Halloween Traditions: A Light-hearted Look

Ah, Halloween! The one night a year when it's socially acceptable to wear a costume that might be deemed “questionable” in any other context. The spooky season is packed with traditions that can be both delightful and downright bizarre. Let’s dive into some of our favorite American Halloween traditions.

Let’s kick things off with the classic—trick-or-treating. Every October, people of all ages don costumes and search the streets for candy. It’s a rite of passage for kids and a sweet opportunity for parents to relive their childhood.

Next up is the art of pumpkin carving. There’s something oddly satisfying about turning a plump pumpkin into a work of art—or a lopsided grin that looks more confused than creepy. Bonus points if you can create a pumpkin that doesn’t rot before Thanksgiving! And let’s not forget about the age-old debate: is it better to roast the seeds or just eat the pumpkin pie?

                                            image: Freepik

Haunted houses are the ultimate Halloween thrill for those who enjoy a good scare. Whether you’re navigating a dark maze filled with chainsaw-wielding actors or jumping at every little noise, it’s all in the name of fun. Just be prepared: nothing says “I love you” quite like clutching your friend’s arm in sheer terror while screaming like a banshee. You know it was a successful night if you leave with a few new gray hairs.

No Halloween is complete without a marathon of spooky movies. From classic horror films to family-friendly flicks, there’s something for everyone. Want to keep it light? Go for "Hocus Pocus" or “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown”. Looking for chills? “Nightmare on Elmstreet” or “Halloween” are the classic go-tos. Need a little pumpkin spice latte-style humor? “Scary Movie” and “Haunted Mansion” will leave you feeling festive.

 

So, whether you’re out trick-or-treating, carving pumpkins, or binge-watching Halloween movies, embrace the spookiness and joy of the season! Halloween is about laughter, creativity, and a little bit of fright. After all, it’s the only time of year when you can dress up as anything you want and no one questions your sanity. Happy Halloween, everyone—may your candy bags be full and your scares be just the right amount of spooky!

Crystal McBride, Attorney, BridgehouseLaw LLP, Charlotte

Implications of Failure to Timely File Corporate Transparency Act BOI Report

                                                        image: iStock
 

The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), represents a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for corporations operating in the United States. One of its key provisions mandates that certain entities report their beneficial ownership information (BOI) to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). While the CTA intends to enhance transparency and combat financial crimes, the failure to timely file the required BOI report can have serious implications for both corporations and their stakeholders. Legal Penalties One of the most immediate implications of failing to file the BOI report on time is the imposition of legal penalties. The CTA stipulates that entities that do not comply with the reporting requirements may face civil penalties of up to $500 for each day the violation continues, and potential criminal penalties may reach up to $10,000. Such financial repercussions can strain the resources of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and can even jeopardize their viability. Additionally, the potential for criminal prosecution can tarnish the reputations of corporate officers and owners, leading to a loss of trust among investors, clients, and the public. Increased Scrutiny and Regulatory Compliance Entities that fail to meet the CTA’s reporting deadlines may also attract heightened scrutiny from regulators. A failure to file can signal potential non-compliance with other regulatory requirements, leading to further investigations. This scrutiny may manifest in audits, additional reporting requirements, and increased oversight, thereby consuming valuable time and resources that could have been allocated to core business operations. Companies may find themselves in a cycle of compliance issues, hampering their ability to focus on growth and innovation. Impact on Corporate Reputation Corporate reputation is a vital asset in today’s competitive landscape. A failure to file the BOI report on time can severely damage a company’s reputation. Stakeholders, including investors, customers, and partners, may perceive non-compliance as a sign of poor management or ethical shortcomings. This loss of trust can have long-lasting effects, including reduced investment opportunities, declining sales, and strained business relationships. In a global market where transparency and corporate governance are increasingly prioritized, companies that fail to adhere to the CTA may find themselves at a distinct disadvantage. Operational Disruptions Timely filing of the BOI report is not just a regulatory obligation; it is also essential for effective corporate governance. A failure to file can lead to operational disruptions, particularly if the company is forced to divert resources to address compliance issues. Executives may need to allocate time to rectifying the oversight rather than focusing on strategic initiatives. This diversion can hinder operational efficiency and productivity, ultimately impacting the company’s bottom line. Risk of Losing Access to Financial Markets Another critical implication of failing to file the BOI report on time is the potential loss of access to financial markets. Many financial institutions are increasingly requiring transparency and compliance with regulatory standards before extending credit or investment opportunities. A history of non-compliance can make it challenging for companies to secure loans, attract investors, or engage in mergers and acquisitions. This barrier to capital can stunt growth and limit the ability of companies to compete effectively. Conclusion The Corporate Transparency Act’s requirement for timely filing of beneficial ownership information is not merely a bureaucratic obligation; it has far-reaching implications for corporations. From legal penalties and increased scrutiny to damage to corporate reputation and operational disruptions, the consequences of failing to comply can be severe. Companies must recognize the importance of adhering to these regulations, not only to avoid penalties but also to foster a culture of transparency and integrity. In an era where accountability and ethical conduct are paramount, timely compliance with the CTA can significantly bolster a company's standing in the marketplace and ensure long-term success. As such, businesses must prioritize their compliance strategies to align with the CTA's requirements, safeguarding their future in an increasingly regulated environment. Please contact BridgehouseLaw LLP for assistance with compliance. Thomas Joa, Attorney, BridgehouseLaw LLP, Charlotte

Publishers Sue AI Giant: What It Means for the Industry.

The recent lawsuit filed by publishers against a major AI company has sparked a lively debate about the future of content creation and intellectual property. As technology continues to evolve, traditional publishing is facing challenges that could reshape the industry as we know it. At the heart of the lawsuit are concerns over copyright infringement. 

Many publishers argue that AI systems use their content without permission, undermining their business models. This raises important questions: How should we protect original works in a world where AI can generate content at lightning speed? And what are the economic implications for publishers who rely on their intellectual property for revenue? This lawsuit could lead to significant changes in how publishers approach licensing.

                                                            image: iStock

We might see new agreements tailored specifically for AI usage, or perhaps stricter regulations that require transparency in how AI systems train on existing works. As publishers navigate this new landscape, they may also explore innovative business models that embrace AI while safeguarding their content. The ramifications of this lawsuit extend beyond publishers to content creators themselves—authors, journalists, and freelance writers. If AI companies are forced to pay for the content they use, this could lead to better compensation for creators. However, there’s also the risk that tighter controls on content might stifle creativity and collaboration in the industry.

This lawsuit isn’t just a flash in the pan; it reflects a broader struggle faced by many industries grappling with the rapid advancement of AI. From music to film, creative sectors must find ways to balance innovation with the protection of their intellectual property. As we watch this legal battle unfold, it’s clear that the relationship between traditional publishing and AI is at a critical juncture. The outcome could set a precedent for how we navigate copyright in the digital age. For now, both sides will need to consider how to foster creativity while ensuring that original works are respected and protected.

Crystal McBride, Attorney, BridgehouseLaw LLP, Charlotte

UPDATE: FTC Non-Compete Rule

In our previous post from July 2024, we informed our clients about the FTC’s impending ban on non-compete agreements, which was scheduled to take effect on September 4, 2024. Since then, a significant legal development has halted the rule from going into effect.

On August 20, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled in Ryan, LLC v. FTC that the FTC lacked the statutory authority to implement this nationwide ban. This ruling has stopped the FTC from enforcing the non-compete rule, which would have required employers to invalidate most existing agreements and notify workers accordingly. The FTC now has until October 19, 2024, to appeal this decision, and it is currently considering its options.

At BridgehouseLaw https://bridgehouse.law, we are closely monitoring this evolving situation. While the future of the FTC’s rule remains uncertain, businesses need to stay aware of ongoing legal proceedings and state-specific non-compete regulations. Should the FTC choose to appeal or other rulings emerge, we will provide further updates to ensure that our clients remain compliant and informed.

Stay tuned for more updates as we continue to track this case. If you have any questions about how this ruling may potentially impact your current agreements or would like to assess your existing contracts under state laws, please reach out to our team. We are here to assist you every step of the way.

A Journey to Citizenship: Henriette Morton’s Story

Dulles International Airport, July 29, 1999—the heat was relentless. Henriette Morton had just touched down for what was supposed to be a one-year internship at a hotel in Raleigh, NC. Her plan was simple: complete the internship, return to Germany, and start the next chapter of her life. But as life often does, it took her on an unexpected adventure.

After a whirlwind romance, Henriette found herself in Las Vegas, NV, where she married. Soon after, the couple welcomed their first child, and Henriette began the process of applying for her Green Card. Things were moving along until the unimaginable happened—9/11 shook the world, and suddenly, her immigration file vanished in the bureaucracy of the INS (now USCIS). At that time, everything was still paper-based, and it felt like her future in the U.S. hung in the balance.

After months of frustration and dead ends, her husband reached out to their congressman. Six months later, Henriette’s Green Card was finally in hand. Life resumed. She worked, traveled, and even welcomed another addition to their family. Her career eventually led her to BridgehouseLaw, where she worked closely with Attorney Reinhard von Hennigs.

One day, Reinhard asked: "Do you ever plan on becoming a U.S. citizen?"

Henriette hadn’t seriously considered it. As a German national, she knew obtaining a Beibehaltung (dual citizenship retention) permit would be difficult. The rules were strict, and she didn’t feel she had a strong case for it—after all, she hadn't faced significant discrimination or compelling reasons to apply. Plus, she had been working on similar cases for clients, so the process seemed daunting. However, Reinhard suggested waiting until she had held her Green Card for 20 years, at which point she could apply based on "gesteigertes Einbürgerungsbedürfnis" (increased need for naturalization).

Then, a change in German law opened a new path for her. With renewed optimism, Henriette decided to pursue U.S. citizenship.

Attorney Crystal McBride dove into research, finding the newly launched online submission process for naturalization (N-400). She guided Henriette through the preparation, ensuring everything was in order. The process moved faster than Henriette had anticipated. Before she knew it, she received her receipt notice, began studying for the citizenship exam, and soon passed with flying colors.

The moment she had been working toward for years arrived—the Oath Ceremony. On September 20, 2024, in Charlotte, North Carolina, Henriette proudly became a U.S. citizen. It was a surreal moment of pride, especially knowing that her American-born children now shared the same citizenship as their mother.

Her journey, though long and filled with challenges, is a testament to perseverance, patience, and the unwavering belief in building a future in a country that she now calls home.

Dathan D'Agostino, BridgehouseLaw LLP

NIL Licensing for College Athletes Brings a Revival in the Video Game Industry

In what has been deemed the “most anticipated sports video game in American history”, EA Sports College Football 25 made history when it premiered on July 19^th, 2024. Although EA Sports has been making college-sport-related video games since the 1990s, this new edition has more than just a roster update for fans’ favorite teams. For the first time, the college athletes depicted in the video game are being compensated for the use of their image – their name, image, and likeliness (NIL). This is due to new legislation that allows for college athletes to be compensated for the use of their NIL, as opposed to previous laws only allowing for professional athletes to be able to profit from their NIL.

While college athletes could not previously license out the use of their NIL, this did not stop video game companies, including EA Sports, from creating college-based football videogames with attempts at anonymity – instead of including athletes’ names in the game, players selected an athlete avatar to play based on a position on the field, and the number of the player (for example, Quarterback #10). However, college athletes quickly caught on to the fact that while these avatars were technically nameless, they shared specific qualities with the athletes themselves, including hair color, height, weight, jersey number, school of attendance, and athletic skill attributes) that made it clear that the video game companies had used everything but the athletes’ names. A UCLA college athlete led a class action lawsuit against the NCAA for profiting off of the image of athletes without compensation and won in 2014. Since then, there has been a complete stop to the use of athletes’ names in video games, disappointing gamers who appreciate the realism of playing as their favorite college athletes within a virtual college stadium.

That is until the Supreme Court announced in a unanimous decision that the NCAA refusing to allow college athletes to license their NIL violated antitrust law. With this new ruling, college athletes can profit off of their image after giving consent for that image to be used, which could prove to be incredibly lucrative. The highest-valued college athletes have NIL valuations upwards of $4.5 million, which presents unforeseen opportunities for revenue for college athletes and universities alike. However, it’s notable that while these valuations are high, EA Sports paid each athlete only $600 for the use of their NIL, in addition to a free copy of the video game (valued at $70).

While the new ruling certainly opens the door for new opportunities for college athletes to profit and for fans to engage in more realistic videogames, the uncertainties in the NIL negotiation process in determining “how much an athlete’s image is worth” are likely to remain as other video game companies begin to create their variations of interactive games. These games are likely to become more prevalent given the success of NCAA 25, bringing in over $200 million in revenue before the game was even officially released. However, with college athletes now legally able to take control of their own NIL, it seems that for now, the situation is a triple win; more opportunity for companies to create video games without the threat of legal action, more realistic gameplay for the consumers, and payment to the college athletes for the use of their NIL.

 

Mary-Kathryn Appanaitis, Law Clerk, BridgehouseLaw LLP, Charlotte, NC

image: EA 

Federal Trade Commission Act has issued a final rule called the “Non-Compete Clause Rule”

The US Federal Trade Commission under authority granted to it under the Federal Trade Commission Act has issued a final rule called the “Non-Compete Clause Rule” effective Wednesday, September 4, 2024.

In short, this rule prohibits covered employers from entering into, enforcing, or attempting to enforce POST-EMPLOYMENT non-compete agreements with workers, with a very limited exception for certain senior executives.

 

Who is considered a worker?

 

           Workers are employees, independent contractors, interns, externs, and volunteers.

 

Who is considered a senior executive under the rule?

 

A senior executive is a person who (1) is in a policy-making position with final policy-making authority (President, CEO, Officer of the Company, or equivalent position) AND (2) earns at least USD 151,164.00 annually. Current non-competes remain in effect and can be enforced for persons qualifying as senior executives.

 

Who is a covered employer?

 

           All employers within the FTC’s jurisdiction except certain banks, savings and loan associations, federal credit unions, Common Carriers, Air Carriers, certain persons covered under the Packards and Stockyards Act, and Non-profit organizations.

 

What are your responsibilities as a covered employer?

 

           1. Employers subject to this rule must notify all workers (current and former employees with existing non-competes) who are parties to non-compete agreements that non-compete agreements are prohibited as of September 4, 2024, and that any existing non-compete agreement cannot and will not be enforced. This notification must be in writing, either via paper, mail, email, or text. The FTC has provided guidance and language that meets the minimum verbiage requirements for the notification.

 

           2. The mandatory required notification must be sent before Wednesday, September 4, 2024.

 

What else do Employers need to know?

 

           The new rule does not invalidate any confidentiality, non-solicit, non-disparagement, or other restrictive clauses in current employment agreements.

 

If you have questions regarding your company’s current agreements, your current agreement, or the written notification requirement, please get in touch with BridgehouseLaw LLP at (980)219-5200. One of our attorneys will be happy to assist you.

Crystal McBridem, Attorney, BridgehouseLaw LLP, Charlotte

image: istock