JD Supra Buzz!

Although acceptance of medical marijuana at the state level is growing, federal prohibition remains unchanged.

That’s why the rights of four severely disabled individuals were not violated when the cities of Costa Mesa and Lake Forest (in California, where medical marijuana is allowed) banned dispensaries within their city limits.

In a suit, the four in question claimed that the American Disabilities Act (ADA) guaranteed their access to medically prescribed treatment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed.

For your reference, here’s a quick look at the ruling:

Up In Smoke: Hopes Of ADA Protection For Medical Marijuana Use Are Dashed … For Now, Anyway (Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLP)

“Here’s the problem: although medical marijuana use is legal under California state law, it is illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act. And the statute specifically says that ‘illegal’ means any drug made illegal by the federal Controlled … well, you know. The parties agreed on that point. But the ADA has an exception to the exclusion. The exception applies to ‘use of a drug taken under supervision of a licensed health care professional, or other uses authorized by the Controlled Substances Act or other provisions of federal law.’ The plaintiffs argued that this language meant that even a drug prohibited by the Controlled Substances Act was ok if ‘taken under supervision of a licensed health care professional.’” Read on»

Americans With Disabilities Act Does Not Protect Medical Marijuana Users That Face Discrimination Based On Their Use Of Marijuana (Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard)

“The court rejected this argument after examining the text of the statute and its legislative history. The court concluded ‘that doctor-supervised marijuana use is an illegal use of drugs not covered by the ADA’s supervised use exception.’ Although there is some indication ‘that the federal government’s views on the wisdom of restricting medical marijuana use may be evolving,’ as it currently stands ‘Congress has determined that, for purposes of federal law, marijuana is unacceptable for medical use.’  Therefore, medical marijuana use even where recommended by a physician does not fall within the ADA’s supervised use exception.” Read on»

Medical Marijuana: Arizona Law And The Americans With Disabilities Act (Bryan Cave)

“Although the issue considered by the Court did not arise in the employment context, because the terms analyzed by the Court are the same as those used in the employment provisions of the ADA, it is reasonable to expect that the Court’s decision will also apply in the employment context.” Read on»

—- 

Related reading: Connecticut and Delaware Pass Medical Marijuana Laws to Protect Employees 

—- 

Looking for more on medical marijuana? Follow our @420laws Twitter feed»

For businesses on the forefront of globalization, there haven’t been many opportunities to “go where no one has gone before” in recent years. But there’s hope.

After nearly 50 years of military rule, Burma’s government has been taking steps toward democratization of the county, including landmark elections this year that saw opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi elected to parliament.

The international community has responded in kind. Europe, the United States, and Canada have begun to lift long-standing economic and trade barriers that prohibit multinational companies from investing in or doing business with the country.

For your convenience, a roundup of recent legal advisories on the changing sanctions: 

United States Eases Sanctions on New Investment in Burma / Myanmar (Foley Hoag LLP)

“On Thursday, May 17, 2012, President Obama announced that the U.S. would issue a general license easing sanctions on the export of financial services and new investment in Burma, although he did not lift them, meaning that they could be reinstated if there is backsliding on reforms. Although senior Administration officials had previously indicated that sanctions would only be eased on a few industries, the White House today announced that the general license would apply to all new investments in Burma, regardless of industry.” Read the update»

Burma/Myanmar: The Suspension of EU Sanctions “A New Chapter in Trade and Investment” (Dechert LLP)

“The European Council on the 14 May adopted Regulation that will give full legal effect to the suspension of EU sanctions against Burma/Myanmar. EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy has welcomed the announcement as opening ‘a new chapter’ in the EU’s trade and investment relationship with the country. The suspension of EU restrictions follows agreement by European ministers, at the Foreign Affairs Council on 23 April 2012, to re-open trade and investment across a range of sectors including logging, timber processing, and mining of precious stones.” Read the update»

EU Suspends Most Sanctions Against Burma/Myanmar; US Only Eases Some (White & Case LLP)

“In response to the ongoing democratic reforms in Burma/Myanmar, the Council of the European Union agreed on April 23, 2012 to suspend all sanctions for one year, but to leave the arms embargo and the embargo on equipment that might be used for internal repression in place. The United States partially eased sanctions against Burma/Myanmar on April 18, 2012 by [authorizing] the export and reexport to Burma/Myanmar of certain financial services by US entities that support specific not-for-profit activities. At present, US sanctions on other types of financial services, investments, imports and dealings with blocked parties remain in place.” Read the update»

United States Takes First Step in Liberalizing Sanctions on Burma (Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP)

“In a statement on Burma made on April 4, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced, among other things, that the United States would take measures to enable ‘private organizations in the United States to pursue a broad range of nonprofit activities from democracy building to health and education,’ and would begin ‘the process of a targeted easing of our ban on the export of U.S. financial services and investment as part of a broader effort to help accelerate economic modernization and political reform.’ The new General License represents an important first step toward these goals.” Read the update»

Burma/Myanmar Sanctions Lifted - New Opportunities for Canadian Business (John Boscariol)

“Most of Canada’s economic sanctions against Burma (Myanmar) have been repealed effective today. Enacted in 2007 and touted as being among the most aggressive in the world, Canada’s sanctions and export controls prohibited most activities with Burma, including investment, exports and imports, the provision of financial services and technical data, the transiting of ships and aircraft, and dealings with designated persons. These developments will raise new trade and investment opportunities for Canadian business, however firms should proceed with caution as certain restrictions remain in effect.” Read the update»

United States Eases Sanctions on Financing for Development Organizations in Burma (Foley Hoag LLP)

“On April 17, the U.S. Treasury issued new General License No. 14-C, which relaxes sanctions on financial services with respect to certain humanitarian and not-for-profit activities in Burma. This License allows financial services to support a broader range of development projects than was previously permitted, and includes: (1) projects to meet basic human needs; (2) democracy building and good governance projects; (3) educational activities; (4) sporting activities; (5) non-commercial development projects directly benefiting the Burmese people; and (6) religious activities.” Read the update»

—- 

Related reading: 

• Floating the Kyat: A First Step in Fighting Corruption in Burma (Foley Hoag LLP) 

• Fools Rush In: Social and Environmental Due Diligence in Burma (Foley Hoag LLP) 

—- 

Looking for more? You’ll find it here»

“’If you don’t have mobility in your [healthcare] strategy, then you don’t have a strategy,’ said Allina Health System’s Susan Heichert at a 2012 national health information conference.”

Two recent updates from law firm Duane Morris provide a solid overview of the opportunities and legal considerations of “mHealth,” as mobile health is increasingly known. 

For your reference, key takeaways:

What is mHealth? 

“Various definitions of mHealth exist in the marketplace as the field defines itself, but they all share certain identifying characteristics. Generally, mobile health is healthcare delivered through mobile communication technology, such as applications on an iPhone or web-based software accessed through a mobile device… 

Here is a [simple] definition: mHealth is defined by three fundamental characteristics: 1) a device or software that is 2) health oriented and 3) has mobile use.”

How big is the opportunity?

“As funds for traditional healthcare—doctors’ visits, hospital stays, long-term nursing home residencies—dwindle, some estimates indicate mobile device revenue will reach $1.9 billion globally by 2014.” 

Who are the players?

“They include device makers, software and app developers, investors, providers, payors and insurance companies, not to forget the government and consumers.” 

What are some key legal issues?

• Intellectual property: “Once a concept has been sufficiently developed to promote and disclose, it may die on the vine if intellectual property legal issues have not been appropriately addressed, such as patents, copyrights, trademarks and contracts.”

• Federal and state regulation: “Healthcare is a highly regulated industry, and becoming familiar with specific agency regulations and guidance, along with the direction of enforcement, can be daunting and may require legal support.”

• Insurance coverage: “With any new area of commerce, especially with medical devices where injury could result, it may be challenging to find an insurer that understands and will insure the risk. Specialty insurance brokers may be required to find such coverage. In some cases, the risks may not be insurable. Insurance issues usually arise while an agreement is being negotiated, but they should be a significant consideration of every business plan.”

• Privacy considerations: “A stakeholder should pay special attention to what, if any, patient information, protected under any federal and/or state laws, requires special documentation before that information can be shared. Under HIPAA, some vendors receiving protected health information will have to execute business associate agreements that must conform to the requirements of the law.”

• Fraud and abuse: “Many complex billing issues give rise to potential fraud and abuse issues. For example, physicians have been accused of fraud for billing for services when they are not physically present at the time the service is being rendered.”

—- 

Read the updates: 

• mHealth: Technology’s Healthcare Reform (Duane Morris LLP) 

• mHealth Stakeholders: Bullet List of Legal Considerations (Duane Morris LLP) 

—- 

Related Reading:

• FDA Draft Guidance for Industry on Mobile Medical Applications Released (International Lawyers Network) 

• FDA Issues Draft Guidance on Mobile Medical Apps Does the App Present a Risk to Patients if it Does Not Function as Intended? (King & Spalding) 

• Draft Guidance Clarifies How FDA Plans To Regulate Certain Software “Apps” (Ropes & Gray LLP) 

• New FDA Draft Guidance on Mobile Medical Apps Provides Some Clarity, But Raises Many More Questions (Morgan Lewis) 

—- 

Find related law news on JD Supra»

Earlier this month, social networking service Myspace and the Federal Trade Commission announced that they had reached an agreement over charges that the company shared user data with advertisers in violation of its own privacy policy. From law firm BuckleySandler:

“The policy promised consumers that Myspace would not share users’ personally identifiable information or use that information for purposes inconsistent with those for which the information was submitted without first giving notice to users and receiving their permission. The FTC alleged that the privacy policy was deceptive because, without user notice or consent, Myspace provided advertisers with certain user information that allowed the advertisers to identify additional personal information.” (FTC Settles Privacy Claims Against Myspace) 

What can online businesses learn from the settlement? 

1. The FTC takes privacy policies seriously:

“Once again, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued a warning to companies with online privacy policies: if your privacy policy misrepresents protection of users’ personal information either directly or indirectly, you risk being charged with unfair and deceptive business practices under the FTC Act… Superficially complying with your privacy policy will not pass the FTC’s strict standards when it comes to accurate and adequate privacy policy disclosure.” (FTC Consent Order Requires Myspace Privacy Assessments for 20 Years: How Can You Keep the FTC Out of Your Space? by Mintz Levin) 

2. Keep your promises: 

“… the FTC alleged that Myspace misrepresented that: … Information about users’ web browsing activity was anonymized when shared with advertisers. The FTC claimed, however, that by providing advertisers access to a user’s [personally identifiable information (PII)] via that user’s Friend ID, advertisers could link web browsing activity collected via cookies stored on that user’s browser to PII available on that user’s Myspace profile.” (Myspace Reaches Consent Agreement with FTC over Misrepresentations in Privacy Policy by Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati) 

3. Don’t say you’re following the law when you aren’t:

“The [FTC] also claimed that Myspace certified that it was complying with the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework, which provides a method for U.S. companies to transfer personal data lawfully from the European Union to the United States. As part of its self-certification, Myspace claimed that it complied with the Safe Harbor Principles, including the requirements that consumers be given notice of how their information will be used and the choice to opt out. The FTC alleged that these statements were false.” (Georgia Governor Signs Sweepstakes Bill, Myspace Settles Privacy Charges with FTC by Loeb & Loeb LLP) 

—- 

See also: FTC v. Myspace Part II — The Takeaways (Mintz Levin) 

—- 

Find more like this on JD Supra»

For your Friday perusal, curiosity, interest, edification, and general sense of being well informed, here’s a quick look at five popular searches we noticed on JD Supra this mid-May week, 2012. Click for updates in each topic:

1. HIPAA»

…aka the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, with recent news of a hefty fine ($100k) and a court opinion that ignorance most definitely is not bliss.

2. NLRB Election Rule»

…and we thought a Quickie was something entirely different. Either way, no one gets it.

3. ACTA»

…aka the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, in which the world comes together to enforce anti-counterfeiting and protect IP globally. Or not…

4. California Transparency in Supply Chains Act»

…actually a search term whose popularity remains high over the longterm. And that’s a good thing.

5. Brinker Decision»

…continued interest. Note to California workers: it’s OKAY to read these updates on your lunch break!

—

Additional trending topics? You know where to find them»

Enjoy your weekend. And RIP Donna Summer - here’s a favorite tune from JD Supra team member Carla R:

For months, the National Labor Relations Board has said that complaining about one’s job via social media is considered “protected speech.” 

But employees do more than grouse about working conditions, overbearing supervisors, and company policies when they’re surfing the web. Sometimes, they merely talk about their jobs. Sometimes, they “like” political candidates on Facebook. And sometimes, they get fired for what seems to be relatively innocuous activity online. 

Case in point: Gene Morphis, the former Chief Financial Officer of clothing retailer Francesca’s, who lost his job because he tweeted about his work and his company. From law firm Looper Reed:

“It was not clear in the article if [Morphis] had a contract. It does appear, however, he was not engaging in protected activity.  Instead the company claimed in a release the CFO was terminated because he ‘improperly communicated company information through social media…’

Francesca’s, a women’s clothing and accessory retailer, is a publicly-traded company which means the CFO does not have free reign to say whatever he wants.”

Bobby Bland and Debra Woodward, on the other hand, didn’t post details of their jobs online. Instead, they “liked” a Facebook page.

The page belonged to a candidate for the job of Sheriff in Hampton, Virginia. Unfortunately for Bland and Woodward, the candidate was running against their boss, Sheriff B.J. Roberts. When Roberts won the election, he fired the six people on his staff who supported his opponent, who responded by taking Roberts to court over the dismissals. Law firm Cullen & Dykman:

“Six Virginia Sheriff’s office employees sued the Sheriff of Hampton, B.J. Roberts, both individually and in his official capacity, after they were fired from their jobs in 2009… The employees, some civilians and sworn deputies, alleged First Amendment violations claiming that [their] terminations were linked to the expressions made on Facebook, in violation of their freedom of speech and freedom of association.” 

The court ruled otherwise. From Lawyers.com: 

“The main question was whether a ‘like’ on Facebook constituted free speech under the Constitution. Granting Roberts a motion for summary judgment, the court said no. Perhaps if they had actually written a comment they could have kept their jobs. The judge ruled, ‘No such statements exist in this case. Simply liking a Facebook page is insufficient. It is not the kind of substantive statement that has previously warranted constitutional protection. The Court will not attempt to infer the actual content of Carter’s posts from one click of a button on Adams’ Facebook page.’”

It remains to be seen if these recent events will have a lasting effect on employee use of social media. But one thing is clear: sometimes it might be better to keep your mouse shut.

—- 

Read the updates:

• Houston CFO Fired for Social Media Activity (Looper Reed & McGraw, P.C.) 

• Facebook “Likes” Are Not Protected Speech Under the First Amendment (Cullen and Dykman LLP) 

• You Can Be Fired for a Facebook “Like” (Lawyers.com) 

—- 

Related reading:

• Dealership Update - May 2012: A Supervisor’s Guide to Social Media, Part One (Fisher & Phillips LLP) 

• Reviewing an Applicant’s Social Media Site: Legal Right or Picking a Fight? (Miller Canfield) 

—- 

Find more information on social media and the law here»

Are application programming interfaces (APIs) subject to copyright protection? The question is at the center of the Oracle v. Google intellectual property infringement case, but last week’s jury decision did not provide an answer. 

That’s because the jury was told to avoid the issue altogether. From law firm Patton Boggs:

“The jury, upon an instruction from the Judge to assume the software was copyrighted, found that Android’s overall structure, sequence and organization infringed upon Oracle copyrights.” (California Jury Finds the Google Mobile Software Infringes Oracle Copyrights, but Fails to Decide if Google’s Use is Protected Under the “Fair Use” Doctrine) 

According to Pamela Jones, IP law reporter and founder of Groklaw, presiding Judge William Alsup gave that instruction because he is the only one who can determine the whether the APIs are copyrightable:

“’The jury didn’t decide API are copyrightable. They can’t. That’s a question of law, and the judge is the one that has to decide that issue.’ Jones stated that Alsup ‘decided that he’d let the jury decide the fair use issue first, and then if they found fair use, he wouldn’t have to reach that decision. But if they found infringement and no fair use, then he would decide if APIs are copyrightable and more specifically if their arrangement is protectible.’” (Copyrights, APIs, and Oracle vs Google on ZD Net) 

As it turns out, the jury took yet another path: they found that Google did infringe upon Oracle’s IP, but were not able to reach a verdict on fair use. From Field Law: 

“The failure to decide on the ‘fair use’ defence … leaves the issue open. The jury was deadlocked on that question, potentially leading to a mistrial. Indeed, Google filed for a new trial last week.” (Copyright Protection for APIs) 

That result might not spell the end for hopes of a definitive answer regarding copyright protection for APIs, however. On the contrary: recent developments in the trial indicate that Judge Alsup could be preparing to rule on the issue. Again, Patton Boggs:

“Judge Alsup has requested both sides comment on the May 2, 2012 European Court of Justice opinion, where the European Union held that the functionality of a computer program and the programming language is not copyright protected. The European Union ruled that the software functionality, programming language and data file format is not a ‘form of expression’ sufficient to enjoy copyright protection.”

Whether the judge’s interest in the EU ruling is any indication of his position on copyrighting APIs remains to be seen. For the time being, the jury is still out.

Read the updates:

• California Jury Finds the Google Mobile Software Infringes Oracle Copyrights, but Fails to Decide if Google’s Use is Protected Under the “Fair Use” Doctrine (Patton Boggs LLP) 

• Copyright Protection for APIs (Field Law) 

• European Union Court Rules that Software Functions Cannot Be Copyrighted (Patton Boggs LLP) 

—- 

More technology law updates are available here»

Five quick hits from the JD Supra network this Monday, May 14, 2012. Trending today:

1. Facebook “Likes” Are Not Protected Speech Under the First Amendment - Cullen & Dykman
2. Debt Collector’s Voice Message Not a ‘Communication’ under FDCPA, Federal Judge Rules - Ballard Spahr LLP
3. Around the Virtual World (Roundup of Digital & Social Media Links) - Pillsbury Social Media, Entertainment, Tech
4. Estate Taxes; Where Do We Go From Here? - Akerman Senterfitt
5. Solving the Mystery of What a TPA Does - Rosenbaum Law Firm

—

See you online»

For your interest, here’s a handful of latest updates and law firm advisories covering a controversial topic that always draws interest on JD Supra: hydraulic fracturing, aka fracking:

- Federal Agencies Move to Regulate Aspects of Hydraulic Fracturing (Morgan Lewis)

“On May 4, both the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new draft proposals related to hydraulic fracturing. The Interior Department announced proposed rules for hydraulic fracturing occurring on lands controlled by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). EPA issued draft guidance on using diesel fuel in hydraulic fracturing operations, which would apply to operations EPA directly permits under the Safe Drinking Water Act, regardless of whether located on federal or private lands. Both the Interior Department’s proposed rules and EPA’s draft guidance will be subject to a public comment period before being made final…” Read on»

- Oil And Natural Gas Production Subject To New Air Rules (Bryan Cave):

“While the rules are intimidating for many reasons, the hydraulic fracturing requirements will undoubtedly garner the most attention. As an initial matter, well completions are part of well construction. Applying performance standards to a construction activity is a departure from EPA’s historic interpretation and application of NSPS. This remains controversial. In addition, there is concern that, while VOC emissions associated with oil and natural gas development in certain areas present legitimate issues worthy of reasonable and scientifically defensible regulatory scrutiny, the rules do not adequately consider the wide variability in oil and natural gas production operations and emissions…” Read on»

- New Decisions — Pleading Requirements for Complaints Alleging Contamination from Hydraulic Fracturing (King & Spalding):

“During litigation in the U.S., it is typical that before incurring huge costs of discovery, a defendant may move to dismiss an action due to the plaintiff’s failure to comply with state or federal pleading requirements. This article discusses two recent federal decisions regarding such motions to dismiss complaints alleging fracking contamination, Tucker and Fiorentino. These decisions may shed light as to how other courts are likely to apply pleading requirements that may require dismissal at an early stage. They are applicable to estimating defense costs for fracking contamination litigation…” Read on»

- What Does the ERCB’s Decision in Kallisto Mean for Hydraulic Fracturing? (Lawson Lundell):

“In a recent contest before the Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board between the operator of a natural gas storage reservoir and a producer seeking to drill and frack a Basal Quartz vertical oil well in the vicinity of the storage reservoir, the ERCB granted the producer its well licence, subject to conditions. While not specifically addressing any of the potential issues relating to hydraulic fracturing in tight oil reservoirs, there are interesting and useful inferences that can be drawn from the ERCB’s approach to an adjoining mineral owner’s objection to a fracking operation…” Read on»

- The Shale Play Today - April 2012 (Spilman):

“On April 17, 2012, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) finalized its long-anticipated updated New Source Performance Standards (“NSPS”)and National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (“NESHAP”) for the oil and gas sector, which include first-time federal air standards for hydraulically fractured natural gas wells. This suite of regulations, issued under the federal Clean Air Act, was finalized pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by the D.C. District Court in conjunction with a lawsuit filed against USEPA in January 2009 by WildEarth Guardians and the San Juan Citizens Alliance. The rules will be published in the Federal Register in the coming weeks, and will take effect 60 days following publication…” Read on»

—-

Related: watch this video explanation of the Marcellus Shale and what it means to United States energy consumption, from McNees Wallace & Nurick attorney James Dougherty:

[Link: Natural gas encourages industrial and large commercial end-users to revisit their operational plans - McNees]

Guess what: we put the IF in TGIF. As in:

IF you want to know which of these is, in fact, a true statement, you’re going to have to click and read. Well, c’mon - what did you expect:

True of False?

• President Obama recently signed an executive order to ensure that military service members and veterans are not scammed out of their educational benefits
• The EEOC estimates that 25% of U.S. military veterans returning from the Middle East conflicts will have a service-connected disability
• It is very difficult for foreigners to own land in Iraq
• A single asteroid in space, if mined by earthlings, can hold raw materials to the tune of one trillion dollars
• The United States leads the way in investment of renewable energy ($48 billion)
• Judge says: an email agreement is not a binding contract
• The most common form of data breach involves loss of unencrypted data on computers, smartphones, USB drives, etc
• Oracle is suing Google for one billion dollars
• The Georgia legislature recently passed a bill banning electronic sweepstakes
• People over 40 can be fired for any reason
• Social security taxes are slated to go down in 2013
• According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2009 there were 420 fatal workplace shootings in the United States
• The first will was found in an ancient tomb in Egypt
• Screen siren Hedy Lamarr owned a patent to do with a top secret, World War II torpedo communications system
• The Trademark Office lists 84 records for the term DERBY (as in Kentucky Derby)

Let’s hope your horse comes in ahead of the rest.

This week’s gratuitous music accompaniment? A no-brainer. Here’s a mash-up of the Grateful Dead and Beastie Boys - RIP Adam Yauch:

Interesting, dare we say far out, video interview posted today by Bloomberg Law: Asteroid Mining in Space: Is it Legal?

“Frans von der Dunk, professor of Space Law at University of Nebraska-Lincoln, College of Law, talks with Lee Pacchia about the legal implications of a new company’s plans to mine near Earth asteroids for precious metals and water. The company, Planetary Resources, is a startup backed by Google billionaires Larry Paige, Eric Schmidt and filmmaker James Cameron among others…”

Apparently a single asteroid can bring in a trillion dollar haul. Quick! Someone make a joke about skyrocketing profits.

Sky? Rocketing?

Oh nevermind!

A handful of well-read Tech updates and advisories caught our attention today, each with a different angle on related legal issues.

Besides jumping at the opportunity to write an alliterative title, here’s what we noticed in today’s JD Supra Law News mix:

• The Second Circuit Reverses Conviction of Computer Programmer and Holds that Theft of Intellectual Property Is Not Necessarily Criminal (Pullman & Comley)
• Courts Find Email Communications Result in Binding Contracts (MIller Canfield)
• Data Breaches: Will You Be Sued, And Can You Lower Risk? (Bryan Cave)
• Nothing Revealed on “Reveal Day”: New gTLD Application System Remains Suspended (Mintz Levin)
• Why you should .care that .com can be .anything (Greenberg Glusker)
• Georgia Legislature Passes Bill Banning Electronic Sweepstakes (Loeb & Loeb LLP)
• New Executive Order Imposes Sanctions on Technology Companies that Facilitate Human Rights Abuses in Iran and Syria (Foley Hoag)

Additional? @Tech_Law on Twitter

—

For you reference, here’s a look at some of the most-read and watched legal updates on JD Supra for last month:

1. How a Financial Advisor Can Grow Their 401(k) Plan Practice Without Really Trying* (*just kidding) [Rosenbaum Law Firm]
2. Brinker: California Supreme Court Clarifies Standards for Meal Periods - Steps Employers Should Take Now [Allen Matkins]
3. Video: How to screen job applicants without asking for the Facebook password [McNees Wallace & Nurick]
4. Immigration Alert: April 2012 [Epstein Becker & Green]
5. 2012 Guide To The State Attorneys General [Orrick]
6. Visa Retrogression for Eb-2 Immigrant Visa Category (India and China) [Proskauer]
7. FDA Finalizes Benefit-Risk Determination Methodology for Certain Medical Devices [McDermott Will & Emery]
8. A Stern Warning: Words Do Matter [Greenberg Glusker]
9. Will Green Codes LEED to Litigation? [Dinsmore & Shohl]
10. Video: Ponzi Schemer Marc Dreier Confesses ‘Sins’ in New Film [Bloomberg Law]
11. Propecia Lawsuits Mount as Evidence From New Study is Released [Schmidt & Clark]
12. NLRB to Expand Outreach Campaign Targeting Nonunion Employees [McNees]
13. Gamblification! The Hottest Trend in Social Games [Pillsbury Social Media, Entertainment, & Technology Team]
14. Organized Labor’s Big Day — Are You Ready? [Dinsmore & Shohl]
15. Too Many Choices, Too Little Time for 401(k) Plan Sponsors [Rosenbaum Law Firm]
16. Brinker Decision by California Supreme Court Clarifies Meal and Rest Period Obligations [Constangy]
17. Traditional Litigation versus Alternative Dispute Resolution (in collection cases) [Steven Harms]
18. Terminated Employee with Bipolar Disorder Awarded $315,000 in ADA Case [Nick Birkenhauer]
19. What Is Trademark Parody, Really? Louis Vuitton Puts UPENN in the Fashion Spotlight for a Perfect Case Study [Wahab & Medenica]
20. Employers Must Update Their Social Media Policies [White & Case]
21. Proposed Physician Payment Sunshine Act Regulations Leave Many in the Dark [Mintz Levin]
22. Celebrity Paternity Disputes [Bryan L. Salamone]
23. Top Ten Compensable Time Issues for Non-Exempt Employees [Venable LLP]
24. Significant Rulings From the Deepwater Horizon Court on Discovery and Evidentiary Matters [Sedgwick LLP]
25. $5,120,000 Lifetime Gift Tax Exemption Expiring Soon [Loeb & Loeb LLP]

And, because that’s how we roll, here for your viewing pleasure are the two top vids for the month. Enjoy:

Ponzi Schemer Marc Dreier Confesses ‘Sins’ in New Film»

[Source: Bloomberg Law; see above for link]

—

How to screen job applicants without asking for the Facebook password»

[Source: McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC]

—

Additional daily trending updates on Twitter: @JDSupraBuzz