Club? Very Bad. Expose in the Washington Post. Are we losing the war on AML? Martin Woods says yes. More on McDonald’s suit against its former CEO? Fenwick West lawyers. This month on The Compliance Life, I am joined by Louis Sapirman. In Part 1, we looked at Louis personal and professional journey into compliance. In Part 2, we discussed the qualities of a successful CCO. In Part 3, communication as a driver of compliance. In this month’s final episode Part 4, Sapirman takes a look at the CCO role down the road. On Compliance and Coronavirus we had a week of Exiger. Tuesday had Brandon Daniels on Data Management and Data Security Moving out of Covid-19, Michael Beber on on M&A, IPOs and SPACs During and After Covid-19; and Anna Osborn on managed services and outsourced compliance. On the Compliance Podcast Network, on 31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program, this month focuses on the role of the Board in compliance. This week saw the following offerings: Monday- BOD and succession planning; Tuesday-incorporating compliance strategy into long-term BOD planning; Wednesday-areas of BOD inquiry into compliance; Thursday- special guest Vin DiCianni on 3 specific BOD inquiries on compliance; and Friday-20 questions. The month of August is being sponsored by Affiliated Monitors. Note 31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program now has its own iTunes channel. If you want to binge out and listen to only these episodes, click here. Please join us in September where I take a deep dive into Internal Controls. Join Jay and Tom at Converge20. Convercent’s top compliance conference is going virtual this year. Check at the agenda and register here. There’s a place where True Crime meets Compliance, and its name is Fraud Eats Strategy. Check out this new show by Scott Moritz of FTI consulting, and catch all the episodes, notes, resources and more on the Compliance Podcast Network! We’d love to hear what you think of the show, and we’d love it even more if you shared it with a friend, colleague or that one guy you think might be a secret oligarch. Check out this great new podcast series here. This week on the FCPA Compliance Report, some of the top commentators in compliance have joined Tom to discuss some of the top developments in compliance over the past 10 years. The schedule for this week is as follows: Monday, Aug. 24 – Episode 495 - Mike Volkov on changes in FCPA enforcement; Tuesday, Aug. 25 - Episode 496 - Matt Kelly on changes in compliance from the business journalist perspective; Wednesday, Aug. 26 - Episode 497 - Jonathan Armstrong in changes in data protection/data privacy compliance; Thursday, Aug. 27 - Episode 498 - Jay Rosen in changes to proactive monitoring from the business development perspective; and Friday, Aug. 28 - Episode 499 - Jonathan Marks on how changes in internal audit both mirror and even foreshadow some of the changes he has seen in compliance.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is there anything better than catching up with an old friend after years of separation? It has been 35 years since Jack Russo last got a chance to chat with Vice Puzick about all the things that have changed since they worked together at Fenwick & West in New York. If you too believe that every case has a story, then there's a lot to learn when two curious minds get together and take a trip down memory lane to reflect on how litigation has changed over the last 40 years and is changing again in light of covid-19.

Time waits for no one. So in this episode we're exploring changes in legal tech that developed this year and what we can expect in 2020. Zach Warren, editor-in-chief of Law.com affiliate Legaltech News, talks with James McKenna, chief information officer at Fenwick & West and president of the International Legal Technology Association.

John McNelis is a law partner at Fenwick & West, where he chairs the Autonomous Transportation and Shared Mobility Practice.  John has been has been representing venture-backed and publicly traded tech firms for over 20 years as a patent attorney.  In this conversation, we focus on the issue of cybersecurity as a threat to the Autonomous Vehicle industry, why it exists, and the necessary role of key players in advancing Autonomous Vehicle adoption.  

Jason Boehmig is the Founder & CEO @ Ironclad, the startup that provides powerful legal contracting for modern legal teams. To date, Jason has raised over $84m with Ironclad from some of the best in the business including Sequoia, Accel, Greylock, Emergence, IA Ventures, Semil Shah's Haystack and Ali Rowghani who led their recent $50m Series C from Y Combinator Continuity Fund. As for Jason, prior to founding Ironclad, he was both a corporate attorney with Fenwick & West and then also an adjunct professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame. In Today’s Episode You Will Learn: 1.) How Jason left the world of law and made his way into the world of startups and came to be founder of one of Silicon Valley's hottest startups, Ironclad? How did Jason's experience at Lehmann Brothers impact his operating mentality today as a founder? What were his big lessons on personal conviction from seeing Lehmann unravel? 2.) Ironclad is famed for their customer discovery process, so how does Jason think about product development in the early days? What core questions does Jason ask to understand customer needs and desires? How does Jason determine what to implement and what to prioritise? How does Jason think about the balance between data vs gut in product decision-making? What have been his lessons here? 3.) When it comes to hiring, how does Jason approach keeping top of funnel constantly full? Why does Jason believe that when hiring, "when there is doubt, there is no doubt"? What are the common reasons that Jason does not hire a potentially strong candidate? How does Jason determine between a stretch VP and a stretch too far? 4.) How does Jason think about relationship building with VCs? Where do so many founders make mistakes in this process? What advice does Jason have on successfully negotiating with VCs? What works? What does not? What value-add has Jason realised VCs really can and do provide? Where is there a suggestion that they do but rarely do? Items Mentioned In Today’s Show: Jason’s Fave Book: Meditations by Marcus Aurelius As always you can follow Harry, The Twenty Minute VC and Jason on Twitter here! Likewise, you can follow Harry on Instagram here for mojito madness and all things 20VC.  

Anne Raimondi is an industry veteran with over 20 years of experience driving growth for B2B and B2C companies - taking them from startups to nationally recognized brands. Currently, she is the Chief Customer Officer for Guru, a leading AI knowledge management platform. Prior to Guru, Raimondi served as the SVP of Operations for Zendesk. Prior to Zendesk, Raimondi served as a product leader and executive for technology innovators - including Survey Monkey, TaskRabbit, Blue Nile and eBay. Anne holds an M.B.A. from Stanford University and currently lives in the Bay Area. In this episode, we learn from Anne why face-to-face engagement with customers and prospects is critical and why we should stay in cross-functional pods for as long as possible. Anne encourages founders to hire inherently curious “evangelists” who are already passionate about your product. Pro tip from Anne: The quickest way to end internal debates about what should or shouldn’t be built is to listen to customers talk about their pain points. Listen to the full episode for more pro tips. This episode was recorded live at the first annual SMB Tech Summit, co-hosted by GGV Capital, NFX and Fenwick & West. Episode Highlights: 01:41 If you’re building a company that’s going after the SMB, your functions need to be tightly aligned within the organization. What are tricks of the trade to make sure that happens? 03:41 So how do you build a management team that can manage cross-functionally, particularly with sales? 05:14 What can go wrong and what can go right when hiring more traditional enterprise folks into a company focused on the SMB space? 07:33 As a Chief Customer Officer now and you’ve seen a lot of great companies this world, what are the hacks to make sure your customers are happy, but that you’re not spending a lot of time and resource making that so? 10:39 What have you seen work well related to renewal rates? 13:25 What have you seen work well is you’re attempting to grow accounts? 15:45 For renewal and for expansion who should own those within a company that’s going after SMB? 17:12 What benefits do you get from segmenting your customers? 19:55 What about Net Promoter Score NPS. Is it a useful tool, how is it used well, and when it goes awry, what problems do you need to avoid? 20:47 Is the move up market deliberate and when do you know you’re ready? If it’s not deliberate, how do you make sure you don’t mess it up? 22:27 [question from the audience] How do you maintain connection and understanding of customers as humans as the companies you’ve been with have grown?

Anne Raimondi is an industry veteran with over 20 years of experience driving growth for B2B and B2C companies - taking them from startups to nationally recognized brands. Currently, she is the Chief Customer Officer for Guru, a leading AI knowledge management platform. Prior to Guru, Raimondi served as the SVP of Operations for Zendesk. Prior to Zendesk, Raimondi served as a product leader and executive for technology innovators - including Survey Monkey, TaskRabbit, Blue Nile and eBay. Anne holds an M.B.A. from Stanford University and currently lives in the Bay Area. In this episode, we learn from Anne why face-to-face engagement with customers and prospects is critical and why we should stay in cross-functional pods for as long as possible. Anne encourages founders to hire inherently curious “evangelists” who are already passionate about your product. Pro tip from Anne: The quickest way to end internal debates about what should or shouldn’t be built is to listen to customers talk about their pain points. Listen to the full episode for more pro tips. This episode was recorded live at the first annual SMB Tech Summit, co-hosted by GGV Capital, NFX and Fenwick & West. Episode Highlights: 01:41 If you’re building a company that’s going after the SMB, your functions need to be tightly aligned within the organization. What are tricks of the trade to make sure that happens? 03:41 So how do you build a management team that can manage cross-functionally, particularly with sales? 05:14 What can go wrong and what can go right when hiring more traditional enterprise folks into a company focused on the SMB space? 07:33 As a Chief Customer Officer now and you’ve seen a lot of great companies this world, what are the hacks to make sure your customers are happy, but that you’re not spending a lot of time and resource making that so? 10:39 What have you seen work well related to renewal rates? 13:25 What have you seen work well is you’re attempting to grow accounts? 15:45 For renewal and for expansion who should own those within a company that’s going after SMB? 17:12 What benefits do you get from segmenting your customers? 19:55 What about Net Promoter Score NPS. Is it a useful tool, how is it used well, and when it goes awry, what problems do you need to avoid? 20:47 Is the move up market deliberate and when do you know you’re ready? If it’s not deliberate, how do you make sure you don’t mess it up? 22:27 [question from the audience] How do you maintain connection and understanding of customers as humans as the companies you’ve been with have grown?

In This ILTA podcast episode, Jack Recinto of the Content Coordinating Team discusses "Fenni” the knowledge bot of Fenwick & West with the chief designer and creator Mark Gerow, Director of Fenwick Labs.  Learn about Fenwick's experience and benefits in implementing a  knowledge bot and the advancements they have made in this innovative endeavor. Moderator: Jack Recinto - Senior Applications Director, Vedder Price P.C. Speaker: Mark Gerow - Director of Applications Development, Fenwick & West LLP Recorded on 4-12-2019

Today’s guest is Melissa Redd. Melissa is a life coach and the founder of Pure Luxury Health Retreats. She has a 500-hour Vinyasa Yoga teacher training certification, and has studied Meditation with over 200 hours at Insight Meditation Center in Redwood City, CA. Melissa helps women release stress, anxiety and get back to a place of calm. She has worked with corporations such as the Town of Danville, Genentech, Google, Facebook, the San Francisco Giants, the Oakland A's, Fenwick & West and more. She loves working with the day-to-day Silicon Valley woman who is stressed out and wants to have more balance, calm and joy in her life. You can learn more about her at www.reddcoaching.com, or discover her retreats at http://www.pureluxuryretreats.com/. This episode is being brought to you by the HIVE, which you can learn more about here: HIVE Community. Be sure to subscribe to Consciously Speaking so that you don’t miss a single episode, and while you’re at it, won’t you take a moment to write a short review and rate our show? It would be greatly appreciated! To learn more about our previous guests, listen to past episodes, and get to know your host, go to www.MichaelNeeley.com and follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Competition for legal services is increasing as law firms compete with legal process outsourcing (LPO), the Big Four, increased use of inside counsel, and others.  In response, some firms are developing new approaches to meet client needs.  A few years ago, Fenwick & West rolled out FLEX by Fenwick to provide flexible solutions for interim in-house legal needs.  Linda Netsch, general manager of FLEX, why the firm made the decision to start an “on-demand in-house legal counsel” offering, and how it has been working out for the firm and its clients.

Ted Wang is a Partner @ Cowboy Ventures, one of Silicon Valley's leading early-stage funds with the likes of Philz Coffee, Dollar Shave Club, Brandless, DocSend, Accompany and Brit + Co all in their portfolio. As for Ted, prior to VC, Ted spent X years as a leading Silicon Valley lawyer with Fenwick & West where he worked with some of the most notable companies of our times including Facebook, Dropbox, Twitter, Square and Spotify just to name a few. Ted also created the Series Seed Documents - a set of open-sourced financing documents posted on Github used by thousands around the world today. In Today’s Episode You Will Learn: 1.) How Ted made his way from one of the most renowned lawyers in the valley with Fenwick & West to partner @ Cowboy alongside Aileen Lee? 2.) How does Ted fundamentally approach risk today? Given this mindset, how does this impact Ted's thinking on optimizing portfolio construction? On the flip side, how has Ted seen many founders wrongly approach the theme of risk? What is the question they need to be asking? What is Ted's story about risk related to his time working with Jet? 3.) What is it that makes Ted believe that "advice is often oversimplified"? If so, how can VCs provide tangible advice to their portfolio companies today? How can founders determine what is the right advice to accept and integrate vs listen and disregard? How does this lead Ted's thinking on the 2 core value adds a VC can provide? What advice did Dropbox Founder, Drew Houston give Ted on when to accept advice? 4.) What does Ted mean when he says "there are 4 parts to venture"? How does Ted think about the theme of learning and self-improvement when assessing founders? How does he look to do this pre-investment? What questions reveal the most? Applying it to himself, where will Ted place his biggest efforts on learning within the realm of venture over the next 12 months? Items Mentioned In Today’s Show: Ted’s Fave Book: 7 Habits of Highly Effective People Ted’s Most Recent Investment: Fullcast As always you can follow Harry, The Twenty Minute VC and Ted on Twitter here! Likewise, you can follow Harry on Instagram here for mojito madness and all things 20VC. Much like how Carta changed how private companies manage their cap tables and 409A valuations, Carta are now doing the same for fund administration. With Carta’s new, modern fund administration software and services, you get a real-time dashboard of your general ledger, can securely share info with your LPs, and issue capital calls–from the same platform, you accept securities and request cap table access. So essentially, Carta simplifies how startups and investors manage equity, fund administration, and valuations. Go to carta.com/20VC to get 10% off.

Developments this week in two mega-mergers are raising questions about what the Trump administration’s approach to corporate mergers.  T-Mobile and Sprint announced plans to merge after similar plans were benched in 2014 over concerns the Obama administration would oppose the merger.  And closing arguments were held in the Justice Department’s antitrust trial seeking to block the proposed AT&T-Time Warner merger.   Mark Ostrau, head of the antitrust group with Fenwick & West discusses what may lie ahead for anti-trust in the Trump administration.

Balancing employee rights with employer's data security needs and data privacy requirements can be tricky.  Anna Suh with Fenwick & West discusses how employers can manage this balance.

Brexit and Cuba may be oceans apart, but they share one common issue: a potential disruption of trademarks in both markets. Jeffrey Greene, a trademark partner with Fenwick & West discusses what issues need to be aware of if they are doing business or plan on doing business there.

“Fake news” is nothing new, especially to corporations dealing with short sellers – investors who bet on falling stock prices, who have long been accused of deliberately spreading false information in order to drive bigger gains. But the Securities & Exchange Commission has been surprisingly powerless in dealing with short sellers. Mike Dicke of Fenwick & West, who formerly worked for the SEC, discusses what companies can – and can’t do – to combat fake news being spread by short sellers

Brian Ahier is an award-winning digital evangelist and nationally known expert on health information technology. He received the 2016 Digital Health Evangelist award by Rock Health, Goldman Sachs, Square 1 Bank, and Fenwick & West. He has written numerous articles for a wide variety of industry leading publications including Healthcare IT News, Health Data Management, Executive Insights, and O’Reilly media. Steve and Brian discuss: Data acquisition & sharing courtesy of Medicity/Aetna  EMR interoperability Patient engagement Trumpcare A.I. and Blockchain technology Replacing human workers with machines

Do you store your family pictures and videos in the Cloud?  Would your family be able to access those files if you passed away?  Federal and state governments are scrambling to update estate laws to protect all your selfies and family cat videos against legal fights that could develop over rights to digital assets.   Tyler Newby of Fenwick & West discusses who actually has the rights to your selfies (and more) when you die.  

Fenwick & West civil practitioner Laurence Pulgram and Schoeman Updike & Kaufman complex litigator Beth Kaufman stop by to discuss amendments that were made to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in this Special Report. In 2010, at a symposium at Duke University, rule amendments to improve civil litigation were proposed and over 2,300 individuals provided input on these changes during the public comments period. On April 29th, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court approved and submitted to Congress the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and these amendments took effect on December 1, 2015. However, many lawyers are not aware of these changes. Beth and Laurence, along with The Digital Edge host Jim Calloway and Thinking Like A Lawyer host Joe Patrice, sit down to discuss some of the changes and best practices to help you save money and expedite managing your case.

In our February edition of Law Technology Now, host Monica Bay welcomes Mark Gerow director of applications development and business process in the intellectual property group at Fenwick & West. They talk about why SharePoint is so popular in law firms, and how firms can create "ethical walls" to protect client confidentiality — the subject of Gerow’s article, Building Ethical Walls in Microsoft SharePoint, in the February issue of Law Technology News.