Datasets:

vblagoje

/

Law-StackExchange-Flat

like 0

Copyright of passport pictures

Let's say Person1 takes camera pictures of the following items and releases them as public domain: The external cover of her own USA passport The external cover of the USA passport of a willing Person2 The external cover of the UK passport of a willing Person3 Is it legal? Or is it somehow forbidden to release pictures of these three items (or some of them)?

Works created by the U.S. federal government, such as the passport cover design, are ineligible for copyright within the United States . If the passport design was created by the U.S. federal government (and not a third party who later transferred ownership to the government), then the passport design is in the U.S. public domain and may be photographed, copied, and modified freely. (Obviously, using the design to create a forged passport is illegal, but would not be a copyright offense.) However, the U.S. federal government can assert copyright on their works in nations other than the United States: Copyright laws differ internationally. While a U.S. government work is not protectable under U.S. copyright laws, the work may be protected under the copyright laws of other jurisdictions when used in these jurisdictions. The U.S. government may assert copyright outside of the United States for U.S. government works. Strictly speaking, outside of the U.S., your use would need to satisfy your nation's fair use laws (if any exist) or you would need to seek permission from the U.S. government. In practice, I am not sure how litigious the U.S. federal government is about pursuing derivative works of the passport design outside the United States, and I couldn't find any policy documents about it. In contrast, the U.K. government has issued a document detailing the Crown copyright on their passport design : The UK Passport (the Passport) is subject to Crown copyright protection under section 163 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This means that it may not lawfully be reproduced without the prior permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office... In particular, the documents says about the cover: The image of the cover of the Passport including the Royal Arms, or the details pages of the Passport may not be used: as the main focus of the cover of a work, for example, the dust jacket or cover of a publication in advertising in facsimile form for use as a passport holder or cover Wikipedia's image of the U.K. passport cover is labeled as a non-free image that is under Crown copyright. It is reproduced only under the belief that their encyclopedic use of the image satisfies U.S. fair use criteria.

Can leasehold contracts be amended, and is this a common practice in UK?

I have recently asked following question around leasehold contract in property I am in the process of buying. It states that I am not allowed to sublet parts of building I can only sublet it as a whole (can't rent it out room by room). Which ruins my plans as I intended to live in couple of rooms and rent out the other two. I have glanced over the Residential Long Leaseholders A guide to your rights and responsibilities and couldn't find a section about doing changes or renegotiating existing leasehold contracts, only rights of buying lease of from freeholder which would be an option, but can become more hassle than it's worth (I would have to team up with the other leaseholder). Other option would be to try negotiate with existing landlord to amend leasehold contract (in exchange for some additional payment or agreement to invest certain amount of money in property). I couldn't find any resource on how such negotiations are being done, nor examples of such re-negotiations, or things proposed and such. Can leasehold contracts be amended, and is this a common practice? What are regulations around this? Any help or resource to existing cases and common practices would be much appreciated, I would like to prepare well and know my options before I start talking to landlord.

After some further browsing I managed to find a form for contract amendments , so such practice does exist. Found following here Amending a Contract The amendment of a contract must be an agreement between the landlord and the tenant. A contract cannot simply be changed or altered by the landlord alone once both parties have signed and agreed to the existing terms. If the landlord wants to change rules and regulations regarding the space in question, he/she must create a lease amendment and present it to the tenant. The tenant can then choose to sign it and agree to the changes or choose to neglect the changes and remain in the existing contract. If this happens, the landlord must wait until the contract is up to change the terms. Governing Law or Jurisdiction The amending of a lease contract must be done so according to the laws and regulations in place in the jurisdiction in which the property is located. The original lease agreement should mention the name of the governing jurisdiction, so the tenant knows what laws and regulations the landlord follows. The tenant can contact the local district office for more information about the legal requirements needed for the landlord to amend the agreement. Read small print If the landlord states he/she is allowed to amend the leasing contract, he/she may have added a clause in the lease agreement that allows him/her to amend the agreement without your consent. Read the small print of the contract to see if this is so. If the agreement states the landlord is allowed to amend the contract without your approval, and you have signed the contract, the landlord can amend it as desired since you have given your consent by signing. Amendment Agreement If the landlord wants to amend the existing agreement, but has not included a clause or small print about amending the contract, he/she needs to write an amendment agreement as part of the existing contract. The amendment agreement outlines the changes that need to be made to the original contract. It should state that the landlord and tenant agree to the amendment. Both parties need to sign the amendment and date it accordingly. The amended terms should be added to the existing contract.

Assignment and subletting of leasehold in UK

I am planning on buying a worn down property that has 4 big rooms to fix it up, and then rent out 2 out of 4 rooms - room by room. I would live with my family in the other two (at least for the starters and potentially rent everything out and move out somewhere else in couple of years or so). Today I got copy of existing lease agreement. Couple of parts are especially worrying an confusing: PART VIII Assignment and Sub-letting a) The tenant shall not assign charge or sublet or part with possession of any part of the Demised Premises as distinct from the whole b) Upon any sub-letting or assignment of the whole the tenant shall procure that the sub-tenant or assignee enter into a covenant with the landlord and the tenant of the other flat in the terms of part xi hereof to observe and perform the conditions and obligations of the lease including this obligation Within one month after any assignment sub-letting or other devolution of the Tenant's interest under this Lease the Tenant shall produce to the Landlord the stamped original of the Deed of Covenant above referred to and a certified copy of the document giving effect to the assignment sub-letting or devolution and pay the Landlords registration fee of ten pounds thereon plus VAT (or such other fee as shall at such time be reasonable) There's also other part Part V Tenants Convenant Not to use or permit or suffer the Demised Premises or any part thereof to be used for any illegal or immoral purpose or for the purpose of any trade or business and not to apply for planning permission for any change of use of the Demised Premises nor to use or occupy the Demised Premises other than as a private residential flat in the occupation of one family. Does this mean that I am not allowed to sublet, or that I have to pay 10 pounds every time I get new tenant, and inform Landlord about it?

You are allowed to sublet the whole of the premises but not part of it (VIII a); if you do you must create the agreement mentioned, pay to have it stamped by the government and pay £10 + VAT to the landlord. You must only use the premises as a domicile for one family; better make sure you rent those rooms to your cousins.

Arizona form to allow victim to speak to defendent

Upon an accidental argument/fight in which the husband is being told of assault for pretrial and if the wife which is the victim is wanting to talk to the husband (defendant) then the victim should be able to request a form to allow the wife to talk directly or indirectly with husband. How does the wife go about getting the prosecutor to have a signed form which allows consent of talk of see each other. What is this form called?

It won't be the prosecutor that makes the decision. When someone is charged with domestic violence a judge, during arraignment, will make a determination if the defendant will be released or not. If the defendant is released the judge will set the conditions of that release. As part of those release conditions, the judge, generally, will enter a no-contact order preventing the defendant from having any contact with the victim. If the defendant and the victim wish to have contact then a Motion to Modify the Conditions of Release will need to be submitted to the court. I believe the victim has to initiate such a motion. Here is a link for how the City of Tucson describes the process .

doctor fees for lawyer services

I am a physician and almost routinely am inundated with forms from lawyers to fill for my patients so they can get disability. They get paid for these cases but expect me to fill these forms at no cost. Am I legally bound to fill these at no cost to my patients or their lawyers?

If you are an independent professional providing a professional service then, prima facie , you are entitled to negotiate a fee for that service, including choosing to provide it pro bono . There may be limits to this due to the interaction of other contracts that you may have, for example, with insurance companies. It is also possible that there are statutory limits or restrictions. In both cases, I would ask the person who claimed that they existed to show them to you.

US Can public survey or experimental data be used in profit content if cited?

If I'm looking to build an app or write a book and I wish to use statistics, am I allowed to basically use their numbers as long as I cite where it is coming from? If I do make a profit from it, do I owe any royalties to the original scientists/surveyers? Must I ask them for permission? Currently, the poll data in question is from this website but I'd like to know what's within bounds. The data is from various major media outlets like FOX. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html My intuition pulls me towards thinking that I see books reference hundreds of studies all the time and public polls should be open information to everyone, but on the other hand commercial interests may be legally entangling. I'm not experienced at all in law, so I'd like to hear what you think. Thanks

Copyright Prominent at the bottom of the page is: © RealClearPolitics 2015 This is nice because it tells you who you have to approach for a licence. If it wasn't there the material would still be copyright you just wouldn't know who owned the copyright. Questions So: If I'm looking to build an app or write a book and I wish to use statistics, am I allowed to basically use their numbers as long as I cite where it is coming from? No , unless what you do constitutes fair use and I don't think it does. If I do make a profit from it, do I owe any royalties to the original scientists/surveyers? No , but you would owe whatever licence fee you negotiated with the copyright holder, ostensibly RealClearPolitics. Must I ask them for permission? Yes , unless you are OK with running the risk of being sued. Commentary I see books reference hundreds of studies all the time This is because they are generally protected by Academic Fair Use public polls should be open information to everyone The only public poll that I know of is an election and that information is available. What you are looking at is a private poll commissioned by and paid for by RealClearPolitics and it is their intellectual property; why should that "be open information to everyone"? commercial interests may be legally entangling Always

How to find where to serve process on a company with a non-unique name?

Suppose I transacted with a large business (perhaps a chain store or a hospital) that has a publicly-facing name "ABC", in the U.S. state in which I live, and wish to sue it for whatever reason. How do I find out the correct entity named "ABC" out of a list of several potential matches that represents the legal person with which I transacted (absent any paperwork that indicates which)?

It depends on the state. In some states the Secretary of State holds the records for business entities and in others, such as Arizona, it's an organization known as the Arizona Corporation Commission. Regardless of the state's organization that keeps the information, one of the pieces of information you will find when you look at a company's records is the "registered agent", "resident agent" or "statutory agent." The agent, whether a person or a representative corporation, must be located within the state where business is conducted. That agent is who or what gets served with papers for a lawsuit. Here's a good explanation at legalzoom . A personal example that may help: I am an owner in a business that does business in Louisiana and Arizona. Our LLC is registered in Louisiana and is registered as a "foreign corporation" in Arizona. However, we are required to have a registered agent in each state. We pay a company to act as our registered agent in each state and the registered agent has a physical address in each state in which we are registered. If someone wants to sue my company then they can look up the name of my company in either state and will find my registered agent along with the registered agent's physical address. Service to the registered agent counts as service to my company. The agent will forward to me any service which is made to them. EDIT: if you don't known the name of the entity, i.e., the name on the door of the business does not represent the name of the company, then you need to find the "doing business as," or DBA record of the company. I don't know what state you're in but all the states in which I've done business maintain a "Doing Business As" system that can be searched. I guess it's possible that you're in a state that doesn't maintain DBA filings or require them. Typically, you can search either way - search by owner or search by the DBA name. Some states, such as Arizona, record DBA names at the county level. I've seen some states allow searching by address also.

Can anyone record a cover of a song I put on SoundCloud?

My friend asked me if he could record a cover of a song that I put on SoundCloud called Gratitude (License: All Rights Reserved). What legal rights does my friend have? Does he need my permission? What benefits, compensations, acknowledgements, etc. am I legally entitled to? Does my friend have to pay me mechanical royalties if, e.g., he publishes his version of the song to SoundCloud such that anyone can listen to it for free?

In the United States, when you distribute a recording of a nondramatic musical work, the law grants a compulsory mechanical license allowing anyone to cover the song provided certain formalities are observed, and royalties are paid to the original artist. See 17 U.S.C. sec. 115. If your song falls under this section, then all that is required for your friend to cover it is to give you notice and to pay royalties as provided by the applicable statutes and regulations. Of course, you are free to negotiate other terms if you want to. But your song can be covered even if you don't.

Joke Website / Funny Website repercussions

I have made a funny site not really trying to be serious, which may involve hitting your head on a wall. I state this is a joke, and not meant to be taken seriously. But I'm just trying to cover my bases, and make sure I'm not open to a law suit. It's not currently available to the public, but I would like it to be. I am located in California, if that helps. The terms listed are as follows: TERMS & CONDITIONS Please note: This is not medical advice. This is not meant to be taken literally. Any bodily harm that may come of this is at the sole discretion of the "idiot" taking this literally. This is a joke. Also may not relive stress, and instead cause head ache, or severe brain injury. Am I susceptible to claims of damages if someone takes the gag/joke seriously and hurts themselves as a result? What can I do to mitigate this?

Pardon the pun, but you must be joking. There is no possibility that a lawsuit based on someone following obviously self-destructive advice on an obviously humorous website would succeed.

Hastening execution in response to actions by third parties

This year Jordan hastened the execution of terrorists in retaliation to daesh killing Jordanian hostage Moaz al-Kaseasbeh, having threatened to do so. That is, Jordan treated its own prisoners as hostages in some respects. Apart from the application of the death penalty, and potential issues relating to the fairness of trials, are there any theoretical and/or legal human rights, either in Jordan or internationally, that could be violated as a result of this action, since the timing of the executions weren't in response to actions by the prisoners themselves? For example, would it be seen as collective punishment?

No , if, as you say we put aside the human rights questions surrounding the death penalty itself and assuming that the prisoners had been legitimately charged, convicted and had exhausted their appeals process. Once a person has been convicted, sentenced to death and has exhausted their appeals then the timing of the execution passes from the judicial branch to the executive branch of government. This is why governments can implement and remove moratoriums on executions at their discretion. Doubtless there are administrative rules and logistical issues involved in the actual timing of the execution but if these have all been correctly dealt with then they are essentially held at the pleasure of the person in the government charged with the decision. Was it legal? Probably. Was it ethical? ...

Hastening execution in response to actions by third parties

This year Jordan hastened the execution of terrorists in retaliation to daesh killing Jordanian hostage Moaz al-Kaseasbeh, having threatened to do so. That is, Jordan treated its own prisoners as hostages in some respects. Apart from the application of the death penalty, and potential issues relating to the fairness of trials, are there any theoretical and/or legal human rights, either in Jordan or internationally, that could be violated as a result of this action, since the timing of the executions weren't in response to actions by the prisoners themselves? For example, would it be seen as collective punishment?

This example dates back to the 16th century, but is quite famous historically. Mary Queen of Scots was held prisoner for nearly 20 years (after fleeing from Scotland to England), on suspicion of plotting to take the English throne from Queen Elizabeth I. But things "came to a head" in 1588, when a "third party," a young English Catholic, made a written proposal to assassinate Queen Elizabeth I and enthrone Mary. When this proposal was shown to Mary, and she gave her assent (both were intercepted by Elizabeth's spies), it caused the execution not only of the young man, but of Mary herself.

What rights do travellers have against unreasonable customs officers?

I ask or worry not about the standard questions required during customs, such as a traveller's basic personal information, purposes of travel, etc... However, what if a traveller fears for his privacy, and suspects hostility or nosiness from a customs officer? For example, can a traveller exercise his right of silence, without adverse inferences drawn by an impartial court? Or even the customs officer, who may loathe the silent treatment? Afterword: I ask the above for Canada, USA, and UK.

When you refer to customs, that necessarily denotes travel to a foreign county, such that each county will have their own laws, rules, and regulations that govern these issues. It is more than likely that if you refuse to answer the questions of customs officials in ANY country, you will be denied admittance. The same is true if you refuse or balk at being searched (personally or your possessions), and keep in mind that this is without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The best thing to do is to answer the questions honestly and accurately, but also as narrowly as possible to completely answer. Trying to argue with them will only send up red flags and you will be there longer. Remember it is a privilege, not a right, to enter a sovereign nation of which you are not a citizen. For example, in the U.S., customs reserves the right to detain for questioning, search you, your car, your children, your bags, packages, purse/wallet, or any other travel item with full legal authority to do sol they can even examine your electronics (content and hardware). You place your stuff on the exam station and open it. (After the exam is completed, you will be asked to repack and close the baggage.) If you are unhappy with the way you are being treated, you do have the right to ask to speak to a CBP supervisor, but I cannot see anything good coming of it, unless they were super rude without provocation or broke something of value. The authority to delay and speak with travelers derives from the United States Code (section citations below) enables CBP to prevent the entry of persons who are inadmissible under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and to prevent the smuggling of merchandise, including narcotics and other contraband items, into the United States. Speaking with travelers and examining merchandise coming into or leaving the United States is just one of the mechanisms used to identify illegal or prohibited items, and to determine whether or not someone is trying to enter the U.S. for unlawful or fraudulent purposes. Unless exempt by diplomatic status, all travelers entering the United States, including U.S. citizens, are subjected to routine Customs examinations. At times, people make the mistake of thinking their civil rights are being violated by being asked questions about their trip, personal background and history, etc. That is not the case. Supreme Court decisions have upheld the doctrine that CBP's search authority is unique and does not violate the fourth amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. U.S. Customs website has a detailed Q&A section. Most modern countries do as well.

Overtime salary in Germany

I have a work agreement and there is a point: The gross monthly salary shall also discharge any extra work or overtime. What does it mean? Does it mean that I get extra pay for overtime or it means that I do not get extra pay?

I have the same line in a contract that was just sent to me. So I did some quick research into this. However, I AM NEW TO THE SYSTEM AND DO NOT KNOW IT WELL!! , so please do not act on this information without seeking further advice from the relevant professionals. From what I can gather, the "Arbeitszeitgesetz (ArbZG)" is the law that governs working hours in Germany. Here is a link: http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bundesrecht/arbzg/gesamt.pdf I used Google Translate to translate this information and found that in §3 it states that "The default daily working time must not exceed eight hours. It can only be extended up to ten hours if within six calendar months or 24 weeks an average of eight hours working day is not exceeded." This would lead me to believe that even if overtime is not paid as extra on top of your salary, they must give you the time off at another time to keep the average working day to 8 hours. **However, as the working week is Monday - Sat, the average working hours per week may be calculated as 48 hours per week, and not 40! Once again, I am not fully sure of my information, so use at your own risk!!

Overtime salary in Germany

I have a work agreement and there is a point: The gross monthly salary shall also discharge any extra work or overtime. What does it mean? Does it mean that I get extra pay for overtime or it means that I do not get extra pay?

It means that your salary includes any overtime I.e. You do not get paid extra. Whether this is legal in Germany, I don't know.

How to prove the genuinity/nongenuinity of a signature?

I'm not a law student, but I'm very interested in the topic and learning in general. I got curious about contracts and signatures recently, so I wondered if there have been cases where contracts have been voided because of invalid signatures. What constitutes a person's official signature, and what are the criteria (if any) for the validation of one's signature?

Contracts A contract is not a piece of paper ; it is an agreement intended to be legally binding between 2 or more people and it may be verbal or written or a combination of both. That said, where a person has signed a document knowing that it contains contractual terms, in the absence of fraud that person is bound by the terms: it is immaterial whether the person signing reads the document or not. So there are two reasons why a signed contract would not be binding: the person did not know it contained contractual terms fraud. It is in the second case that the validity of the signature would matter. Fraud would have to be proved: it would not be sufficient to say "I did not sign that"; the person would need to demonstrate that a fraud has been perpetrated. Signatures Particularly today, with the ability to scan a signature it is trivially easy to affix anyone's signature to anything. However, a party to a contract is entitled to rely prima facie on the validity of the signature. A person would have to provide evidence that it was not their signature or had been affixed without their knowledge or consent. A court would look at the entire circumstances surrounding such a claim; if a person had, up until the dispute, acted as though they had signed the document then a court would probably not countenance an argument that they hadn't. It is always possible to construct contrived circumstances where this or that could happen but, in reality, they are extremely rare. Unless you are dealing with a con-artist, you can trust the signature; if you are dealing with a con-artist, you have bigger problems. See, the President has endorsed this answer:

Can a person bring a translator to the driving test in Arkansas?

My dad wants to get a drivers licence . He passed the written test. But his English listening is not perfect. We are from India btw. So, may I legally be at the back seat of the car just in case he does not understand something ? I know one can do this in Illinois. PLEASE do not tell me to call to the dmv and ask them. I am looking for a legal document online that would either allow it or disallow it (WRITTEN REFERENCE ONLY)

The answer is yes : any dmv must provide a translator, or at least let a person bring a translator . Here is a reference to a legal source Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires agencies receiving federal funding to provide individuals with limited English proficiency meaningful access to agency programs and services. Official link is here

Is contract valid if only one side signed it?

The company sent me the contract, I signed it and returned back to them, so now they should sign and send me the copy. In Germany, what if they decide to not sign and withdraw the process. What one can do in this situation, is there any law?

This may or may not help you, I am aware that common law and Germanic law have very different origins, history and consequence; but, since I know nothing about German law I will give you the common law answer. An essential part of a common law contract is the offer and acceptance. One party makes an offer and the other party accepts it. Acceptance can be done by word (verbal or in writing) or action - if the parties act as though there was a contract then there is a contract. Example 1: I walk into a shop and say "May I have a Mars bar please?" The shopkeeper hands me the Mars bar and makes the offer "$2.50, please." I hand over $2.50 accepting the offer . The contract is now binding and barring some fault with the Mars bar, complete. Example 2: I walk into a shop and pick up a Mars bar from a bin labelled $2.50 (technically this is an offer to treat by the shop - they are indicating that they will consider offers of around $2.50) I take it to the counter and had over $2.50, making the offer They accept the offer by taking my money No words were spoken but we end up at the same point as Example 1. By sending you their terms they have made an offer to you; by signing and returning it you have accepted their offer: you are now parties to a binding contract . There is no requirement for them to sign it or send it back. However, if you amended their terms then you have not accepted them , you have made a counter-offer. They can accept them by word (sending you a signed contract back) or deed (doing what the contract says they should). Offers can be withdrawn until they are accepted; after that there is a legally binding contract.

How to effectively search laws?

A common answer to problems and situations includes researching your state/country's law to check what are the consequences of a particular action. As a layman, it is difficult to do this research effectively, since it's hard to find a comprehensive resource/channel of this information, and Legislative Language is complex and very structured. Is there a method I can consistently apply for most political regions (Country or State) in order to do this research, and efficiently find what I'm looking for?

This really depends on what you're looking for . For example, if you want the details of a specific regulation or the statutory definition of some term, the internet is pretty good! If you can't follow legal language, or if you want to know whether something is legal , you probably have to hire a lawyer. In general you can't effectively determine the legality or legal consequences of an action: As noted in this answer , even the enumeration of laws is an unsolved problem. But you can look for "safe harbors" ... if you know in which statutes or case law you are likely to find them. This is one reason we can't just kill all the lawyers ;)

Is it a typo in an official document?

I am looking at a document about a criminal case, that is published here . Knowing from the document it was created in 1992, I suppose the line saying 'Age at time of offense' is wrong saying 21, because DOB is 1960 and 'Date of offence' is 1991. I wouldn't care much if it were not a local authority document, I'd just boldly assume it was a typo. But as it's issued by Texas Department of Criminal Justice, I am concerned about my understanding of English terms, though they seem to be quite obvious to be understood correctly. Is a mistake like that likely to happen in serious cases like death penalty sentencing processes?

That looks like a report summary (addendum to a police report) or a corrections intake sheet; mistakes are common. I would be more shocked, but not completely surprised, it it were part of a published opinion. Clearly, they meant to say 31...you did not misinterpret it.

Dissenting justices' views on second question in Obergefell

Obergefell v. Hodges was a recent case in which the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage was a constitutional right. The Court considered two questions: Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state? The Court ruled 5-4 that the answer to both question is yes (a yes answer to the first question essentially makes the second question moot). Each of the four dissenting justices (Alito, Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas) wrote an opinion. Is there any indication (for example, from their opinions) of how the dissenting justices would have voted on the second question?

From Roberts' dissenting opinion : Although the policy arguments for extending marriage to same-sex couples may be compelling, the legal arguments for requiring such an extension are not. The fundamental right to marry does not include a right to make a State change its definition of marriage. And a State’s decision to maintain the meaning of marriage that has persisted in every culture throughout human history can hardly be called irrational. In short, our Constitution does not enact any one theory of marriage. The people of a State are free to expand marriage to include same-sex couples, or to retain the historic definition. (The Due Process Clause is not a guarantee of every right that should inhere in an ideal system.) In my opinion, this quote speaks as much to the second question as the first. Assume (hypothetically) for a moment that question one was not at issue. If a state defined marriage as only between opposite sexes, and the right to make a state change its definition of marriage is not in the Supreme Court's purview (in our hypo), then the state is as free to reject the validity of marriages abhorrent to its laws, performed elsewhere, as it is to deny the right to marry under its theory of marriage.

How does Aaron Swartz's mass download from JSTOR constitute hacking?

I might be a bit late on this but I just got to know the story of Aaron Swartz, a phenomenal guy to say the least. The internet is filled with news posts, blogs, and even documentaries stating that "he hacked JSTOR" and downloaded gigabytes of academic journal content from the service. Can someone explain to me how what he did constitutes hacking? What I understood is that he mass downloaded academic journals to which he had authorized access to through his university account. The only thing I saw that was off the books is that he kept changing his IP address when it was blocked. If this is hacking (the masking of one's IP address) then doesn't that make using any VPN hacking? Constantly changing an IP address is something a pesky bot would do and doesn't seem to me a crime warranting 35 years of jail time even under the CFAA. I am fully aware of the controversy surrounding his case but that's not what this post is about. I just want to know if what he did constitutes hacking whether under the American CFAA or the definition of the term in computer science or both.

On the face of the CFAA : How does Aaron Swartz's mass download from JSTOR constitute hacking? He exceeded his authorised access on a protected computer. If this is hacking (the masking of one's IP address) then doesn't that make using VPN hacking? Hacking is not a term used in CFAA. In Aaron's case changing the IP address was a necessity for him to exceed his authorised access; if he stopped when blocked then the unauthorised access would have stopped. If you are authorised to use a VPN for access then you have not exceeded your authorisation, have you?

Is it illegal (under US law) to "manually" mass download from JSTOR?

Say I wish to determine the frequency of the use of the word "apple" in academic articles. And so I want to get as many academic articles as possible for analysis. I have access (through my university) to JSTOR. Using my personal computer and my internet access from home, I "manually" (i.e. without any script or bot or tricks) download as many articles as I can everyday. Let's say I can download 1,000 a day. I do this for a few years until I have 1 million articles from JSTOR. This might violate JSTOR's T&C, but would I have done anything illegal under US law?

Probably, yes. By violating your T&C you have "exceeded your authorised access on a protected computer" which is a crime under the CFAA .

What are the Powers of the office of the United States Vice President?

The Constitution lists the powers of the Vice President as President of the Senate and provides him or her a tie-breaking vote. Also the Vice President is granted powers under the 25th amendment to declare the President with the consent of the majority of the Cabinet as incapacitated. However, the Vice Presidency is typically viewed as a position of little power. Over time, various laws and executive orders have added to this position. For example executive order 13526 permits the Vice-President to classify documents. Are there other little-known powers of the Vice-Presidency?

Answer Additional (extra-constitutional) powers of the Vice President (V-POTUS) are whatever the President (POTUS) says they are — subject to the limitations of the authority of POTUS. You are correct in that the constitution enumerates specific powers and authority to V-POTUS. As you have outlined. However, the additional powers you ask about are at the discretion of POTUS. As Chief Executive, POTUS can delegate powers and authority (within the executive branch) according to his sole discretion — except for where the constitution requires senate approval. As in the case of cabinet appointees. Each president has a unique management style and the variable nature of the skill sets of the executives around him require Presidents to have some flexibility in the extra-constitutional duties they delegate to V-POTUS.

What are the Powers of the office of the United States Vice President?

The Constitution lists the powers of the Vice President as President of the Senate and provides him or her a tie-breaking vote. Also the Vice President is granted powers under the 25th amendment to declare the President with the consent of the majority of the Cabinet as incapacitated. However, the Vice Presidency is typically viewed as a position of little power. Over time, various laws and executive orders have added to this position. For example executive order 13526 permits the Vice-President to classify documents. Are there other little-known powers of the Vice-Presidency?

The VP rarely exercises his powers as President of the Senate, because a President pro tempore who is the constitutionally recognized officer of the Senate presides over the chamber and is elected by the Senate (and who is customarily the senator of the majority party with the longest record of continuous service). In recent history a shift has occurred whereby presidents have relied heavily on their VP as their chief advisor (Cheaney/Bush and Gore/Clinton) with great powers flowing to them as a result. This trend began with Truman but culminated in recent history. Modern examples being Gore, as major proponent of IT leading to economic growth: as VP he oversaw the creation of a new tax on telecommunications companies that funded a federal program to install Internet connections in public classrooms, and the passage of v-chip technology that allows parents to block programming on their televisions. He is probably best known for spearheading the environmental revolution with his efforts for major environmental reforms including extending the ban on off-shore drilling. Cheney is most certainly known as the most powerful VP in history, who under George W. Bush from 2000 to 2008, expanded the office's power even further. In some cases, he actually directed the president -- or at least led him in a favored direction. In 2001, Cheney presented a draft of an executive order that denied a trial or court martial to terror suspects, which the president signed within an hour [source: Telegraph]. While in office, Vice President Cheney created a special top secret classification for his files, Top Secret/SCI (sensitive compartmentalized information), now the highest classification of sensitive material [source: Washington Post via link below]. Cheney also argued vehemently for an expanded restoration of presidential powers, reasoning that they'd been limited by Congress in response to abuses by the Nixon administration (in which Cheney began his political career as an aide) and should be expanded in the face of the war on terror. Tons of great information on the expanded powers of VPs are detailed in this article: http://www.anamericanvision.com/info/office_of_the_u_s_vice_president.php And The 10 Most Important Vice Presidents of the US is interesting as it focuses exclusively on which vice-presidents were most influential in regards to the evolution of the office and not best/worst type analysis.

How often are requests for search warrants declined?

Before law enforcement can search a property, they need to obtain a search warrant (with some exceptions). That is, they request the warrant from a judge/magistrate/court, that then decides whether to grant the warrant or not. It is clear that this system is intended to prevent arbitrary searches, as the judge might simply decline a warrant request if there is no reasonable justification behind it. How often does this actually happen? I've never heard of a warrant request being declined by a judge, but surely there must be statistics about it.

Disclaimer: there are whole sections of criminal law courses that deal with this issue and the various laws and precedents that have shaped american jurisprudence relating to right of privacy, expectation of privacy, and search and seizure. So, this is more of a primer than a comprehensive answer. That being said, the Fourth Amendment, which protects the people from unreasonable search and seizure by the government, dictates that there must be probable cause for a search warrant to issue. However, in addition to the restrictions that are imposed by the Fourth Amendment, several states’ constitutions, as well as a variety of state and federal statutes, rules of procedure, and law court rulings interpret these edicts further, limiting the process for obtaining a search warrant (a state can add additional safeguards, or impose more stringent requirements, but not less than the 4th amendment demands). On the federal level alone, the laws on search and seizure are also limited in scope by sections appearing in Title 18, Part II, Chapter 205 – Searches and Seizures. 18 U.S.C. § 3101-18. Federal warrants are further governed by Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Only Judges and magistrates may issue search warrants. To obtain a warrant, law enforcement officers must show that there is probable cause (i.e. grounds) that search is legally justified. Officers must support this showing with sworn statements (affidavits) under oath, and must describe in particularity the place they will search and the items they will seize. Judges must consider the totality of the circumstances when deciding whether or not to issue the warrant. When issuing a search warrant, the judge may restrict how and when the police conduct the search. Police officers (a broad term I'm using for ease of discussion to include all manner of state and federal investigators operating under color of law) seeking a warrant do not need to show that the people being searched (or those whose property is being searched) actually, or even probably, committed the crime(s) in question. Rather, officers merely need to show probable cause exists to show that the evidence sought-after is likely there and upon discovery may implicate some person or persons in criminal activity (that has been committed). A landmark case that resulted in some reforms is Zurcher v. Stanford Daily , 436 U.S. 547 (1978), in which the Supreme Court opined that a search conducted by the police at a student newspaper, where the newspaper was not implicated or connected to any criminal activity, was a legal search under the Fourth Amendment, because the police suspected it had photographic evidence of the identities of demonstrators who assaulted police officers. Afterward, however, some jurisdictions responded by passing laws restricting or forbidding these kinds of searches - so again, what stands as acceptable procedure is not static. While you may not often hear of requests for warrants being denied, it does happen if there is insufficient PC pled in the affidavit; General unawareness is not surprising as it is not something often made public, although there are instances. Most officers know when they have enough for a warrant and know how to adequately swear out an affidavit so that PC is present enough for the judge to sign the warrant in good faith. However, some Judges are more stringent and demanding than others with regard to how the PC was obtained,the scope of the warrant under those facts, etc. Certainly, not every application is granted. Cornell has a great primer of this issue and you can find article when application for a warrant was denied...especially in higher profile investigations. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/search_warrant

Using Paintings for Commercial Purposes

I am in the process of developing an IOS application that displays paintings as part of it, ranging from the Mona Lisa to Picasso to Bob Ross's landscapes (there are many others in between). This app will cost money. I was wondering if I would be breaching U.S. copyright/intellectual property laws by doing this. I will be editing the works a bit as a core part of the application (minor stuff like adding a mustache on the Mona Lisa or a door in the middle of a Mondrian). Would editing the works like this be illegal? At the top of the view, for example, it will say the name of the artist and the name of the painting, along with something like "All rights reserved". Would this be necessary or even make a difference? This Stack Exchange question said that if at least 70 years have passed since the death of the artist, then it is no longer protected (or in my case and that of many others––limited) by copyright. If this is in fact true, would I be able to use the paintings for my purposes? I will make it clear that I am not the artist and that I take no credit for the painting. Thanks a lot in advance for any responses! All are greatly appreciated!

Background A painting is either protected by copyright or it isn't; if it isn't it is in the public domain and anyone can do anything they want with it. If they make sufficient changes, the derivative work will have copyright on its own account. Leonardo da Vinci's paintings are in the public domain. This is not because of the time since his death in 1519; it is because they were created before there was any copyright law. Bob Ross' paintings are probably not in the public domain, however, this would need to be determined on a case by case basis using the applicable law at the time and in the place where each was published. Copyright laws change and the changes may or may not affect pre-existing works. However, in both cases, photographs of the paintings will have their own copyright. These may or may not be in the public domain on a case by case basis. I am explicitly not considering a "fair use" defence because based on your description you probably can't use one Questions I will be editing the works a bit as a core part of the application (minor stuff like adding a mustache on the Mona Lisa or a door in the middle of a Mondrian). Would editing the works like this be illegal? If you are planning an adding a moustache to the actual Mona Lisa that hangs in the Louvre; that would be illegal on so many levels! Expect to die inside a French prison if the gendarmes don't "accidently" shoot you during the arrest. If you are editing a photograph then providing you either have a) a photograph that is in the public domain or b) a photograph that you own or are licenced to use in that way; go for your life. I will also be clear because "illegal" is an ambiguous word: copyright violation is not a crime that would be prosecuted by the state; it is a civil infraction of the copyright owner's property rights that they can take action on. Would this be necessary or even make a difference? If it is in the public domain then its not necessary and would not make a difference. If it is subject to a licence then its necessary if the licence says it is. Leaving it out if it is required would breach the licence; putting it in if it wasn't would not make a difference. If this is in fact true ...? It isn't or isn't precisely. The expiration of copyright on a given work depends on where it was published and the laws of that country at the time it was published. Changes to the law can do strange things to the life of copyright. For example, see here for US origin works. In addition, some works are in the public domain from the instant of their creation; in the US works created by US government employees are public domain as a matter of law, however, in Australia by contrast, government produced works have copyright owned by the Australian Government and follow the same rules as for privately produced works. ... would I be able to use the paintings for my purposes? See above. I will make it clear that I am not the artist and that I take no credit for the painting. Good idea, irrespective of copyright status claiming works are yours when they are not is the tort of "passing off" - a common law doctrine with a much longer history than copyright.

Are the Q&A posted on Stack Exchange websites valuable consideration?

In order to form a legally binding contract it is necessary that both parties provide valuable consideration. Is the provision by a user on this (or other Stack Exchange sites) of a question, answer or comment "valuable consideration" sufficient to form a contract?

Yes. There's no requirement that the consideration be objectively valuable, as there's no real standard for value; as long as there is some consideration, it can be offered for a contract. The peppercorn rule states that nominal consideration is sufficient to constitute consideration for the purposes of establishing a contract. Even if later, we decide that the comments or posts are no longer desired, it does not cease to be good consideration.

Is the description of number of rooms prescriptive or descriptive in Massachusetts condo docs?

We live in a three-unit condo, with three trustees (one per unit) who act by majority vote. We're interested in adding a second bathroom to ours — by converting an existing small room rather than building or taking common area. Even though we're not changing the footprint, this is an improvement which affects the common areas (because of the plumbing) and therefore needs trustee approval. We have that, with a 2-1 vote. But, the people voting no are saying that since there is a page in the condo docs which describes the number of rooms and notes on a chart "1B", where B is bathroom, that the project requires an amendment to this part of the Master Deed to change this and cannot go forward without. Is this true? Is this chart a prescription , or is it intended to describe the condo at formation and should be changed to follow reality but does not block it? Or, something else?

So, likely descriptive but may be either depending on how the deed is drafted, and depending on whether it's in an exhibit that is incorporated by reference into the deed or not. However, what likely governs is not the description/prescription in any event; it is whether your deed allows for an easement and the board has approved it. Most master deeds for condominiums have what is called an "Easement of Encroachment" in the body of deed (usually shortly after the name, description of land, description of building, description of unit(s)), so that each unit has the benefit of an easement of encroachment in the event that said unit (meaning any unit) encroaches upon any portion of the common elements of the structure or another unit (encroachment on another unit is only for things like building settling that causes the building lines to move or change slightly – you can't bump out your closet a foot into your neighbor's room). This easement goes both ways, or vice versa, such that common elements may encroach upon the unit for a variety of different reasons like building maintenance and building settling; i.e., the whole has the same rights. The part that is really relevant in your case, however, and is very typical language, is the part that typically states something like: each unit has and is subject to an easement for the benefit of any other unit, to use and access such elements to encompass wires, ducts, pipes, conduits, cables or any other common elements located in, on, or within the right of any unit such that if improvements to a unit that are within your right under the restrictive covenants (the vote would decide that in your case) then those common elements may be changed to the extent that they do not materially and adversely affect another unit . This does not mean that another unit does not like it. It means that it would materially change their unit in some way, like the shape of it, the water available to them, etc. You should check the master deed for this. Otherwise, the covenants control and you still should have the right to do this. You may potentially just need to amend the description of your unit. Even if an amendment needs to get filed with the registry of deeds, that is not a big deal. I hope this helps.

Why is pachinko exempt from Japan's gambling laws?

Wikipedia states that [Pachinko] is officially not considered gambling because Japanese laws regard pachinko as an exception to the criminal code on gambling for historical, monetary, and cultural reasons. My questions are these: Is there an official, legal exception for pachinko written in the Japanese criminal code? And if there is not, is it simply that Japanese law enforcement agencies simply choose to turn a blind eye to pachinko? Or are there good legal arguments for why pachinko is different from other forms of gambling? Supposedly one way pachinko gets around the law is that you exchange your tokens for cash at a booth that is nominally separate from the parlour. But I believe that if you tried to start a, say, mahjong parlour using this same trick, the Japanese authorities would crack down on you. So clearly this loophole is not the only thing that keeps pachinko alive in Japan.

I don't speak Japanese, but using Japan's "unofficially" translated Penal Code document, they do not specifically define Pachinko as being allowed or disallowed. And as you noted with Pachinko, as long as cash is not exchanged directly , that is "enough to circumvent the gambling laws", a practice that "is both understood and fully ignored by all authories everywhere." But, as in many places around the world, Government Profiteering and Criminal Corruption play into the "historical, monetary, and cultural reasons" you mentioned. So unless you have those ties, and I think you would know, I don't think you will be opening your own Mahjong parlour any time soon. As this Reuters article mentions, Pachinko's status as an amusement activity and "past links to organized crime" and a "web of special interests involved, not least the national police agency which oversees it" have allowed these private companies to remain cemented into the culture because it is too profitable for those in power to allow it to be removed. But that may change as Las Vegas-style casinos are looking to expand gaming regulations. The answer ultimately breaks down to the same reasons lotteries are allowed in most states in the United States. As long as the government is profiting, it is going to be ignored. This article is slightly dated, but is extremely comprehensive in it's examination of gambling in Japan and breaks down the staggering figures as of 2002, and you can imagine they haven't gone down: Pachinko, as you mentioned, is exempt from Japanese gambling laws and is bigger than the Japanese auto industry. Each year, 30 million Japanese spend $200 billion, and lose around $40 billion of it. And though, as the article states, "Japanese criminal law declares unambiguously that gambling is illegal", when you dig deeper: Japan’s government-run horseracing industry is three times bigger than any other horseracing business in the world, with nearly $30 billion wagered every year. Japan has more professional cyclists than any country in the world. Why? Because Japan runs the world’s largest bicycle-racing betting operation. Government-sponsored motorboat races and motorcycle races attract billions in wagers every year. The government operates a soccer lottery. The government also operates a national numbers lottery. ...and on, and on, with total wagers reaching "on the order of $300 billion/year for legal gambling alone", making Japan the biggest gambling market in the world. Pretty unambiguous.

Song Lyric Sites

How do song lyrics sites (such as azlyrics.com) legally operate? It seems that they can't claim fair use because they are making money (ads) and that they are publishing complete song lyrics.

In the first instance, breach of copyright is not a crime; therefore the "state" (any "state") cannot take action against the site. It falls to each copyright holder to protect their copyright. So, the question is: why would they bother? The copyright holder makes money from the song , not the poem that the lyrics comprise. Having the lyrics publicly available probably increases sales of the song. Arguably this breach of copyright is to the copyright holders benefit. What could they do anyway? They could raise a cease and desist letter followed by an injunction; as stated this is probably not in their own interests. They could sue for the profits attributable to each of their songs, but it is quite likely that these would be less than the cost of the lawsuit.

How do laws affect photography of non-humans in public when people may be in the frame?

Given that this is taking place in a public area where one would not have an expectation of privacy, what legal restrictions exist on photography of people where they are not the subject of the photograph? For instance, say that I am taking a photograph of a popular statue, and people happen to be in the frame? Assume this is in Australia; New south Wales, specifically, but I am interested in answers for other states also.

Let's put to bed the myth of privacy that is at the heart of your question: in R v Sotheren (2001) NSWSC 204 Justice Dowd said “A person, in our society, does not have a right not to be photographed.” In general, you can take photos of people; statues have even less privacy rights. There are limitations mainly related to voyeurism and commercial use, which are discussed at http://www.4020.net .

Can you be penalized for pleading not guilty if you're found guilty?

If you plead not guilty on a traffic ticket in New York City. If at the court hearing you are found guilty, is it possible for them to penalize you or charge you interest for the time elapsed since the incident? I am referring to penalties/interest in addition to the fine written on the ticket.

Well, yes. It's called a fine and it will be written on the ticket; that is the penalty for the offence. Right now you are presumed innocent; you can refute that presumption by paying the fine or you can maintain it and have your day in court. If you defend it and fail then you are guilty and always were! There will be no additional penalties but there may be additional costs. Interest if you pay late, court fees and fees to a lawyer if you hire one. Just beware that you do not commit the crime of perjury in your defence; you are allowed to be wrong about your innocence, you are not allowed to attempt to pervert the course of justice. Marcus Einfeld serves as a salutary lesson.

What kind of agreement/contract do I need?

I want to offer a service to small businesses (e.g. virtual assistance). The fees will be part fixed and part variable (based on the actual amount of time spent doing the work). I would prefer not to specify an upper limit to what the fees can be (as that actually creates more work on my part to monitor what the projected invoice will be). Some contracts/agreement will have a minimum duration for the service and a cancellation fee. For those that are on a minimum duration, once it exceeds, I want the terms to continue as is. Rates might change on occasion, so provision for that is needed. What kind of contract/agreement do I need to get my customers to sign with me? A trading agreement? Any key points I should include in this contract/agreement? Any templates I can use online?

To be done correctly, this is actually a much more complex undertaking than your question implies. That being said, what you are suggesting is a fee for services contract. If the scope of services are limited you could create it yourself, although there are many issues that must be taken into consideration. Just off of the top of my head, to name a few issues that must be considered, are: Scope of services; Definitions (important in that ambiguity is typically construed against the drafter); terms and conditions; indemnification; severability (savings clause); specific performance and penalties for failure; whether or not time is of the essence; payment methods, and ceilings that trigger another explicit affirmation in writing. I know you'd like to avoid earning/payment caps, but contracts of this type are typically negotiated and there is usually some limit that, when reached, a change order or addendum must be added. This could include reasonable and necessary expenses on your end (again: how these are defined will be important). Very few business will enter into a contract for services with no ceiling to what they could end up owing. Contracts, in general, should not typically be one-sided agreements that benefit only the drafter as you want to ensure general enforceability. There are, in just a very general sense, many provisions that may be necessary to create an enforceable contract depending on exactly what type of work you will be doing, whether or not you will sub any of the work out, whether your work (if inadequate or negligent in some way) can materially adversely impact the business and if so, a clear limitation of damages (if any) you could be exposed to. Also it can really matter what jurisdiction you are in. If it is something very simple, like "John Doe will sort Jane Doe's email folder remotely once per week," you could probably get away with doing it yourself with online templates. Not something I would suggest if your are doing any type of meaningful service(s) and entering into any lucrative/long-term contract. There are all sorts of simple contract principals a layperson just does not have an understanding of, that may and often do, end up being essential. If it is something relatively simple, a lawyer could draft such an instrument for you without you needing to spend much money on the front end, and you may save yourself a lot of headaches and money at the backend.

What kind of agreement/contract do I need?

I want to offer a service to small businesses (e.g. virtual assistance). The fees will be part fixed and part variable (based on the actual amount of time spent doing the work). I would prefer not to specify an upper limit to what the fees can be (as that actually creates more work on my part to monitor what the projected invoice will be). Some contracts/agreement will have a minimum duration for the service and a cancellation fee. For those that are on a minimum duration, once it exceeds, I want the terms to continue as is. Rates might change on occasion, so provision for that is needed. What kind of contract/agreement do I need to get my customers to sign with me? A trading agreement? Any key points I should include in this contract/agreement? Any templates I can use online?

To answer your questions: One that is legally enforceable and does not breach the law where you and your customers are located. A basic contract should cover: Who does what and when (generally what you do and what and when they pay) Considers reasonable contingencies and their consequences (e.g. failure of a party to perform, extraneous events like insolvency etc.) Has a way of resolving disputes a severance provision There are bound to be online templates that you can use. Whether or not they meet 1 and 2 above is another thing ... A local lawyer should be able to produce a standard form contract that specifically meets your needs for a relatively modest fee - if these contracts are of significant value (to you) then this is probably money well spent.

If no prior contracts have been signed, can a landlord make tenants sign after a week of tenancy?

I am not asking for legal advice, just curious about the law. To illustrate the question I think it's best to use a specific example. A friend of mine responded to an ad on craiglists for shared housing. It was agreed upon, one of the roommates would be the acting landlord (rent would be paid to him and he would be responsible for the up keep of the house). No paper work was signed. A week after everyone moved in, the actual land lord (the owner of the house), has everyone co-sign a lease. Is it legal for the landlord to request the tenants sign a lease a week after moving in and if it is, could the landlord evict if a tenant refuses to sign? What if only the one tenant who had said he would be acting as the landlord had already signed it, but the actual owner wants everyone to sign now? If relevant, I'm talking about one lease with everyone's names on it (not individual leases). I understand if someone rents and moves in before signing the lease, the landlord can kick them out if they don't agree to the lease, but I'm wondering if different if they've already lived there a week? This is assuming none except the "acting landlord" had signed any lease (though the verbal agreement was only the acting landlord would have to). This is for B.C. Canada.

To begin, it is always legal to request the signing of a contractual arrangement in this type of circumstance; however, it is not your duty to assent to this so long as the original tenant had the right to sublet or take on roommates. Without having signed the new lease, you (all the new tenants not on the lease) would just be tenants-at-will. This occurs when an occupant has rented a premises without a lease but pays rent at a set interval (typically monthly). The agreement for a Tenancy-at-Will may be either written or verbal. Just because a rental agreement is in writing does not make it a lease. Either the landlord or tenant may terminate this arrangement by giving written notice 30 days or one full rental period in advance, whichever is longer. In a situation where you rented from a renter, I would want to have the assent of the landlord, as no reason is required to terminate by either party. This should be done in writing either by certified mail or have the landlord sign it, if you are presenting it in person. If rent is paid the first of each month, notice should be given prior to the first day of the month. Many landlords are fond of tenancies-at-will because they maintain the ability to terminate a rental at any time with only a month's notice, without needing a reason. This is their prerogative for even petty reasons (e.g., they don't like your friends, or the hours you keep). This is especially true with a roommate situation, where the original lessee has a lease and is subletting rooms, because the lessor has someone on the hook for a time certain (the original lessee), but if the roommates get annoying for whatever reason to either the landlord or the lessee, you can be given a 30 day notice for a great many reasons that a lease cannot control and are not viable reasons to evict. A lease is for a duration certain, after which, the renter would either move, sign another lease, or in the case where they stayed on past the end date and continued to pay (and landlord continued to accept) rent, it would just become a tenancy-at-will. In many ways a lease protects the renter just as much as it does the landlord, because moving is expensive and (except in very limited circumstances) the renter is guaranteed being able to keep the rental until the lease ends, so long as they pay rent and do not violate the lease or local statute(s), which would subject them to eviction. This would be beneficial in a roommate situation as it takes the power to give notice or evict away from the original lessee who sublet the rooms. It is important to understand that just because there is a writing does not necessarily mean it is a lease. Many landlords who don't want the time constraint of a lease still like to affirm in writing basic issues like date of rent due, pets, etc. It is just cleaner than a verbal agreement. So, in your hypothetical, the landlord could ask the new renters to (co)sign a new lease, join the existing lease, or just sign a rental agreement as a Tenant-at-Will, even though the tenancy has already begun. The renter is not obligated to sign any writing at this point. However, if the renter refuses and if the landlord insists, the landlord would likely exercise their right to terminate by serving a 30 day notice to quit. Having already taken possession, you would also be in a good position to negotiate the terms, which could be to your benefit, so it is not necessarily a bad thing. Regarding eviction, that would only be an option to the landlord if you failed to vacate if a 30 day notice to quit was issued and you didn't move (or of course, as with any renter, if actions that would always allow the landlord the right to seek eviction occur, like failure to pay rent). I would not be concerned about showing you have a right to be there as you likely had to pay rent to move in and your check is proof that the tenancy began, and other things like having a key, etc., support your position if it ever came to that and you had paid cash. If you do ever pay cash, get a receipt. If, hypothetically, the new renters sign a lease, I would want to make sure it is for the room and not the whole so that liability (at least for rent) is limited if others default.

If no prior contracts have been signed, can a landlord make tenants sign after a week of tenancy?

I am not asking for legal advice, just curious about the law. To illustrate the question I think it's best to use a specific example. A friend of mine responded to an ad on craiglists for shared housing. It was agreed upon, one of the roommates would be the acting landlord (rent would be paid to him and he would be responsible for the up keep of the house). No paper work was signed. A week after everyone moved in, the actual land lord (the owner of the house), has everyone co-sign a lease. Is it legal for the landlord to request the tenants sign a lease a week after moving in and if it is, could the landlord evict if a tenant refuses to sign? What if only the one tenant who had said he would be acting as the landlord had already signed it, but the actual owner wants everyone to sign now? If relevant, I'm talking about one lease with everyone's names on it (not individual leases). I understand if someone rents and moves in before signing the lease, the landlord can kick them out if they don't agree to the lease, but I'm wondering if different if they've already lived there a week? This is assuming none except the "acting landlord" had signed any lease (though the verbal agreement was only the acting landlord would have to). This is for B.C. Canada.

Think about this from the other direction. If the landlord evicts anyone or everyone, what proof will you show a judge that you have a right to stay? I'm guessing from the story you tell that the non-signers have no proof. The signer has the proof of her signature on a lease but that only protects her to the extent that she abides by the terms of the lease. If the lease prohibits long term guests then the signer is breaking the lease and opens herself up to whatever remedies are available to the landlord including eviction. That's a general statement. All localities have landlord/tenant law which will cover a lot of default terms which provide the rules for any aspects of the relationship which are not covered by the lease. For example if the lease does not specify the length of the lease a local rule should specify (monthly, yearly, etc). The starting point here is the lease that your so-called acting landlord signed. Read it in the light of trying to defend everyone against eviction.

Bed Bug Liability/Responsibility: Landlord or Tenant?

Situation: I'm currently paying someone monthly rent to live in one of the rooms of their house. There is no signed contract or any records of this exchange. Recently, the room I am in appears to have become infested with bed bugs. I've taken reasonable steps to moderate and control this, but it is getting out of hand. I am considering simply moving out. I respect and like the homeowner, but I can't seem to eradicate the pest on my own. Do I have any legal obligation to pay for a professional pest control service? Morally, I'd like to, but I simply can't afford it. EDIT: This is for the state of Texas, although I'm interested in how any jurisdiction handles this.

If you introduced the bedbugs, liability could flow to you by way of the landlord keeping your security deposit (if there is one) and explaining when sending you notice that a portion/all of your deposit was withheld due to you causing the infestation for the purposes of remediation. The inverse is also true, in that if you do not have a deposit, you could be sued in housing/small claims court for the infestation if you were negligent in some way (grabbed the mattress curbside and didn't put a bedbug proof sealed cover on the mattress. Since you said you rent a room, my curiosity is piqued as to whether it came with the bed (mattress). If the bed came with the room, it is almost certainly not your fault. Even when there are statutes/codes/regs delineating a lessor's/lessee's obligations and rights re pest control (from jurisdiction to jurisdiction) they rarely exclude the right to general civil remedies. I used to represent my municipality and remember reading that bed bugs are difficult to treat unless the bed is disposed of and all bedding is washed in hot water with a disinfectant and even that can not ensure their removal because if you brought them in because of access to them on a regular basis (e.g., if you are a maid at a motel), then you may continue to introduce them. If the room had no bedbugs and you brought the bed in and now it does, it may be easier to prove who created the unsafe/unsettling condition, as opposed to ants, roaches, spiders, which can be introduced in myriad ways.

Bed Bug Liability/Responsibility: Landlord or Tenant?

Situation: I'm currently paying someone monthly rent to live in one of the rooms of their house. There is no signed contract or any records of this exchange. Recently, the room I am in appears to have become infested with bed bugs. I've taken reasonable steps to moderate and control this, but it is getting out of hand. I am considering simply moving out. I respect and like the homeowner, but I can't seem to eradicate the pest on my own. Do I have any legal obligation to pay for a professional pest control service? Morally, I'd like to, but I simply can't afford it. EDIT: This is for the state of Texas, although I'm interested in how any jurisdiction handles this.

You didn't list a jurisdiction, and these things vary a good deal from locale to locale. For example, in the U.S., here's a state-by-state reference. Note, in some states (like Florida), the answer depends on who introduced the pests. A landlord would be responsible unless the tenant brought the bugs in (say, in a mattress). Edit: Texas The TAA's addendum would provides structure for people on TAA leases. However, that doesn't apply to everyone (and doesn't sound like your situation). That said, Texas Property Code §92.052 discusses like conditions: (a) A landlord shall make a diligent effort to repair or remedy a condition if: (1) the tenant specifies the condition in a notice to the person to whom or to the place where rent is normally paid; (2) the tenant is not delinquent in the payment of rent at the time notice is given; and (3) the condition: (A) materially affects the physical health or safety of an ordinary tenant; or (B) arises from the landlord's failure to provide and maintain in good operating condition a device to supply hot water of a minimum temperature of 120 degrees Fahrenheit. (b) Unless the condition was caused by normal wear and tear, the landlord does not have a duty during the lease term or a renewal or extension to repair or remedy a condition caused by: (1) the tenant; (2) a lawful occupant in the tenant's dwelling; (3) a member of the tenant's family; or (4) a guest or invitee of the tenant. (c) This subchapter does not require the landlord: (1) to furnish utilities from a utility company if as a practical matter the utility lines of the company are not reasonably available; or (2) to furnish security guards. (d) The tenant's notice under Subsection (a) must be in writing only if the tenant's lease is in writing and requires written notice. See also TX Property Code §92.056.

Available structure for a parent to buy a property on behalf of their children?

In the UK.... If an elderly parent wanted to buy a property to live in, and have the property owned by their children so that it passes to them when she passes, what structures are available and what are pros and cons. I can imagine 2 options: She could buy the property and put it in the names of the children. She could create a trust or some legal entity to own the property, and put that in the names of children. The relevant goals here are: The ownership is given to the children at the time of purchase and cannot be reversed. The parent cannot be forced to move out of the property. This arrangement is not related to her last will and testament. Are there any established structures to make this work? Are there other details that would depend on the structure, for example tax?

Joint tenancy (as opposed to tenancy in common) would accomplish all of these goals. Joint tenancy gives each individual the absolute right to occupy the property (each person owns the whole property). If one dies the property automatically passes to the other joint tenant(s), which is known legally as the right of survivorship. The child(ren) could never force the parent(s) (other joint tenants) to vacate the property; on the inverse, however, the parent(s) could not deny the child(ren) the ability to also possess the property during their lives, if they so chose to do this. I am assuming if the children ran into hard times and needed to live there, it wouldn't be a problem, but this should be specifically addressed with the client. For a valid joint tenancy to be created, you would simply need to have: a. Unity of title: whereby the joint tenants must hold title to the property under one document (i.e., the title deeds); b. Unity of time: the joint tenancy must start and end on the same date for all the joint tenants (end date being the death of the final joint tenant, who will/should have passed through will/trust to an heir the title interest; c. Unity of possession: all joint tenants have equal rights to possess the whole property (as mentioned above, the children could occupy); d. and finally, Unity of interest: joint tenants must have equal interests in the whole of the property. This is the simplest way to do this while meeting all objectives.

Available structure for a parent to buy a property on behalf of their children?

In the UK.... If an elderly parent wanted to buy a property to live in, and have the property owned by their children so that it passes to them when she passes, what structures are available and what are pros and cons. I can imagine 2 options: She could buy the property and put it in the names of the children. She could create a trust or some legal entity to own the property, and put that in the names of children. The relevant goals here are: The ownership is given to the children at the time of purchase and cannot be reversed. The parent cannot be forced to move out of the property. This arrangement is not related to her last will and testament. Are there any established structures to make this work? Are there other details that would depend on the structure, for example tax?

As an alternative to joint tenancy, the property could be owned by the children with the parent having a Life Estate . This would need to be set up by a lawyer and properly registered - there will be additional cost but it means that the children cannot move into the property without the parent's permission if this is a thing that matters to you.

What qualifies as "violent" and "assault"?

I was reading the following news: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150719/local/update-3-veteran-actor-john-suda-charged-with-violent-indecent-assault.577272 Essentially a person is being charged in Malta with "committing violent indecent assault" for allegedly placing a blindfolded woman's hand on his genitals. How could this be considered "assault?" And how could it be considered "violent?"

The specific elements of the crime in question are going to be defined by Maltese law, which appears to be a blend of a European-style civil code with English-style common law. However, under ordinary Anglo-American standards, the alleged acts do seem to meet the legal definitions of these terms. At common law, an "assault" consists of placing someone in fear of an unwanted touching, and a "battery" is a completed assault; that is, an actual unwanted touching. If Mr. Suda, as alleged, took the victim's hand and touched it to his own genitals, without her consent, he committed an assault and battery. Any touching can constitute a battery, from a tap on the shoulder to a bullet in the head. Likewise, at common law, "violence" is any degree of physical force. If he tricked her into touching his genitals, that would not be a crime of violence; if he physically moved her hand to his genitals with his own hand, then he used physical force, or violence, to commit the crime. Again, what actually needs to be proven will depend on specifics you would need a Maltese lawyer to go into--but under general common law principles, neither "assault" not "violence" are particularly surprising.

Latin expression for the advantage of being possession of disputed goods in a civil suit?

Some time ago I saw (In fact it might have been in a comic, possibly Zits.) an expression/proverb that basically said that being in possession of disputed goods meant that a civil lawsuit/quarrel was almost won before it had begun. Anyone know what idiom I am talking about and can remind me? NB: I am not sure if it was in English or Latin. If possible I would prefer a Latin answer. Edit: after learning about this nine-tenths idiom I found two similar latin expressions, possidetis, ita possideatis and qui tenet teneat, qui dolet doleat . Are there more or better latin expressions I should be aware of?

The only expression I'm aware of is: possession is nine-tenths of the law . This expression does not hold up literally; title is much stronger evidence than possession. Uti possidetis, ita possideatis is a principle of international law . This applies to relations between sovereign states, rather than private individuals. It relates to the acquisition of territory following conflict. Qui tenet teneat, qui dolet doleat is a different matter - although it's a reasonably well-known Latin expression, it's not been used in law since 1286 . Although these Latin expressions exist, they don't really hold any legal force, and I wouldn't try to use them in a court. They're good for impressing friends at a party, though.

CPS Breaching Court Order

CPS were directed by the Crown court to provide the reasoning why the Police did not secure CCTV evidence. The court made an order to provide this to all parties by 28 July. On 30th July CPS requested a variation to the order to extend the time to 11 August. CPS were asked on what grounds they were seeking this variation. Nothing was received from CPS and even their own requested extended deadline has passed now. Case is being heard 21 August What options are available to the defendant at this point?

This is not unusual its a technical abuse of process but the CPS get away with it all the time and get away with breaching HHJ orders. Lots of case law on free sites like Bailii outline CPIA rules of gathering evidence such as CCTV and potential consequences of not doing so. How important to the defence case was the CCTV etc ? If your going to trial on 21st at Crown Court your in trouble if your a LIP, start researching ECHR and fair trials and get all your concerns on the record etc.. too much to note on here, put some more detail up if you want more detailed comments.

Question about a ticket cost

Last week I was issued a ticket for "Operating Vehicle While Texting/Reading/Typing". It was a bs ticket since I had just pulled out of a parking lot and was merely plugging my phone in to charge it. Regardless, I probably don't have a shot at winning that since I was still looking down with a mobile device in my hand. My question is regarding the cost of this ticket. Ordinance 257.602b states it's just a $100 fine for the first offense. The magistrate told me it was going to cost me $240. I didn't pay it because her GPS was down and I don't carry around $240 in cash on me... The ticket was issued in Tuscola County, Michigan. I did a bunch of digging around and found this: http://www.14adistrictcourt.org/traffic_court/traffic_fines.html It shows $240 as the total for the ticket, which is ridiculous to begin with, but what is the difference in the Fine and Cost and what are SMCO and BLDG? How can a fine cost $100 but I end up having to pay $240?

Consider that stuff "court costs" or "court fees." They are actually often things not related to the court, like environmental fee, or emergency medical something or other, or park poop bag fee. Pretty much whatever either the legislature or administrative decision makers what to put on there. And FWIW, if you were not texting get your phone records and bring them to court to prove that you did not send any texts in or around that time.

Being Paid for Preparation Time

The question: If I am missing time at work, and spending free time, to do research to free myself from a 'crime' I didn't commit, can I sue 'the plaintiff'? The background: A rental car company is accusing me of doing ~2000 dollars worth of damage to the locks on one of their cars, they said that I must have locked myself out and trashed the door trying to break in. I have hours of footage of the car in the hotel lot where I parked it, pictures showing the car in the condition it was returned, and the car was inspected when dropped off. There is more information I could provide, but it suffices to say that I have mountains of incontrovertible evidence showing that I never broke the car. Three dealers have quoted me a price of ~$300 to repair the damage they are describing. In addition, they have tried to charge me twice today, once for 2000, and once for 500 dollars, and I had to cancel my credit card to prevent them from continuing to try to get whatever sum they can. I have spent the last eight hours gathering this information, I plan to write them a letter tonight, mail it tomorrow, will probably be in contact with them again at least once more, and so will be spending more of my time defending myself against a 'thief'. I have read online that rental car companies will do this sometimes, and that there is no way out of their fees, but that part I already have covered. the question is: Is there some way for me to inconvenience them (monetarily or otherwise) to get a sense justice?

You are asking if can sue for your damages which in this case are limited to the time that you spent refuting their accusation? No. What can you do to inconvenience them? Start with yelp and go from there.

3 day notice to cure breach or quit over a dirty bathtub

I am very frustrated with my landlord. They inspected my unit while I was at work and yesterday they posted on my door a 3 day notice to cure breach or quit over a "dirty bathtub". They didn't even give me a warning about it. In my opinion, it's not that dirty and certainly not to the extent requiring a legal threat. Also I noticed a typographical error on the notice. Instead of "Address of : Unit name" it was "Address if : Unit name" I've always paid my rent on time and I am very quiet. I am pissed they would treat me like this. I am thinking of the fighting this. Is it standard operating procedure to threaten tenants over such a small infractions? If I take this to court, is a judge going to issue an eviction order over a bathtub whose cleanliness is debatable? How can I take advantage of the typographical error?

Clean your tub. Scratch that off the list. Typo - forget about it, there is nothing here, clerical errors are curable if not outright reasonable. In CA your landlord can enter under certain circumstances. All but emergency require notice, agreement, or your presence. But what is your remedy? A civil suit for damages or call the cops and try to get the landlord charged with criminal trespass under CAL. PEN. CODE § 602.

3 day notice to cure breach or quit over a dirty bathtub

I am very frustrated with my landlord. They inspected my unit while I was at work and yesterday they posted on my door a 3 day notice to cure breach or quit over a "dirty bathtub". They didn't even give me a warning about it. In my opinion, it's not that dirty and certainly not to the extent requiring a legal threat. Also I noticed a typographical error on the notice. Instead of "Address of : Unit name" it was "Address if : Unit name" I've always paid my rent on time and I am very quiet. I am pissed they would treat me like this. I am thinking of the fighting this. Is it standard operating procedure to threaten tenants over such a small infractions? If I take this to court, is a judge going to issue an eviction order over a bathtub whose cleanliness is debatable? How can I take advantage of the typographical error?

If anyone runs to a similar issue, here is the relevant law: Some landlords seek to perform periodic inspections (usually once a year) to look for any needed repairs or unsafe conditions, such as inoperable smoke detectors, water leaks, mold, termite damage, tripping hazards, etc. While periodic maintenance inspections can be beneficial to tenants and landlords, California law does not give a private landlord the right to enter for that purpose unless the tenant consents. Any rental agreement provision that allows a landlord to enter for such inspections without the tenant’s consent is unenforceable. Evicting a tenant who refused to allow such an inspection would constitute an illegal retaliatory eviction. http://housing.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Landlord-entry-annual-inspections.pdf So their initial inspection was illegal, and the inspection they will do in a few days will be illegal. I will never consent to them entering my apartment. If they start legal proceedings against me, I will be vindicated in the end. I will not clean my bathtub if don't want to, gosh darn it! This is America!

3 day notice to cure breach or quit over a dirty bathtub

I am very frustrated with my landlord. They inspected my unit while I was at work and yesterday they posted on my door a 3 day notice to cure breach or quit over a "dirty bathtub". They didn't even give me a warning about it. In my opinion, it's not that dirty and certainly not to the extent requiring a legal threat. Also I noticed a typographical error on the notice. Instead of "Address of : Unit name" it was "Address if : Unit name" I've always paid my rent on time and I am very quiet. I am pissed they would treat me like this. I am thinking of the fighting this. Is it standard operating procedure to threaten tenants over such a small infractions? If I take this to court, is a judge going to issue an eviction order over a bathtub whose cleanliness is debatable? How can I take advantage of the typographical error?

Is it standard operating procedure to threaten tenants over such a small infractions? Maybe, we don't have enough information; all we know is that they have done it at least once, to you. Wrong question anyway; it doesn't matter if it is standard practice; it matters if it is legal. I don't know enough about California tenancy law or your lease to say. If I take this to court, is a judge going to issue an eviction order over a bathtub whose cleanliness is debatable? Maybe , depends on the judge, depends on the law, depends on the facts. By the way, when you say "cleanliness is debatable" and "not that dirty", I hear "not clean"; maybe a judge will hear the same thing? How can I take advantage of the typographical error? You can't; an error that insignificant will not invalidate the notice. You need to ask yourself some simple questions: do you want to keep living here? If so, don't piss off the landlord and clean the bath! if you don't want to keep living here; do you want to spend a lot of time and money fighting for the right to live somewhere you don't want to?

Is a general Indemnification rule related to IP enforcable in Germany?

I, living in Germany, am developing an app based on the API of a company that has to following rules in their Legal section: ... don't want to get sued. Therefore, you agree that we can use, copy, modify, distribute, and make derivative works of your Project in any form, on a royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide basis, for any purpose and without having to pay you anything, obtain your approval, or give you credit. You can't use a third party’s IP in your Project if doing so would violate their rights. We understand that besides our IP, you might want to incorporate someone else’s IP in your Project, such as a cool song or some other artwork. If you’re using someone else’s music, artwork or other IP, you need to have their permission before you put it into your Project. If we find out that your Project is using a third person’s IP without their permission, we may require you to take down and stop distributing your Project. Our lawyers don’t want us to get sued or be put at risk by your Project. If we, or our partners or affiliates, have any kind of legal claim or other lawsuit brought against us that is related to your Project, you’ll pay our legal fees and costs related to this lawsuit, including our attorney’s fees, and any settlement or judgment amount that we have to pay as a result. ... The following scenario comes to my mind as a problem: I create the app, use the company's IP and also make heavy use of a third party's library/IP with that party's consent . The company might end up redistributing my app, but the third party, who doesn't have an agreement with them, doesn't want them to . In this case (which I think complies to all agreements up to now), would I have to pay for the attorney fees for the (possible) lawsuit of the third party against the company? In other words, would it be legal that the company holds me accountable for them not getting the third party's agreement to using their IP?

You can't use a third party’s IP in your Project if doing so would violate their rights. If the third-party's licence to you did not allow you to give permission for redistribution that matchs the second-party's requirement then you have violated the third-party's rights and the second-party could rely on the indemnity you have given.

Is it legal include an image from Wikipedia into a lead-generating e-book?

I'm writing an e-book, which is supposed to generate leads in the following way: People visit my landing page. There, they see a text like "Enter your e-mail address and get this e-book for free". Those, who entered and confirmed their membership, receive the e-book. As long as they haven't unsubscribed, they also receive several e-mails in the following weeks with information related to the e-book and the product I'll sell to them. The purpose of those e-mails is to make the subscriber to contact me and tell me what he or she liked/disliked about my offering (sort of market research). Based on the responses from the list members, I create and sell products. Even though the e-book is free, it's a for-profit thing. In that e-book I have this passage: There used to be a Russian management guru, Georgii Petrovich Shchedrovitski, who argued that there are two fundamentally different kinds of knowledge work: 1) Science, which looks for sameness. 2) Activity, which looks for differences. Thereafter follows a detailed explanation of his theory. Is it legal (under US laws) to include a picture of G. P. Shchedrovitski from Wikipedia in this e-book?

Wikipedia has two kinds of pictures: Reusable pictures, most of them stored at http://commons.wikimedia.org Copyrighted pictures under fair-use, stored on the local Wikipedia (in your case, the Russian Wikipedia) but not on Commons. To know what case it is, just click on the Wikipedia picture, click on the blue "Description" button, and see whether it redirects you to Commons or not. Pictures on Commons are reusable if you include the author and license ( see the full requirements ). Commercial use is OK. Fair-use pictures can not be reused. Unfortunately, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Файл:Tschedrovitsky.jpg is in the second case, so you can not reuse it, even in a non-commercial setting, unless you can justify that your usage qualifies as fair-use in your country. Hopefully one day someone will find a legally reusable picture of Shchedrovitski and upload it to Commons.

Contribution terms for an LGPL Licensed Project

Background: I am making contributions to a certain project which is released under LGPL and also under a commercial license. According to the terms of contribution in the project by doing so I am transferring all my rights and ownership of the code to the company which owns said project. My question is whether this stipulation has any effect on the license-terms of the code I contribute? That is as far as I understand that once a code is released as GPLv3 (and LGPL seems to contain mostly permissions for use additions to GPL) that this license cannot be rescinded. Is my contribution (independent of ownership) thus also LGPL in a way which cannot be rescinded? Are their terms of contribution than just a way of saying that they can dual-license your code (if they so choose) for a Proprietary version of the product? Do I lose the ability to do the later myself?

If you sign over the copyright of a piece of code, then under US copyright law you have essentially lost any authority over the code and any inherent right to use it. It is exactly as if a company employee had written it; for at least 35 years, you lose any and all rights of authorship. You may not use the code except under license from the assignee; in particular, you may not modify it and use it in your own proprietary program, unless you have permission from the company. The default for a simple copyright assignment is that the assignee gains the right to do whatever they want with the code. If they own the copyright, nothing they do could conceivably be copyright infringement. Likewise, the original author often loses any right to do anything whatsoever with their code without explicitly gaining permission. Note, though, that the GPL is not revocable except under certain conditions; the company could at most make future versions proprietary. That said, these agreements can be more complicated. The FSF copyright assignment licenses the code back to the author for use as the author sees fit; it also imposes conditions on how the FSF may use the code. Copyright assignments are generally standard contracts, and can have all sorts of terms. I'm not sure what the effect is if the FSF violates its transfer, but the specific legal document you have been asked to sign is very important. The details of understanding it are a matter for a licensed lawyer, not a Stack Exchange site.

is landlord responsible for damage that's not his fault?

My apartment had a toxic contamination issue. It wasn't my fault or the landlord's (in fact, it happened before he owned the building). Some of my belongings had to be disposed of. Is he responsible for replacing them?

It depends on where you live and also the details of your lease agreement. But in most cases, it is the landlord's responsibility to make sure the home you're living in is safe for you to live in (even conditions that existed before he owned the building). So in most cases yes, he would be responsible for replacing them (but again, this depends on where you live and the terms of your lease)

is landlord responsible for damage that's not his fault?

My apartment had a toxic contamination issue. It wasn't my fault or the landlord's (in fact, it happened before he owned the building). Some of my belongings had to be disposed of. Is he responsible for replacing them?

You do not give the jurisdiction, however, just looking at common law. What warranties did the landlord give in the lease about the condition of the property? Additionally, what warranties are read into the lease under local real estate or consumer protection laws? A general "fitness for purpose" warranty is virtually a given. If there are warranties and the property did not meet those then you have a cause of action for breach of contract. Notwithstanding your contractual position, you likely have a claim under the tort of negligence.

When do I have to register my copyright if I want to file an infringement suit?

I read in a blog post that to file an infringement suit, I need to have registered my work registered with the US copyright office before the infringement took place. However, I can't find anything about this on the website of the US copyright office, just that it needs to be filed before the suit is filed. When do I have to register my work with the copyright office to file an infringement suit?

There are two types of awards one can receive when a copyright is violated: actual or statutory damages. One also has the ability to recover attorney's fees. From the U.S. Copyright Office: The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. A copyright holder may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action. Statutory damages may be higher than actual damages so there may be a good reason to seek statutory damages instead of actual damages. The court may also award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party as part of the costs. However, 17 U.S. Code section 412 states : In any action under this title, other than an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), an action for infringement of the copyright of a work that has been preregistered under section 408(f) before the commencement of the infringement and that has an effective date of registration not later than the earlier of 3 months after the first publication of the work or 1 month after the copyright owner has learned of the infringement, or an action instituted under section 411(c), no award of statutory damages or of attorney’s fees, as provided by sections 504 and 505, shall be made for — (1) any infringement of copyright in an unpublished work commenced before the effective date of its registration; or (2) any infringement of copyright commenced after first publication of the work and before the effective date of its registration, unless such registration is made within three months after the first publication of the work. So, you can only recover actual damages and neither statutory damages nor attorney's fees if the copyright is not registered. Statutory damages can only be collected for copyright violations that occurred after the effective date of the registration or within three months of first publication if registration is made within those three months.

Can doctors make patients sign contracts?

Hypothetical: You're waiting in your doctor's office for your provider to perform a medically-necessary procedure. In walks a coordinator who requests you sign a contract for your upcoming procedure. The contract satisfies the usual elements and contains a hold-harmless clause. Does signing the contract reduce or eliminate the doctor's liability in tort?

First of all, unless the doctor is providing the procedure as a gift then the transaction is a contract. Every transaction where valuable consideration is provided by 2 or more parties is a contract: buying chewing gum from the supermarket, lessons from a tennis coach or advice from a lawyer - all of these are contracts as is every medical procedure a doctor performs for which they get paid. In my experience GPs do not generally use written contracts; surgeons almost always do. The general common law position is that the parties to a contract can agree to anything they want provided it is not illegal . Signing the contract will almost certainly reduce the doctor's liability but only down to what the law in your jurisdiction permits. It is a fair bet that there is a whole body of law in whatever jurisdiction you are in that limits the amount of liability that a service provider like a doctor can avoid under a contract - if those limits are respected in a contract then they will be binding on the parties; if they are not then the entire contract may be invalid, or, if it is a well drafted contract, the invalidity will be limited to the unlawful terms. You basically have 3 choices: Sign the contract and accept the doctor's terms Negotiate different terms acceptable to both of you Find another doctor Starting from a common law basis, a doctor is under no legal obligation to perform a procedure. That said, there are many jurisdictions that do impose such an obligation to render emergency aid, however, most of these are drafted such that the person compelled to perform the service is indemnified except in cases of gross or criminal negligence. Such laws are referred to as "Good Samaritan" acts.

Small business claims absent a contract

What legal recourse does company have against a client for compensation when it performs work for the client without a contract, given that the company has documentation of provided services, along with multiple witnesses?

The answer is: it depends. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. First of all, it depends on whether there actually was a contract. Under the law, a contract does not need to be something written down and signed. If you have this conversation with someone: "Hey, can you do [this job] for me?" "Sure, it'll run you about [cost]." "Great." You have a contract, which may well be legally binding and enforceable in court. Even if, for whatever reason, there was no contract--for instance, the person you talked to didn't actually work for the company s/he said s/he did--there are legal doctrines that could give you some rights. They have names, depending on the jurisdiction and the facts, like "quantum meruit," "unjust enrichment," and "implied contract." These doctrines all say, basically, the same thing: if you didn't have a contract for some reason, but you still gave someone something of value, reasonably expecting to be paid, then they have to pay you. Whether these doctrines apply is going to depend on the facts of the specific case. For example, you can't paint someone's house secretly in the middle of the night without being asked, then demand payment. But if you're a painting contractor, he asks you to paint it, and he sees you painting it every day for a week, at the end of the week he can't say, "I never signed anything, so I don't have to pay you anything." If this situation applies to you, your best bet is to discuss it with a lawyer licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.

Small business claims absent a contract

What legal recourse does company have against a client for compensation when it performs work for the client without a contract, given that the company has documentation of provided services, along with multiple witnesses?

Most contracts do not have to be in writing. A verbal contract is just as enforceable as a written one. Of course, when a dispute arises it becomes a little bit harder to determine the terms of the contract or even if there is a contract; which of course leads to the saying that "A verbal contract is worth the paper its written on". That said, in some jurisdictions there are some contracts that are required to be in writing. What happens if they are not depends on the law that makes that requirement. I have no knowledge of examples from Florida but from New South Wales: A contract for the sale of land must be in writing; if it isn't then there is no contract A contract for residential building works worth over $12,000 must be in writing; if it isn't the contract is not binding on the owner (i.e. they do not have to pay), however, it is binding on the builder (i.e. they have to perform the work).

Can Paypal withold funds for 180 days?

Paypal, as part of their banking license, perform random checks on accounts where they ask for Photo ID, Proof of Address and Proof of Age. However, if one is unable to provide this information, for whatever reason, they prevent you withdrawing your funds for 180 days. Is this legal? (Specifically in the UK if that's relevant)

Probably Terms and Conditions extract: 7.2 Limitations on Closing Your Account. You may not close your Account to evade an investigation. If you attempt to close your Account while we are conducting an investigation, we may hold your funds for up to 180 Days to protect PayPal or a third party against the risk of Reversals, Chargebacks, Claims, fees, fines, penalties and other liabilities of whatever nature. You will remain liable for all obligations related to your Account even after the Account is closed. 10.6 Information about you a. PayPal reserves the right to request additional information from you, other than what is referred to in this Agreement, to allow it to comply with its anti-money laundering obligations. You agree to comply with any request for further information as we reasonably require to enable us to comply with our anti-money laundering obligations. This may include , without limitation, requiring you to fax, email or otherwise provide to us certain identification documents . You also agree to provide us, upon our reasonable request and at your own expense, information about your finance and operations, including, without limitation, your most recent financial statements (certified or otherwise) and merchant processing statements (if applicable). This is the contract that you agreed to be bound by.

Are pre-employment drug screening results not obtainable by the patient?

Can an individual require access to his pre-employment drug screening results in the United States? I am mostly interested in California and Massachusetts.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ( HIPAA ) may apply to you and provide certain rights. HIPAA does seem to cover part of this, though if it covers you particularly and the lab that performed the test is a separate question. On the Department of Health and Human Services website discussing HIPAA , they outline requirements discussing pre-employment drug tests. Basically, your authorization is required in order to release the results of the drug test to your employer and there is nothing prohibiting the employer from conditioning employment on your provision of that authorization. This seems to indicate that the drug test is a medical record. In another section on the same web site concerning your medical records, it outlines that the Privacy Rule gives you the general right to inspect, review and receive a copy of your medical records if the health care provider is covered by the Privacy Rule. You can read about the privacy rule on yet another section of that web site . Generally speaking, the privacy rule applies to any health care provider that transmits health records electronically. Certain exceptions to the rule apply, however determining what those exceptions happen to be is a more difficult task. You will notice from the hhs.gov web site that any entity that is covered by the privacy act is required to give you a privacy practices notice (with certain exceptions). If you didn't receive a privacy practices notice then the entity conducting the drug test is probably not covered by HIPAA. If you did receive a privacy practices notice then the entity conducting the test is covered by HIPAA and you have a right to review your records.

Are pre-employment drug screening results not obtainable by the patient?

Can an individual require access to his pre-employment drug screening results in the United States? I am mostly interested in California and Massachusetts.

I am not aware of specific laws anywhere that automatically require such tests to be provided to the employee. This doesn't mean there aren't any; just that I don't know about them. From a common law perspective, there are two contracts operating: the employee consents to the test as a prerequisite to the employment contract, and the contract between the employer and the testing organisation. Unless the former has something to say about the latter the employee has no rights under the latter contract.

What jurisdiction do remote workers fall under?

There are many sites like elance.com or fiverr.com where you can contract out work online - often to foreign countries. Besides short-term or fixed price contracts, it's also possible to hire a remote employee on a more permanent basis. But different countries have greatly differing labor laws, and bringing a case to court may be inconvenient if the distance is great. If there is a dispute between a remote employee and an employer, which is the appropriate court to resolve this dispute? The employer's or the employee's? Is it generally allowed to choose a jurisdiction in an employment agreement? That is, is it common for countries to allow citizens to waive the use of their local courts/laws in contracts?

I found a mention of this issue here , where the case Rhonda Eddy v. Ingenesis was cited. Eddy worked from home in West Virginia, but had signed her contract with a company headquartered in Texas. The link is the decision of The State of West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, which upheld the decision of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, namely, that the Circuit Court did not have the authority to hear Eddy's petition against her employer because she was out of the Circuit Court's jurisdiction. The circuit court found that it did not have personal jurisdiction over respondent under West Virginia’s personal jurisdiction statutes, and that respondent did not have sufficient minimum contacts with West Virginia to satisfy federal due process considerations. The circuit court also found that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction over petitioner’s WPCA claim because petitioner’s employment contract contained a valid choice of law clause that mandated Texas law would govern any dispute between the parties. Emphasis mine. It all depends on stipulations made in the employment contract. This (in the United Kingdom) states 4. Place of Work Allows the employer to specify the location where the employee will work. However, it also allows for the employer to specify any other location in the future. This gives the employer much greater flexibility. That would seem to indicate that (at least in the U.K.) the place is specified in the contract.

What jurisdiction do remote workers fall under?

There are many sites like elance.com or fiverr.com where you can contract out work online - often to foreign countries. Besides short-term or fixed price contracts, it's also possible to hire a remote employee on a more permanent basis. But different countries have greatly differing labor laws, and bringing a case to court may be inconvenient if the distance is great. If there is a dispute between a remote employee and an employer, which is the appropriate court to resolve this dispute? The employer's or the employee's? Is it generally allowed to choose a jurisdiction in an employment agreement? That is, is it common for countries to allow citizens to waive the use of their local courts/laws in contracts?

Most often with these arrangements, even with the more permanent ones, you're not actually an employee, but rather still a contractor / vendor, thus the employment laws would not apply at all. Otherwise, the same jurisdictional rules apply as in any other case -- if the defendant does not have sufficient ties with the community where you physically are located, then no court in such community will have any jurisdiction over the matter.

What jurisdiction do remote workers fall under?

There are many sites like elance.com or fiverr.com where you can contract out work online - often to foreign countries. Besides short-term or fixed price contracts, it's also possible to hire a remote employee on a more permanent basis. But different countries have greatly differing labor laws, and bringing a case to court may be inconvenient if the distance is great. If there is a dispute between a remote employee and an employer, which is the appropriate court to resolve this dispute? The employer's or the employee's? Is it generally allowed to choose a jurisdiction in an employment agreement? That is, is it common for countries to allow citizens to waive the use of their local courts/laws in contracts?

(Standard disclaimer: I am not your lawyer. I am not here to help you. ) You've tagged this "labor law," but as I understand it a big part of this question is about international contract disputes rather than employment law. I'm not a labor law expert by any means; if there's some special laws governing international employment agreements, I don't know about them. Let's hypothesize that A, a United States citizen, seeks out, makes an agreement with, and pays B, a national of some foreign country, to do some task. B, sitting at home, tries to do it, but A is dissatisfied and wants her money back. B refuses and issues that famous ultimatum: "So sue me." What can A do? (It doesn't necessarily matter who's the "employee" and who's the "employer" for the jurisdictional issue I'm talking about; it would work the same if B, a foreign resident, hired A, a U.S. resident, to do something but didn't pay. The important part is that A is the injured party.) There are at least two fundamental issues here: (1) what court(s) will have authority to impose a judgment binding a breaching party; and (2) what law will apply to the relationship. The first issue is, in Anglo-American jurisprudence, generally called "personal jurisdiction"; the second is called "choice of law." (There's a separate issue, called "subject matter jurisdiction," that would probably arise in real life but that's beyond the scope of this question.) A would prefer to sue B in her local United States court; let's say in California. Under U.S. law, a court must have personal jurisdiction over the defendant--B--in order to hear the suit. The outer bounds of that jurisdiction are spelled out in a series of famous Supreme Court cases, which held that a defendant must have done something in, or done something aimed at, the forum state. (Maybe in the future we'll have a standard introduction to minimum contacts jurisdiction on Law.SE; for now, Wikipedia's article isn't terrible.) In my hypo, B didn't do anything at all regarding California: he was sitting in his home country until A sought him out. In that case, a California court could not exercise jurisdiction, and A would be out of luck. In real life, the services you're talking about probably do seek out California and other U.S. clients. They run advertisements aimed at California residents, they build relationships with California residents. That may or may not be enough to open them up to suit in the U.S. (With a "marketplace" site like Elance, this is a bit more complicated because there are three people involved: A, B, and Elance.) This isn't a very clear area of U.S. law; different courts have approached online transactions in different ways. I'd have to do some research to see what the relevant decisions are. Even if A got a judgment in a U.S. court, she may not be able to enforce it in B's home country. This would depend entirely on the laws of that country, and on treaty relationships between the countries. A's other option, of course, is to sue B in B's home country. The procedural laws of that country would apply. If things work there like they do in the United States, you can basically always sue somebody in the court where they live, are headquartered, or are incorporated. That court would apply its own choice-of-laws rules in determining whether to apply U.S. or local law to the contract. Now in reality, there's a good chance much of this problem, as well as the choice-of-laws question I haven't talked about, will be resolved by agreement between the parties. If I were A's lawyer, I'd make sure that the contract included a "forum selection clause" specifying that any lawsuit would be tried in a California court, and that B agreed to the jurisdiction of that court. While that may not totally resolve the problem, it'd go a long way. This isn't exactly the answer to your second question. I'm talking about B's agreeing to be sued in A's jurisdiction. B may or may not still be able to sue A in B's home jurisdiction; that's a different question. You mentioned elance.com; their Terms of Service page includes the "Independent Contractor Services Agreement" that they provide as a default agreement between their clients and freelancers, as well as the "User Agreement" that applies to everyone using their site. The user agreement has a section entitled "Law and Forum for Disputes," which sounds like a forum selection clause, but it's not; it just says that the agreement will be governed by Delaware law, but doesn't require consent to be sued there. The mandatory arbitration clause explicitly doesn't apply to foreign freelancers. I don't know why they chose not to require consent to be sued in Delaware; there may be a good reason. But on brief review, this particular contract doesn't necessarily help a United States plaintiff as much as it could.

Works published before which year are internationally in public domain?

Figuring out whether a work is in public domain can be quite complex as different countries have different rules and there are often a lot of (relatively) complex exceptions. There must however be a cut off point before which you can be sure beyond any reasonably doubt that the work is in public domain. Which year would this be? Or put differently: What is the oldest work which is not yet in the public domain? And just for the record, I am aware that this might be a bit of a complex question, but it seems to be quite a reasonable question, especially if you would wish to use the work for some product that you wish to distribute internationally (e.g. this question made me think of it ). Now, I do realize that other issues can come up (trademarks, later editions and moral rights for example), but to keep the question reasonable just ignore those (though as an aside they are fine).

See World Copyright Terms . If this is an accurate reflection of current laws and if those laws have not changed, then the country with the longest terms is Mexico at Life + 100 years; it's a reasonable assumption that most authors don't live more than 80 years after first publication so anything before 1835 is probably fine. But , the laws in Mexico have changed and works whose authors died in or before 1952 are in the public domain. This demonstrates why it is impossible to give a general answer applicable to all works. A definitive answer can only be determined by: Identifying the work Determining the originating country or countries; online publication in particular will create more than one. For each of those, determine the law in force at the time of publication and the copyright duration that results For each of those, determine if changes to the law have affected the copyright duration Find out when the author died Determine copyright status This is a non-trivial endeavour.

Reviving an expired corporation

Is there a procedure that allows the reviving of an expired LLC in Nevada? The company in question expired over a year ago after the required annual documents were not filed.

Yes. Most states have a reinstatement period of up to five years during which you can reinstate your corporation by filing the appropriate paperwork and paying the required fees and any penalties (extra fees) due. Check the website of your state's corporation authority for the exact procedure. In Nevada, it looks like the Secretary of State is the right place to go. There website link is here .

Mistake in contract in my favor

Several months ago I signed a contract to lease an apartment in Utah, USA and took up residence in the said apartment. The contract was stated explicitly to run through August 25th. This is clearly and unambiguously stated in writing. I signed this contract and so did the landlords. However, now the landlord is telling me that this was a typo and that it should have said August 14th. I was notified of this on August 6. They are threatening to fine me or send collections after me if I do not vacate the apartment by noon on the 14th of August. The only problem is that I have employment in this city until August 19th. I would need to live in my car for five days if they kick me out. I am not overly concerned about them coming after me, as I do not believe that the case law backs them up here. However, I felt it best to get the legal opinion of the Internet on the matter. Do I have a firm case to stand on if they were to pursue legal or financial action against me? Are there specific cases or statutory considerations that you are aware of that provide legal precedent in this type of case?

I will not speak to your specific situation. I am unfamiliar with the jurisdiction and real estate contracts are one of the most highly regulated contracts so local statutes may override common law. In general, the terms of a contract are what the parties agree; the written document is not the contract - it is evidence of the contract. In a case where the parties agree that the written version is wrong then the written version is wrong. Where the parties disagree that the written version is wrong (or agree that it is wrong but disagree as to how) then each will need to provide evidence to support their position. A signed written contract that supports one parties position is extremely strong evidence! The other party would need to provide some overwhelming evidence to trump this. The general position that the courts take is that the written contract accurately documents the agreement unless someone can prove that it doesn't.

Absence for jury summons

I know there are penalties for ignoring the jury summons, but what about missing the summons letter entirely? By missing, I mean not being present for both the initial letter and the actual date of the jury panel. Hence, it was not physically possible to appear since the person would have no knowledge of the summons. Also, if being absent does change the legality of the matter, what would count as sufficient evidence? (If this is a separate question I will remove it) Disclosure: This did happen to me, in Canada.

This happened to me many years ago in New South Wales; I wrote a letter (see how long ago it was!) to the sheriff explaining the circumstances and they waived the fine; if this had not worked I would have had the option of paying the fine or going before a magistrate to contest it. New South Wales is not Canada; your results may differ. No matter what the jurisdiction it is difficult to see the justice in fining someone for failing to attend a summons of which they genuinely had no knowledge.

Can I use illegally obtained code?

There are some EULA which prohibit disassembly or reverse-engineering of its executables Now Joe in Somalia gets a hold if this software, disassembles it, and publishes the algorithm online. Bob in the United States gets a hold of this algorithm, re-implements it in his own software. Assuming there are no patents, did Bob do something illegal? Is this similar to a "fruit of the poisoned tree?"

Take a look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design From that it appears that you are just following the specifications of the algorithm made by a third party. You're not copying the algorithm, you are re-implementing it based on certain specifications you saw online. I would say unless you agree to some contract like you will not implement this, it should be legal. Furthermore, there is distinction between legality and breaching contracts. It is not illegal to breach a contract. You could just be sued for damages and injunctive relief. Failure to abide by a judicial order, such as an injunction is illegal. DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A LAWYER. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.

Can I use illegally obtained code?

There are some EULA which prohibit disassembly or reverse-engineering of its executables Now Joe in Somalia gets a hold if this software, disassembles it, and publishes the algorithm online. Bob in the United States gets a hold of this algorithm, re-implements it in his own software. Assuming there are no patents, did Bob do something illegal? Is this similar to a "fruit of the poisoned tree?"

Algorithms are not subject to copyright like the original computer code is; they may be patentable but you have specifically said that they aren't. So you are not breaching any IP of the original owner. Your friend in Somalia is breaching his contract with the original owner but that is not your issue. The IP he extracts (the algorithm) is not owned by anyone so you are free to use it.

Is it legal to use a company name that has one word trademarked in the UK?

Is it possible for legal action to be taken in the UK, for example if the word FormatA has been trademarked, and then someone else starts up a company called FormatA Diagnostics Even if the two companies do completely unrelated things? Thanks

Quoting from https://www.gov.uk/intellectual-property-crime-and-infringement If you use an identical or similar trade mark for identical or similar goods and services to a registered trade mark - you may be infringing the registered mark if your use creates a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public. This includes the case where because of the similarities between the marks the public are led to the mistaken belief that the trade marks, although different, identify the goods or services of one and the same trader. Where the registered mark has a significant reputation, infringement may also arise from the use of the same or a similar mark which, although not causing confusion, damages or takes unfair advantage of the reputation of the registered mark. This can occasionally arise from the use of the same or similar mark for goods or services which are dissimilar to those covered by the registration of the registered mark. If FormatA Diagnostic's products are not "identical or similar goods and services to a registered trade mark" then at first blush there is no infringement. Even if they are "identical or similar goods" then there must be "a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public"; for example, if FormatA Diagnostics does not use its name to market the goods and services then there is probably not "a likelihood of confusion". In addition, if FormatA has "has a significant reputation" (and we are talking Coca-Cola, Pepsi type levels of reputation) then if FormatA Diagnostics taks advantage of this they are breaching the Trade Mark. TL;DR No

When a criminal statute is repealed, are those still held under it automatically freed?

How was this handled in the past when things were decriminalized, e.g. homosexuality? Is there an automatic process that guarantees freedom for those held under an abolished law, or does this have to be made explicit every time? Can one's criminal record include an offence against a statute that is no longer valid?

There are two sides to this question. First, there is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , which states: Article 15 1 . No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offence was committed. If, subsequent to the commission of the offence, provision is made by law for the imposition of the lighter penalty, the offender shall benefit thereby. http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx When signing this treaty, however, the United States of America made a couple of reservations, including this one: I. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following reservations: (...) (4) That because U.S. law generally applies to an offender the penalty in force at the time the offense was committed , the United States does not adhere to the third clause of paragraph 1 of Article 15. (...) http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/usdocs/civilres.html (emphasis mine in both cases)

When a criminal statute is repealed, are those still held under it automatically freed?

How was this handled in the past when things were decriminalized, e.g. homosexuality? Is there an automatic process that guarantees freedom for those held under an abolished law, or does this have to be made explicit every time? Can one's criminal record include an offence against a statute that is no longer valid?

The United States does not guarantee retroactive ameliorative relief - there is no automatic process for freeing those sentenced under an abolished or amended law ¹. The Supreme Court of California found in People v Harmon 54 Cal. 2d 9 (1960) that even a defendant undergoing trial for assault was not entitled to the benefit of an amendment of the mandatory death penalty to a lesser sentence at judicial discretion. However, In re Estrada , 63 Cal. 2d 740 (1965), the Court overturned the previous ruling, and agreed with the dissenting opinion - that the defendant was entitled to the relief from the amendment. Ultimately, this would depend on whether the Act that repeals the sections of the law that made those actions criminal is retroactive or not. As with most laws, the general presumption is that it is not retroactive. As for your criminal record, indictments and misdemeanors will appear unless expunged, the process for which varies between jurisdictions. 1. p.43 - it is generally denied, or limited to cases where the legislation does not have a 'saving class' (statutes that prevent the abatement of past or pending convictions), or where final judgment is pending.

When a criminal statute is repealed, are those still held under it automatically freed?

How was this handled in the past when things were decriminalized, e.g. homosexuality? Is there an automatic process that guarantees freedom for those held under an abolished law, or does this have to be made explicit every time? Can one's criminal record include an offence against a statute that is no longer valid?

A crime is a crime if it was unlawful at the time. A law is not retroactively applied or repealed unless that is explicit in the law that creates or repeals it. For very good reasons most governments are very careful about retrospective legislation. A criminal record will include all crimes of which you were convicted unless there is a law saying otherwise (e.g. expungement laws).

Can someone more wealthy than me bury me in legal fees?

USA Federal Law - I have a company worth about $6m. I got on the bad side of a person with a company worth well over $750m (with attorneys on staff). The CEO threatened to bury me in an endless sea of frivolous lawsuits, so that I'm essentially paralyzed having to defend myself in court day after day until my legal expenses drain my bank account and put me out of business. Is this legal? Are there any countermeasures or defenses against it?

There are both statutes and customs aimed at preventing " Malicious Prosecution " and " Abuse of Process ." (In Pennsylvania, for example, the 1980 Dragonetti Act allows the victim of a frivolous lawsuit to counter-sue for compensatory damages.) One can also buy insurance against this type of risk: Umbrella liability policies will generally provide a defense against civil lawsuits and any damages awarded, as will many business insurance policies. Of course, none of this is to say that a skilled legal team can't avoid all of these countermeasures and, in practice, take up a significant amount of your time and trouble. We do not have a perfect system of justice.

Can someone more wealthy than me bury me in legal fees?

USA Federal Law - I have a company worth about $6m. I got on the bad side of a person with a company worth well over $750m (with attorneys on staff). The CEO threatened to bury me in an endless sea of frivolous lawsuits, so that I'm essentially paralyzed having to defend myself in court day after day until my legal expenses drain my bank account and put me out of business. Is this legal? Are there any countermeasures or defenses against it?

Lawyers can be sanctioned for filing law suits they know have no merit. It's unethical and an abuse of due process. That said, there are plenty of legitimate reasons someone could find to file a law suit against you if they choose to make you their "pet project." The more business dealings you do with them, the more reasons they could potentially find to sue you. And, yes, you are correct. The discrepancy in your relative bank accounts gives your counterparty a distinct advantage in this situation. As a practical matter, I suggest the following: Invest in an attorney to figure out your legal position regarding the matter at hand. Negotiate with your counterparty to reach an amicable settlement. Go kindly on your way and try to have no further contact with him. (Hopefully, he will forget about you and focus on more constructive things than filing law suits.)

Can embedded software be patented in the EU?

I know that no software can be patented in Europe. But what if I use software in an electronic board, and introduce that hardware? Can that be patented?

Software cannot be patented although it does have copyright. Hardware can be the subject of a patent, however, that would not cover any software aspects such as the programming built into a PROM. While it is possible to render any software into an integrated circuit, practically, anything simple enough to make this feasible is probably too simple to patent.

Legality of using album artwork from freecovers.net

I am building an online store for a vinyl company and I want to create an application to help them add cover artwork to their store. Am I legally allowed to use the artwork from freecovers.net on their online store? Will I get sued?

Am I legally allowed to use the artwork from freecovers.net on their online store? Maybe. Will I get sued? Maybe. I had a look at their site and when trying to follow the link to the "Terms of Use" page all I got was a broken database query so I can't see whet they say about it. However, reading their FAQ and the way they source their covers there is a very real chance that there are potential copyright breaches involved. Put simply, the covers are somebody's copyright. In general, they have been uploaded without the copyright holder's permission. The use that FreeCovers.net makes of them may meet fair use/fair dealing provisions in the copyright acts of the relevant jurisdictions (i.e. basically every jurisdiction in the world for online use) or they may not - that is between the copyright holder and FreeCovers.net. It is likely that they would in the USA; in places like the UK or Australia it is likely that they wouldn't - what is fair use/fair dealing depends on jurisdiction. What you are proposing to do (use the covers in a profit making venture) is extremely unlikely to be considered fair use/fair dealing anywhere and may leave you open to being sued by the copyright holder - whether that suit is successful is a matter for the court. However, if you are selling the records then it is highly likely that the copyright holder of the music and the cover art are the same organisation i.e. the record company. If you approached them for permission to use the cover art and they agree, then you are home and hosed.

How is an area deemed unsafe and needing to be cordoned off?

How is an area deemed unsafe and needing to be cordoned off? Would it be the person at the top of the law enforcement agency (police chief or sheriff) who would make the decision that a particular area is unsafe and needs to be cordoned off with police tape, would it be the elected official at the top (mayor, town supervisor, county administrator), or a judge or magistrate? What I'm imagining is that after the police tape is put up, and personnel is stationed at the tape to explain to people, if needed, that anyone crossing the tape will be subject to arrest.

The powers given to law enforcement professionals will be detailed in the relevant law that establishes them. I would suspect that the decision to cordon off an area would fall within the purview of the officer on the scene; the idea that a police officer would need to seek permission before cordoning off a motor vehicle accident or chemical spill is unworkable. I would also suspect that other emergency personnel (e.g. ambulance and fire-fighters) would have similar powers. However, such cordoning off would be a temporary measure and if it was maintained for an unreasonable period it would be open to challenge through an administrative or judicial process. If the police decided that a feature was a permanent hazard then they could seek a court order on the owner of the property to provide some measure to adequately protect the public, by either removing the hazard or providing some permanent barrier, under whatever laws seemed most appropriate.

How is an area deemed unsafe and needing to be cordoned off?

How is an area deemed unsafe and needing to be cordoned off? Would it be the person at the top of the law enforcement agency (police chief or sheriff) who would make the decision that a particular area is unsafe and needs to be cordoned off with police tape, would it be the elected official at the top (mayor, town supervisor, county administrator), or a judge or magistrate? What I'm imagining is that after the police tape is put up, and personnel is stationed at the tape to explain to people, if needed, that anyone crossing the tape will be subject to arrest.

A few states including NY have a defined executive government role called "fire police" who can deny access to the site of emergencies; if there has been a recent death then they may be enabled to do this. wikipedia "Fire police in New York State are peace officers with full police powers (including that of arrest) when acting pursuant to their special duties. These are granted under Section 209 (c) of the General Municipal Law. As New York State peace officers, they are required to take an oath, a copy of which must be kept on file in the town clerk's office in the municipality in which they serve. As mandated by Executive Law, Section 845 (Chapter 482, Laws of 1979 and Chapter 843 Laws of 1980), they are also listed with the Central Registry of Police and Peace Officers at the New York State, Division of Criminal Justice Services, Office of Public Safety in Albany, NY. " I cannot say if your city, county or town has such an office.

What are the benefits of a incorporating vs. operating an LLC?

I'm in California, but have been told to Incorporate or become an LLC in Nevada. Is there any reason to do this out of state, other than cheaper renewal fees?

The specific law you incorporate under will determine the rights and liabilities involved. That said, as a general rule, the major practical difference between a C corporation and an LLC is that a C corp will pay corporate income taxes, while and LLC has partnership-style pass-through taxation.

What are the benefits of a incorporating vs. operating an LLC?

I'm in California, but have been told to Incorporate or become an LLC in Nevada. Is there any reason to do this out of state, other than cheaper renewal fees?

Until recently Delaware offered so many benefits to businesses that an overwhelming number of U.S. businesses were formed there. Nevada is one of the states challenging Delaware's distinction in that capacity. Because this is an area of law that is both nuanced and subject to rapid changes, I won't provide a digest of the relative merits of each domicile. The states that are actively courting this business do a good job of touting their relative advantages, so an internet search can provide that. E.g., presently: http://www.bizfilings.com/learn/incorporate-delaware-nevada.aspx https://www.incnow.com/delaware-vs-nevada/ https://www.delawareinc.com/llc/advantages-of-llc/

Fringe case of naturalization and dual citizenship (United states)?

So I've given a look over State Department policy and am unsure about exact actions that can result in revoked citizenship. From here it seems naturalizing with intent to lose citizenship in another country is grounds for expatriation but its meaning is vague. http://travel.state.gov/content/travel/english/legal-considerations/us-citizenship-laws-policies/citizenship-and-dual-nationality.html Let's say I somehow made my own country and declared myself president of it, and everybody in the borders at the time is granted citizenship. Do I automatically lose my U.S. citizenship? Do the other US citizens? Were they naturalized even or does that not count as naturalization and they just are citizens of the new country? Have I now forced them to choose between my stylish empire in the making or the world of American citizenry? What about getting new US citizens, what if my government had no qualms about you retaining US citizenship, are you still acting with intent to lose citizenship ? This may sound wacky and unrealistic but discussing this simplified example could have some useful procedural clarifications.

The way "with intent to lose citizenship" works in US law is extremely demanding; it is very hard to establish it by doing anything short of appearing before a consular officer and formally renouncing citizenship. Other ways include serving in the military of a country at war with the US, being convicted of treason for committing one of the specified potentially expatriating acts (serving in an army at war with the US is sort of a trial-less special case of that, because engaging in a war against the US is treason), or serving in a "policy-level position" in a foreign government. The State Department says as much in the link. Obtaining citizenship is listed as a case where the administrative premise applies ; so is swearing allegiance to a foreign state, serving in the military of a state at peace with the US, and serving in lower-level government posts of a foreign state. In those cases, the person retains US citizenship but at some point in the future may be asked by the State Department if they wanted to renounce it. Intent to renounce citizenship is established only by explicit declaration if you've only obtained citizenship in another country. With "policy-level posts" the premise doesn't apply, but then the State Department just decides on a case-by-case basis. You may well lose US citizenship (although the King of Thailand was born in the US, and I'm not sure if he's considered to have lost citizenship), but it's not automatic. Your senior ministers may lose citizenship, but it is likewise not automatic. But the normal citizens? The link explicitly says that the administrative premise covers that.

Can I attack a VPS I am renting?

I live in France and I would like to know if it was legal to attack the Virtual Private Server I am renting in the US.

Consider that the provider doesn't know it's you that is attacking your own VPS, so they could start an investigation, which is expensive, and might also incur fines if they alert the police forces Some attacks (DDOS for instance) will necessarily affect also other users, not only you. Bottom line, I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that if you don't have their permission, it's illegal everywhere. Ask your provider, and if he refuses to grant you permission, find a provider which specifically allows such a thing (I guess they must exist somewhere, after all, white hats must do some tests sometimes…). Keep in mind that I think it's unlikely you'll find a VPS which allows such a thing, since you would risk crashing the whole machine, it's much more likely you'll end up needing a dedicated server.

Are the names of guns protected under copyright law in the US?

So I am trying to create a military shooter and therefore must have guns. I would like to include some weapons from real life (Ak-47, M16, Glock, etc.) and I would like to know what legal issues I might run into by using these names. Mainly if I could be violating copyright laws.

Copyrights don't apply to the names used. You mean trademarks. You copyright your game and you trademark the name. http://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/11v69k/using_a_guns_name_in_your_video_game/ Basically, it wouldn't be wise to use trademarked names in your game. Even though it's unlikely you would be sued and even if you were, you could possibly fight it under Fair Use, but do you want to take the chance? If some gun company decided they didn't like how you used their name, even if they have little to no grounds for a case, they can STILL sue. Anybody can sue for pretty much any reason where there is doubt. If they have enough money to throw around, they can drag you through the mud, ruin your business and then just lift their lawsuit. They don't need to win in court, just destroy you. Keep in mind that even if you don't use the name, if the gun in your game is an accurate replica of the real thing, it could still be a trademark issue. EDIT: Something you could consider though is asking permission. You never know. They may simply not care. You might even try propositioning them to pay YOU to have their gun showcased in your game. It's not entirely uncommon for companies to be willing to pay for a bit of endorsement advertising.

Are the names of guns protected under copyright law in the US?

So I am trying to create a military shooter and therefore must have guns. I would like to include some weapons from real life (Ak-47, M16, Glock, etc.) and I would like to know what legal issues I might run into by using these names. Mainly if I could be violating copyright laws.

It may happen that the manufacturer may ask you for attribution as appears to have happened in Battlefield 4 (Serbu Shorty et al.) where the manufacturer is now recognised in the descriptions, even though internally a nickname is used (for scripting and the like).

Are the names of guns protected under copyright law in the US?

So I am trying to create a military shooter and therefore must have guns. I would like to include some weapons from real life (Ak-47, M16, Glock, etc.) and I would like to know what legal issues I might run into by using these names. Mainly if I could be violating copyright laws.

Glock isn't a gun; it's a company. You would need permission to use any guns that they own the trademarks for. I think colt owns the trademark for the M16. But "M4" was ruled to be a generic term, so you could use an M4 instead. The AK-47 is a Russian gun and Mikhail Kalashnikov is dead. As far as I can tell, you could still use the design of these guns, but you would have to call it something else. I think this is what Arma did Possible solutions There's a good chance you won't get sued, but if you want to avoid issues altogether, you could make your own weapons. Just keep in mind how a gun works when designing them. If you want it to look like a military weapon, just make sure that it accepts a STANAG magazine. Look at other weapons for inspiration. Since this is for a game, I would would personally create a fictional gun manufacture in your game. Like "Kirk MacQuarrie Arms". Another thing to remember is that nobody owns copyrights on the concept of guns in general. If you use an existing model and change a few things, you should be safe. Someone in this forum thread said: If you are a big company, yes. If you have no money they won’t hunt you for using their gun designs. Would be a waste of resources to sue an indie without anything in his pockets. You may also want to check out this reddit page .

Can a mayor or a Common Council issue a temporary no trespassing order at an unsafe location?

Related question: How is an area deemed unsafe and needing to be cordoned off? An individual property owner can set up No Trespassing signs at the required intervals, and then law enforcement can prosecute people for ignoring those signs. But what about a municipality? In this case, it's a city in the state of New York. Can the mayor decide that a particular area is unsafe, and order that No Trespassing signs be put up? Can the legislative body (in this case, a Common Council) issue such an order? I realize that the Common Council can alter the City Code but that takes time -- there needs to be a public hearing, etc. I'm talking about a short-term solution. I spoke with the head of the local station of the state police, and he said that if the City put up such signs, and notified the state police with a jurat (i.e. in writing, with the required legal language), then they would do the enforcement.

As I alluded to in a comment to your previous question, if the stream is "navigable in fact" then you may have an uphill battle, especially if it is owned by a government entity. Long review of navigable waterways in NY state I have a theory of which waterway you are referring to, and I believe I found it by name in this article, referenced to a historic court case under a section titled "held to be navigable in fact". If I am guessing correctly, I am sorry for your cause, since this suggests that the common law right of access cannot be denied, or at the very least, this is not a simple question and may take much effort on the part of the city to execute to your desires.

Can an author of an app use logos that belong to auto manufacturers?

Consider a mobile app related to automobiles. In order to identify the make of a vehicle within the app (in list views, menus, and buttons, for example), the author might choose to use logos that belong to car manufacturers (Ford, Toyota, etc.) Would this hypothetical use of logos scenario implicate trademark law? Would it be trademark infringement?

The use may constitute trademark infringement if it implies sponsorship or endorsement I'm going to assume US jurisdiction for this question, because you've not provided one, and you haven't provided enough car manufacturer names to suggest that this wouldn't apply to the US. I'll also only cover Federal law (the cases were tried in state courts), so be aware that there may be additional responsibilities under state law that I don't examine here. 15 U.S. Code § 1114 : (1) Any person who shall, without the consent of the registrant— (a) use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; or (b) reproduce, counterfeit, copy, or colorably imitate a registered mark and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used in commerce upon or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive, shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant for the remedies hereinafter provided. Under subsection (b) hereof, the registrant shall not be entitled to recover profits or damages unless the acts have been committed with knowledge that such imitation is intended to be used to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive. 15 U.S. Code § 1125 : (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which— (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act. These actions - the use of the trademarked manufacturer logo within the app - is likely to constitute trademark infringement, if the trademark owner's permission is not sought prior to publication, and the use of the trademark is likely to cause confusion as to the source, sponsorship or approval of the goods. What this means, is that if the trademarks are used in such a way that a reasonable person is likely to think that: The product is an official product from the owner/brand associated with the trademark; The product is sponsored by the owner/brand associated with the trademark; or The product is approved or endorsed by the owner/brand associated with the trademark. Then an action in trademark infringement may be brought by the trademark owner. Consider the following two cases: Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elect. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961) In this case, judgement was made for the defendant, as the defendant's field was not considered close enough to the plaintiff's for there to be a likely chance of confusion. AMF, Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979) In this case the trial judge decided that the trademarks Slickcraft and Sleekcraft were unlikely to cause confusion. This ruling was overturned on appeal and an injunction was ordered by the court. Possible defenses Nominative use of a mark When a mark is used solely to identify a product, this use is privileged. A descriptive mark used for its primary purpose Descriptive marks are a subtype of trademarks, which are descriptive in nature but have acquired a secondary meaning. Here, using a descriptive mark for its primary purpose has been found not to constitute infringement. General First Amendment protection Satire and parody are generally recognized as defenses if the primary purpose of the use is not directly commercial. If the products are not similar enough to be likely to cause confusion; and The use does not imply endorsement, sponsorship or approval of the product by the trademark owner then it should be fine. It seems that the situation in the question above would not give rise to confusion (unless the car manufacturer also develops an app, for instance), the second issue - endorsement - should be avoided. Many programs will have a legal section that includes ownership information and disclaims any association with the trademark owner(s). I have not been able to locate any cases where the effect of these sections have been tested. Further reading Overview of Trademark Law

Can an author of an app use logos that belong to auto manufacturers?

Consider a mobile app related to automobiles. In order to identify the make of a vehicle within the app (in list views, menus, and buttons, for example), the author might choose to use logos that belong to car manufacturers (Ford, Toyota, etc.) Would this hypothetical use of logos scenario implicate trademark law? Would it be trademark infringement?

Wikipedia suggests: Fair Use allows nominative use of trademarks. When you consult your attorney, make sure he explains to you how "Fair Use" might apply to your situation. And whether your application refers to the "actual trademarked product or its source" for comparative purposes which might allow you to fairly use the marks in your product. Please remember, I am not providing you legal advice. You need an attorney for that. Never take legal advice from strangers over the internet. Always go to an attorney licensed to practice in your state.

How ironclad are businesses's terms and conditions?

I was wondering how binding my websites Terms and Conditions are. I specify a few things there, including a return policy and terms of use. I am in California. I'm starting to sell to the U.S. and then Canada, and then the whole EU.

Your terms and conditions must comply with the laws in: Your jurisdiction (California) Your customer's jurisdiction (each of the US states, Canadian provinces and ultimately countries and sub-jurisdictions in Europe) If they do they will generally be enforceable; if they don't then they will not be enforceable and you may be exposing yourself to civil and criminal sanctions. While not immediately relevant to you, Australian Consumer Law has such sanctions to goods sold into Australia from anywhere in the world; I am not familiar with other jurisdictions. With respect to your comment that you will not accept returns or refunds, this would expose you to potential fines in Australia of $220,000 for an individual or $1,100,000 for a corporation - under Australian Consumer Law returns and refunds are a consumer right. I strongly suspect that most of the jurisdictions you are selling into would take a similar position. A general "catch-all" like "to the extent permitted by law" may reduce the risk of being prosecuted but it would not eliminate it entirely. Again, in Australia, the provision is that you must not engage in deceptive and misleading conduct - merely suggesting that you will not give a refund even with the limitation above - may still be deemed "deceptive and misleading" if the court feels that a reasonable consumer might assume that they are not entitled to a refund. You need professional legal advice on this.

How It is with sharing content on Facebook

Facebook Terms of Service contains (3.8.2015) the following text in section 2.4: When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture). Does this mean everyone is allowed to use that content (republish, remix...), when you publish it using Public setting? What happens If user who originally published published content, removes it?

No. That clause does not give other users a licence to reproduce the work (other than what is necessary to access or use it) or create derivative works. The copyright owner has the exclusive right to do those things. (See 17 USC 106 .) The clause you quote only indicates that other users can "access" (download for viewing) your "information" and use it, too. It doesn't give away any of your exclusive copyright in the work. You do grant Facebook a licence to do certain things with your work in section 2.1 of the Terms of Service, though.

Under U.S. Law, what does "Notwithstanding" mean?

I am being asked to sign an non-disclosure agreement and one of the sections focuses on the ownership of any "works" (defined broadly to include everything from ideas to tangible products) which I might produce while employed. The first two paragraphs in the section state very clearly that everything I produce belongs to the employing company. The third paragraph seems to grant me the right to produce non-competitive products as long as I do it on my own time and do not use the company's equipment or trade secrets. As an budding entrepreneur, I will not sign this agreement unless this third paragraph overpowers the statements of the previous two. Unfortunately, the third paragraph begins with a phrase that I don't know how to interpret... "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, any provision of this Agreement which provides for me to assign any of my rights to a Work shall not apply to any invention developed on my own time without using equipment, supplies, facilities or trade secrets..." So here is my question... Does the phrase "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement" mean... a). "Subordinate to everything else contained in this Agreement..." ...or... b). "Overriding everything else contained in this Agremeent..." ...or... c). something else entirely?

Notwithstanding in this case takes its ordinary meaning - "despite": Despite anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, any provision of this Agreement which provides for me to assign any of my rights to a Work shall not apply to any invention developed on my own time without using equipment, supplies, facilities or trade secrets… Without having the text of the rest of the relevant parts of the contract, my initial interpretation is that the effect of this, is that you would not need to assign your rights to Works produced in your own time without connection to your paid employment. Also, if this was subordinate to the other clauses you mentioned, then it would have little or no effect. Finally, the general legal principle is that works produced in your own time with no connection to your employment (resources, knowledge or otherwise) are not assigned, unless specifically stated. That is, the contract would generally explicitly state that works produced in your own time with no reliance on your employment are assigned to the Employer. However, such a term is almost certainly unreasonable and could be challenged in court if the employer ever attempted to enforce it.

UK: Public Access Barrister vs Solicitor

The PDF entitled 'Public Access Guidance for Lay Clients' (from the Bar Standards Board ) compares and contrasts Public Access Barristers (abbreviated as AB) and Solicitors. Two key differences are the question of an AB's ability to 'conduct litigation, and availability of an AB. However, besides the similarities (eg 1 AB is cheaper than 1 regular B and 1 Solicitor) and differences mentioned in that PDF, what are the other similarities and differences?

I would say all the similarities and differences between approaching a barrister directly and going through a solicitor are set out in the PDF. The historical division of barristers and solicitors is discussed in the document. Traditionally, solicitors took on cases and did the 'behind the scenes' preparation before a case went to trial, and barristers represented that client in the courtroom using the prepared materials. You needed to go through a solicitor in order to be represented by a barrister; there was no way of approaching a barrister directly yourself as a lay person. While this has changed with the Public Access Barrister scheme, this way of instructing a barrister is still seen as the 'default' method. In the usual scheme of things, you, as a client, would deal with a solicitor, and they would then instruct a barrister to represent you in court. In the Public Access Barristers scheme, you, the client, effectively miss out the solicitor stage and you approach the barrister directly. But this leaves something of a gap. In the typical client-solicitor-barrister model, the solicitor's role is to prepare the case for the barrister: collating documents for court, for example. The barrister then takes the papers, reads them, prepares an argument based on those documents and puts the client's case in a courtroom. (This isn't always the case, as the document makes clear: some barristers are not qualified to conduct litigation, for example, whereas some solicitors are qualified to represent clients in court. It's more the typical and historical model.) In the Public Access Barrister scheme, there is no solicitor to prepare the case. From the PDF provided, this means that: this is cheaper, as you're not paying for two lawyers; but conversely: you will have to undertake some of the preparation yourself, e.g. collating the papers, and there are some cases which are too complex for a client to take directly to a barrister, because a solicitor would be required to prepare all of the documents necessary for the trial. In terms of similarities, you will still end up receiving the advice and/or the representation of a barrister; you simply won't be going through a third party, but will be dealing directly with that barrister.

When does one become a "founder" of a business?

When does one become a "founder" of a business? For example, would it be when work on the business starts or when the business is incorporated? Such events could be years apart.

"Founder" is a common term used in the startup community . The SEC refers to founders in its definition of "promoter" : Any person who, acting alone or in conjunction with one or more other persons, directly or indirectly takes initiative in founding and organizing the business or enterprise of an issuer

When does one become a "founder" of a business?

When does one become a "founder" of a business? For example, would it be when work on the business starts or when the business is incorporated? Such events could be years apart.

I think your question is one of semantics. So the answer depends on context. For example, if you are chatting with your friends, the answer could be when you start working on a new business idea that you one day hope will make money. On the other hand, if you are talking to VC investors it might be when you file the legal paperwork for your patent(s) or your corporation. Semantics depend on context.

Can a school punish you for appearing in court?

My friend missed an assignment in school because of a mandatory court summons. The teacher gave him a failing grade, and overall his grade dropped 3 letters for something he couldn't control. I'm almost certain that work and school have to give you an excused absence for attending court. If this is illegal could someone give me the law that says so?

The answer is a clear maybe. The school has a set of rules and by not attending you have broken those rules. The rules may (probably do) allow for consideration of extenuating circumstances but, in general, it doesn't have to. There is probably an appeals process, you need to investigate this. That said, if there are no provisions for extenuating circumstances and/or no appeals process then this may make the contract "unconscionable"; in many jurisdictions this makes the contract void. That doesn't mean you get the marks; it means you get your money back. The circumstances of your court appearance matter: the school may grant special consideration if you are called as a juror or witness; they might not if you are a defendant. Ultimately you had a choice, to follow the rules of the court or the school; there are consequences either way.

Protection on deposit for home buyers

Is it legal for a real estate agent to accept a deposit on a house and then hold an open house for that property in NSW Australia? Also is it legal for the real estate agent to raise the price on the house once the deposit has been made a certain price? Are there any laws that protect the home buyer once the deposit has been made outside of any contract that was signed?

In New South Wales all contracts for real estate must be in writing and there is no contract until they have been exchanged , that is signed by both parties although typically each party signs a different copy of the contract which is then exchanged. Once this occurs the contract is binding save for some cooling off provisions on the buyer (except auction sales) and the deposit is payable. What commonly happens is that a buyer will put in an offer with a signed contract and a cheque for the deposit - this does not make a contract, it is simply an aggressive and risky negotiating tactic! It remains an offer until the vendor signs the contract; in the meantime they are free to negotiate with other parties, make a counter offer etc. Ultimately, if they do not accept the offer or the buyer withdraws the offer they must refund the deposit. So, yes they can continue to show the property and raise the asking price. There are laws that limit the behaviour of real estate agents, most notably with respect to deceptive and misleading conduct, however, accepting a deposit cheque and a signed contract from a prospective buyer to take to the vendor would not offend these. Actually saying the offer was accepted when it wasn't might do.

Copyright of cartoon characters in a mobile app

I'm developing a mobile application and inside it, I have some customization options. I was interested in using designs, colors and ideas based on famous cartoon characters. For example: Wolverine's claws with a yellow background, Captain America's shield, Superman's symbol, Batman's face... etc... So, I'd like some information about this. Can I use those images in the first place? What are the implications? I know that I can't use a full batman drawing from an artist, but how about the batman symbol (which is universally known and used everywhere). Is there a difference? And finally, If I do get a C&D order, can I simply remove the content and avoid any further legal implications? Thank you very much.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. The likenesses of fictional characters are copyrightable works (not trademarks), and the examples you gave are most certainly copyrighted. Can I use those images in the first place? What are the implications? If you negotiate a license with the copyright holders, certainly. Otherwise, US copyright law provides an exemption for fair use, allowing portions of copyrighted works to be incorporated into original works for demonstrative or educational purposes. There's also an exemption for parodies under Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. Without knowing more about your app, it's hard to say if you'd be covered under an exemption, and the decision is ultimately up to a court if and when an infringement suit is filed against you. I know that I can't use a full batman drawing from an artist, but how about the batman symbol (which is universally known and used everywhere). Is there a difference? Probably not. The popularity and wide use of a work does not affect its copyright status. And finally, If I do get a C&D order, can I simply remove the content and avoid any further legal implications? It depends on the wording of the cease and desist order. If it explicitly says that they will waive their legal right to pursue a claim against you if you comply, then yes, you'll be safe. But in all likelihood it will simply be a threat to sue if you don't comply, and complying does not necessarily mean that you're safe. Also note that a cease and desist does not necessarily mean that what you did was illegal; see chilling effect . It just means that the copyright holder believes your use is an infringement.

Copyright of cartoon characters in a mobile app

I'm developing a mobile application and inside it, I have some customization options. I was interested in using designs, colors and ideas based on famous cartoon characters. For example: Wolverine's claws with a yellow background, Captain America's shield, Superman's symbol, Batman's face... etc... So, I'd like some information about this. Can I use those images in the first place? What are the implications? I know that I can't use a full batman drawing from an artist, but how about the batman symbol (which is universally known and used everywhere). Is there a difference? And finally, If I do get a C&D order, can I simply remove the content and avoid any further legal implications? Thank you very much.

In general, the objects you describe are almost certainly Trade Marks and you cannot use these without permission. The remedies for infringing a Trade Mark include an injunction to stop use but the plaintiff could also seek damages and/or the profit that you made from using them.

Do UK citizens have a right to legal advice?

As a British citizen: If I can't afford to pay a solicitor to get legal advice, am I entitled to free legal advice from the government?

It depends on the circumstances, see here . You’ll usually need to show that: your case is eligible for legal aid the problem is serious you can’t afford to pay for legal costs