<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Snow Creek Technology Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://snowcreektechlaw.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com</link>
	<description>Seattle/Leavenworth Washington</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 21:38:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>LinkedIn&#8217;s Open Source Risk Factor</title>
		<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2011/01/28/linkedins-open-source-risk-factor/</link>
		<comments>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2011/01/28/linkedins-open-source-risk-factor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 21:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy_Freeland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[GPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[licensing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open source]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snowcreektechlaw.com/?p=121</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chances are that, even if you’re building a proprietary software application, it will include some open source.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2011/01/28/linkedins-open-source-risk-factor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When legalese is not enough</title>
		<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/11/when-legalese-is-not-enough/</link>
		<comments>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/11/when-legalese-is-not-enough/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy_Freeland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[consumer protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deceptive practices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web businesses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snowcreektechlaw.com/?p=110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington State Attorney General’s office has entered into a consent decree with Intelius to settle allegations of deceptive marketing tactics relating to post transaction marketing. The consent decree involves a $1.3 million payment by Intelius, and Intelius’ submitting to a series of permanent injunctions restricting its advertising practices. “Intelius chose cash over candor” Attorney [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/11/when-legalese-is-not-enough/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Cassandra Complex</title>
		<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/04/the-cassandra-complex/</link>
		<comments>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/04/the-cassandra-complex/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy_Freeland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[lawyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk management]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snowcreektechlaw.com/?p=92</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First off – apologies. This isn’t the opening chapter to a Robert Ludlum novel, nor a tribute to the (apparently) legendary Euro-goth band. One of my close friends runs a mountain guiding business. He recently spent a week’s well-earned vacation in Mexico, where he took surfing lessons. One of his conclusions was that it was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/04/the-cassandra-complex/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Software licensing fundamentals</title>
		<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/02/software-licensing-fundamentals/</link>
		<comments>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/02/software-licensing-fundamentals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 15:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy_Freeland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[licensing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snowcreektechlaw.com/?p=85</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We do a lot of software licensing transactions. This article addresses two fundamental areas of software licensing legal practice that I think often get missed, but which can be critical to getting the deal right. A.     Revenue recognition. How revenue is recognized on a software licensing transaction is plainly an accounting issue (as [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2010/08/02/software-licensing-fundamentals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Early Stage Tech Companies – When Should You Involve a Lawyer?</title>
		<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/09/03/early-stage-tech-companies-%e2%80%93-when-should-you-involve-a-lawyer/</link>
		<comments>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/09/03/early-stage-tech-companies-%e2%80%93-when-should-you-involve-a-lawyer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 02:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy_Freeland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[lawyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[start-up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/09/03/early-stage-tech-companies-%e2%80%93-when-should-you-involve-a-lawyer/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Early stage tech companies know that they need to hire lawyers. This post provides some help in figuring out when to spend the company’s hard earned cash on legal advice, and when it might be OK to do without. As with many things legal, there are no clear boundaries, but these are the guidelines I [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/09/03/early-stage-tech-companies-%e2%80%93-when-should-you-involve-a-lawyer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Out with the billable hour?</title>
		<link>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/07/15/out-with-the-billable-hour/</link>
		<comments>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/07/15/out-with-the-billable-hour/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 02:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy_Freeland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[lawyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal fees]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/07/15/out-with-the-billable-hour/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve welcomed the shift that, based on the media at least, seems to be providing clients with more choice than the billable hour model. As everyone recognizes, it’s a model that ‘can’ be fraught with conflict. However, I think we’re at some risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I’ve always been struck [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://snowcreektechlaw.com/2009/07/15/out-with-the-billable-hour/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

