In a small business we have people who make orders over the phone (commonly known as card not present). Common practice is to directly input the details into the machine as the customer reads them out.

One of the chaps in the office is adamant that, they read out the details and I write them down and not input them in the machine, once the customer is done telling me the details I say that I will call them back with payment confirmation.

I would then in my own time input the details into the card machine and process the payment and if all goes through, I would shred the paper immediatly and notify the customer.

I don't feel comfortable writing the details down, I've told this chap many times. Is there a legal way I could tell him so he won't pressure me to do this in the future?

Is it legal to retain customer card details when making transactions over the phone (UK)?


The title basic summarizes my question. Is a real life story subject to copyright by those who lived it? Or could someones create a book or movie about the history without contacting those who actually lived it?

To make the question more concrete, consider the recent [soccer team rescue in a thai cave](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/thai-cave-rescue-boys-coach-safe-thailand-chiang-rai-a8445561.html) and some intentions to [create a movie](https://www.dw.com/en/thai-cave-rescue-drama-could-be-hollywoods-next-blockbuster/a-44645418) about it. Could potential movie producers create a movie about a football team trapped inside a cave for 18 days without contacting anyone (or their legal representatives)?


How long does it take for a conviction which will result in a fine and community order to become spent in England for someone over 18 years of age ?

Spent convictions


[This article](http://www.mbbp.com/news/generic-trademark) (and my knowledge about trademarks) says Generic Names can't be trademarked. So my question is about the genericity of a name and the probability of getting it trademarked.

I own a generic domain name with `.com` since 2010 but lately found that another person is using the `.co.uk` tld of the same domain since 2016 for a website and doing business. I am planning to develop on my domain.

The domain name looks something like `freecupcakes.com` (just symbolic but not about cupcakes) and another party use the domain `freecupcakes.co.uk`.

my observations about the other person's business are.

1. They are using it since 2016
2. They don't have trademark registerd but a company with the same name in UK

So my questions are,.

1. Can I use proceed building the business with my domain which I own from 2010?
2. Can I register a company with the same name in another location not in UK/Europe?
3. Can this type of name be ever trademarked?
4. Can the other person using the same business name ever trademark this name?

Can I get a generic name trademarked?


I am working in one of UK companies as an employee. I have one and half week holiday during Christmas period, it includes bank holidays and my personal holidays. My notification period is one week as well. Will it will be right to give then notification last working day of the year and, so all following week will be my holiday and bank holidays. Effectively I would not come back to work. Will it be considered proper notification?

Notifying to leave a job during Christmas season in UK


Can you legaly share a course (without asking the writer) if you always quote who wrote it?

I said "always" because I'm talking about a large scale, not a private conversation on Facebook for example.

Does it have something to do with money? I understand selling someone's work is not ok, but what about money generated by discret publicity?

What about public domain knowledge? How do you make a legal difference between sharing Thales Theorem and sharing a formula found by one of your teachers? Between sharing a quote from a famous person with a not famous person? Is it related to 'is the person alive'?

About Course Intellectual Property


I will go straight to the point, I already read the terms I looked for some information on the issue of licenses I looked at sites but nothing, I did not understand anything is that I have a project that is totally done by me, but I want anyone who dares to share or do something to dump the credits on me, what license do I use for this?

I have doubts about the Github licensing issue


I used to work for Orbitz.com the travel site and remembered wondering how [OrbitzMoving.com](https://blog.movingcompanyreviews.com/orbitzmoving-com-what-happened-to-it-history-and-overview/) could get away with using the Orbitz name in their website url. OrbitzMoving.com was not related to Orbitz.com in any way, they just hijacked the name to confuse consumers into trusting them.

Is this legal? Could you start a site called GoogleMoving.com? I have to think it's not, but OrbitzMoving.com lasted ~10 years. Would love to hear the right answer.

Is it legal to include another company name in your name? Example: Is OrbitzMoving.com (not related to Orbitz.com) legal?


Where can I find a lawyer for victims of cyberstalking? One can find a criminal defense lawyer but not the one help these victims.


How can one give advice that he or she thinks is correct without incurring legal liability from possible negative effects of the advice? Is there some phrase that can be used for that? Something like "I don't take responsibility for this advice. I'm just expressing my personal opinion."?

Does this matter if it's done in a blog or personally? If the clause is on a blog's TOS or on every page? If the advisor is an expert in the field he or she is advising about?

How can one give advice without risk?


I have a quick question as I am curious about the legality of websites such as literotica as an example.

These websites are aimed at the kink community. I have heard Literotica
contains countless stories involving kink and some of these are of a sexual nature.

The problem is some of these stories I have heard involve minors so would this site be legal or illegal in UK?

All these stories are completely 100% fictional. Not sure if this makes a difference.
Just interested to hear about these sites.

As a disclaimer I have not visited this site or read any stories regarding minors. I am just interested in the law.

The legality of fictional stories involving sex with minors


I am going to create open-source project for Linux, and i would like to ask you, how is it with licenses and law.

For example i will make a project with GPL license and:

1. Must i have company, or can i make it as individual?
2. Must i have sign any agreement with/out lawyer?
3. Is it enough to post my project into github with source code and just write that is GPL license?
4. And is 3. is true that let's say that some man (bad man) make open-source with GPL license and if project will be successful that he just change license or close github repository. Is possible to sue that man?

Thank you

Law and open-source project


Suppose that a plaintiff wants to bring a lawsuit but keep his/her identity confidential, in either a criminal or a civil case.

The plaintiff refuses to tell either the general public or the media who he/she is. When is this possible? Who decides this request for privacy? Does the plaintiff ever have to choose between appealing a case to a Supreme Court (example), and preserving anonymity? For example, the plaintiff may fear public general condemnation, reprisals, for his/her safety.

I ask this for England and Wales, but please feel free to discuss other countries.

In England and Wales, how can a plaintiff remain private and confidential?


[*O'Sullivan & Hilliard's The Law of Contract*](https://www.amazon.co.uk/OSullivan-Hilliards-Law-Contract-Janet/dp/0198807821/ref=dp_ob_title_bk) (2018 8 ed). p. 312.

>
> [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eqFgW.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eqFgW.jpg)
>
>
>

The green (party's believing a mistaken unreasonable belief) obviously can be distinguished from the red (about causation). Furthermore, I don't think the HCA Justices in [*McRae*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McRae_v_Commonwealth_Disposals_Commission) would be dumb enough to concoct two limbs that couldn't be distinguished.

Thus how can the orange contend that the green "is identical" to the purple, but that the purple makes unnecessary the red? With math symbols, if green ≠ red and green = purple, then how can purple make unnecessary red?

How does the first limb of the McRae test make the second limb unnecessary?


What is the meaning of the consensual principle for the basis of making the law of contract?

What is the meaning of consensual principle for the basis of making law of contract?


What if there is a clash between the spirit of law and the letter of law and my actions only abide by the spirit of law but not the letter of law?Is there a chance that I might go to jail?

Can one go to jail for not abiding by the letter of the law but abiding the spirit of the law?


If a person had and will never have a use for gun and wanted to insure nobody can use his identity to potentially buy one (through identity theft, for example), would that be possible?

Obviously committing a crime seems like a bad way of doing this but I believe if you have been jailed you can't legally own a gun.

I would like to opt out of owning guns


I did my 2018 tax return with Universal Financials, LLC, and I got my tax review copy online. Then one of my colleague came and said he also did tax return filing through the same agency and he got my tax review copy, which includes my name, address,social security number, and other tax related info. So I dont know how to protect my details from others and also is that details shared to anyone else or not. Is there any way to ask for the compensation to the above said agency? or should I ask the agency to provide me a documented agreement saying that if anything happens in future, they will take the full responsibility. Or shall I move a legal case against them?

Identity Leakage - Universal Financials


Although at present there is no 'Single Market' for Crime and Punishment, is there mutual recognition of Criminal Laws across all EU members, such that any offense commited in one Country is also an offense in every EU Country? For example, a person commits a (non-corporate) crime in one country, and subsequently goes on holiday in another Country. Can he be prosecuted for the original crime (and possibly jailed) in the Country he is in while on holiday, without requiring extradition back to the original Country? Similary, lets assume that somebody that somebody publicly insults the EU (e.g. on Social Media) while in his home Country. Can he be punished anywhere in the EU for it, including his home Country?

EU-Wide laws on Crime and Punishment (of individuals)


Let's begin with a little premise of my query. I have been learning the Ossetian language for the past few months. Unfortunately, resources on the language are few and far between, and most of them are in Russian. That said, I have been able to gather some materials (mostly online) that I have been using thus far to study. Problem is, now that I am venturing into more challenging grammatical topics, I feel that having physical copies of the books, articles and dictionaries would be necessary. Now, most of these resources are old Soviet-era stuff, and I don't know if they are still available, and even if they are, I have no way to have them delivered from Russia. I checked online (Amazon, ebay and the like), but none of the sellers have anything remotely related to the kinds of things I am looking for. So, I have decided to print some of these out. My question is whether it will be legal to do that? To be specific, the resources I am talking about include an Ossetian-Russian dictionary and two grammars of Ossetian.

Is printing a softcopy of an extremely old book/document/research article illegal?


**The case:**

X is Y’s next door neighbor. Y regularly drops off Y’s child, C, for X to babysit for the afternoon. In return, Y typically (although not always) buys X groceries and other items. Y brings C over to X’s house. X tells Y that “I am much too busy to pay close attention to C. C will have to look out for him/herself.” Y leaves and during the course of the afternoon X occasionally checks on C and gives C some food for lunch. C while left alone wanders into X’s unattended swimming pool and drowns to death. Y returns with groceries for X to find that C is dead. Is X liable for C’s death or is Y?

**Interpretation:**

I know that there is no statute that addressed the obligation of parents or babysitters. Thus, even though X agrees to babysit, there is nothing backing Y's situation legally. In addition, X even said that X is busy that day. So I see Y as being liable for C's death. Does the law of omissions (duty) apply here?

Is X liable for this child's death?


I have pictures which I've transformed into my own art and have watermarked. I've shared them with one other person. How do I legally prevent not only this person from using, distributing or selling these pictures but anyone for that matter?

creative art-work


Let's say there's some material licensed under *X*. *X* has section *A*, which states that it survives termination. But *X* was applied to material, parts of which can't be licensed under *X* in the first place. What happens with *A*?

Does it survive? Is it like it was never applied? Is it applied only to licensable parts? Does it depend on local laws?

Section survivability on violated licenses


In software industry, while naming a new app or a product, will there be any copyright issue if we use an existing name?

Will there be any copyright issue if we use an existing product's name?


If I am an ISP, I have to pay some money to my upstream network provider in order to transfer data in and out at a certain speed for a certain ammount of data. This is reflected on the user by speed and data capping.

However, when two of my users want to communicate, they probably barely even touch my servers and it generally does not cost me anything to let someone, say, access a website their neighbours host from the same ISP.

As such, if I decide not to throttle or cap the network unless I have to, where it costs me more money, would I be in violation of Title II net neutrality? In order to stay compliant, will I have to start charging my customers for a service that is basically free to me, and actually takes more effort to regulate? And what happens when, say, netflix tries to buy a connection from me? Will I be compliant as long as I don't discriminate against who I give a connection to?

Will net neutrality require me as an ISP to actively throttle my own users?


I made a doctor's appointment by calling and reserving it.

I received a text messaging saying that I need to call the doctor's office and confirm my appointment, and that if I fail to do so the appointment may be cancelled.

I forgot about the appointment and missed it, and then I received a text message saying that I owe them $125 for failing to cancel the appointment.

Is this some kind of fraud? Or why do they do this?

I will never pay them unless ordered to do so by a court, which I don't expect to happen, but is it normal?

What's with unexpected cancellation fees?


I took a job a year ago for which I am significantly over-qualified, because it allowed me to work from home while I convalesced from two major surgeries. During that time, I have observed myriad opportunities to improve operations and brought many of those to my management but virtually all were ignored. So, I have thrice over several months proposed to higher management that I move to a new role, but due to incredibly high management turnover there has also been to no progress there.

My employer is a service outsourcing business, and while this was unfolding the client of theirs I essentially work for posted an opening for a job with a description essentially identical to that I have been proposing to my employer, and I indicated to a colleague that I would be applying for it. This information became known to my management, who NOW became interested and called me into a meeting with the intention of terminating me, which I have theater temporarily by virtue of belonging to multiple protected employee classes.

As a result of that meeting, my direct supervisor and her boss have begun a campaign of harassment. Most of that is typical and not germaine to my issue for this forum, which is that they are also actively working to denigrate my relationship with the client, using demonstrably false information. Can I halt that behavior, and/or Sue for the damage to my ability to later work for the client?

It may be worth noting that no NDA nor non-compete prevents me from going to work for/with the client.

Thanks very much in advance for your help.

Employer is damaging my reputation with client


I was in a bookstore today and I saw a coloring book called "Tolkien's World" which was based on characters from The Lord of the Rings and other works by JRR Tolkien. On the back cover, it said:

>
> This book is unofficial and is not authorised by the Tolkien Estate or HarperCollins Publishers.
>
>
>

How can the author and his/her publisher get away with that? Surely the publication of the work is going to infringe on the copyright of the Tolkien Estate and HarperCollins? I would have expected publication of the work to have drawn a lawsuit, but it's clearly been in print for a couple of years.

Disclaimer - I have no background in law.

How can an "unofficial" book avoid copyright issues?


If I release my website in Dec 2015, the copyright date should definitely say "© 2015". Once Jan 1st comes around, if I automatically (with Javascript or some server side code) change it to "© 2016" is that legal? No code has changed, so there is nothing that is really copyright 2016.

I tried searching for an answer, but everything I found was about how to change automatically, not if it was OK to do so.

Is it legal in the US to update my website copyright automatically?


In the United States, [some states require consent to record](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/6502/31) if one party decides to record the phone call. A person I'm talking to told me they would record the call, do I need to tell them that I will record the call if I decide to?

I am especially thinking about customer services who warn the customer that the call may be recorded: can I record the call as well without asking for consent in that case?

---

I am mostly interested in the following locations, ordered by descending interest:

* California, United States
* Massachusetts, United States (-> no need for consent in that state, so problem solved)
* All other states in the United States
* Paris, France
* Seoul, South Korea

If one person on a phone said they would record the call, do I need to tell them that I record the call if I decide to do so?


Suppose, a scientist is planning to publish a paper that is about an algorithm which analyzes Wikipedia articles. I'm wondering, if the European General Data Protection Regulation would be relevant in that case.

According to Article 13, one has to inform anyone whose personal data is collected:

>
> 1. Where personal data relating to a data subject are collected from the data subject, the controller shall, at the time when personal data
>  are obtained, provide the data subject with all of the following
>  information: (...)
>
>
>

Article 4 explains, what "personal data" means:

>
> ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or
>  identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural
>  person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in
>  particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an
>  identification number, location data, an online identifier (...)
>
>
>

(Source: <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0679>)

Wikipedia articles might contain personal data, because each one has an edit history that lists changes and who did them (User accounts or IP addresses). Therefore, each article can be related to "online identifiers" (such as the account or the IP) of its editors. Would the scientist - according to the GDPR - have to inform the editors of all the Wikipedia Articles that he has processed their personal data?

How to fulfill the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in science


*The provisions of this Act are in lieu of any right of action, statutory or otherwise, founded on a breach of duty of care or any other cause of action, whether that duty or cause of action is imposed by or arises by reason of law or contract, express of implied, to which an employee, dependant or member of the family of the employee is or may be intitled against the employer of the employee, or against any employer within the scope of this Act, or against any employee, in respect of any death, injury or disability arising out of and in the course of employment and whrere no action in respect of it lies.*

I can not understand this provision completely... I can not imagine this situation. I am not an english-speaker. Help me.

PS. Especially, I don't know the expression 'in lieu of'... In dictionaries, it means 'replace' or sort of.

What does this provision mean?


If someone contacts me asking for permission to share my original work on their website or Facebook page, am I within my legal rights to grant permission with specific conditions? For example, "You may post on Facebook if you include a tag link to my profile in the post caption."

In the case of the example above, if they posted it without my profile in the caption (but perhaps in the comments somewhere), could I file a DCMA against them?

Can I grant and enforce specific conditions for the use of my copyrighted work?


There was a case in which a screenshot of a piece of ransomware (a dialog box asking for ransom) was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. It is was claimed that this screenshot is rendered ineligible for copyright protection by the legal doctrine of *ex turpi causa non oritur actio* (Latin for "from a dishonorable cause an action does not arise").

My questions are:

* Is this correct in the United States of America?
* Is this correct in the United Kingdom?

By "is this correct" I mean whether the doctrine is valid in the queried countries and isf so, whether it applies to copyright.

Are screenshots of malware eligible for copyright protection?


I know that false pretense have to do with a scenario involving someone who pretend to be someone else in order to obtain money..etc. But I get confuse with both of them

What the difference between false pretense and forgery


>
> Residential taxation means that you pay taxes based on where you live.
>  Many countries use a version of the “183 days” principle. This means
>  that if you spend at least half your time living in the country,
>  you’re taxed on your worldwide income.
>
>
> Of course, it’s rarely that simple. The majority of countries have
>  criteria you need to fulfill in order to prove you don’t have ties to
>  that country. Different countries will have different rules on what
>  “ties” you to them. Some of the common ties are: a Wife (or husband),
>  kids, real estate that you own but don’t rent, a car that you own,
>  bank accounts you’ve set up…the list goes on.
>
>
> Disqualifying yourself from residential taxation can be a bit complex,
>  depending on the country. It’s not impossible, but it will take a
>  thorough understanding of the residential tax laws (and some smart
>  flag planting). The payoff is worth it. When you prove you don’t have
>  ties to a country, you’re no longer deemed a resident. This means you
>  no longer pay tax on your worldwide income.
>
>
>

<http://nomadcapitalist.com/flag-theory/>

Okay. So what about Indonesia. What would be required to be free from income tax in Indonesia. Would a person need to be outside 180 days in a year?

Is Indonesia tax based on residency?


The only information I am able to find on this topic is under the assumption that the duplication would be in print format:

Some of the most common conditions are (not all apply to every country):

* **Size** - smaller or larger than original, the amount varies by country
* **Color** - black & white reproductions only or the use of distinctly
different colors from original
* **One-side** - reproductions cannot be double-sided
* **Surface Area** - only a certain percentage of the overall
surface of one side of the bill may be depicted
* **Orientation** - currency must be at an angle within the illustration
* **Labeling** - placing the word "Specimen" or "Sample" across the illustration
* **Material** - some types of reproductions can only be placed on materials that are not paper or paper-like
* **Permission** - in some countries you must request permission in writing before reproducing banknotes in advertising or for educational purposes
* **Creative Materials** - disposal of scans, negatives, plates, or other materials used in creating the currency reproductions

I'm just looking to use elements of currency as part of a mobile website theme; there's a **very** obvious lack of the possibility of mistaking anything as counterfeit. But, I'm aware of the sensitivity of this, so I want to make sure I'm not taking any chances on getting caught up on a technicality; the prison industrial complex is booming business now.

I suppose just using *portions* of a US dollar bill might be the safest route, but I just need to know what my limitations are before heading down this path.

Lastly, where's a great place to find this type of information without risking a tour of Guantanamo?

Using US currency within a webpage design


I want to make a product (call it A) compatible with another proprietary product (B). So if I take product B and then reverse engineer the protocol by watching network traffic, I could produce a document describing the protocol. Then, lets say I give the document to another engineer. He implements the protocol based on the document, without himself being involved in the original reverse engineering of product B. Is it legal for me to use that new "green" protocol implementation in product A?

Legality surrounding reverse engineering protocols?


This is a specific question about English Construction Law.

* Domestic client
* JCT ICD Contract (with provisions for adjudication)

Although I may have misconstrued the point, I've read somewhere that domestic clients don't have a right to adjudication. But surely they do if the contract says they do ?!?!

EDIT:

In the specific example which prompted the question, having reached practical completion the Employer has taken possession and so is *now* 'resident owner' - but they lived elsewhere at the time the JCT Intermediate Contract was let, having purchased the property shortly before instructing the works. So, it's not (what I would understand by the term) 'a resident owner contract', and the Employer wasn't 'a resident owner' when the contract began.

Does that have any bearing on the matter?

In English Construction Law, does a domestic client have a right to adjudication if the agreed form of contract provides for it


Can one create a ***personal*** email address containing the stock ticker symbol of a public company ? My understanding is that Stock ticker is not a trademark and only trademarks are protected.. Please take a look at the following scenarios where the email address may give the appearance of use of stock tickers where the creator/user may not have any intent of enriching from such use.

```
     Company name                    Ticker        Email address

     Agilent Technology               A             Ticker.A@xyz.com
     Americansource Bergen Corp       ABC           I.Love.ABC@xyz.com
     Apple                            AAPL          Why.AAPL@xyz.com
     Equifax                         **EFX**        whathappened.EFX@xyz.com

```

Question : Is the use of a stock ticker symbols in a personal email address legal in USA . Discuss using the examples above?

Is the stock ticker symbol protected from copying?


Friend and I were having about an argument about whether the federal government could just blanket legalize something. For example, would the federal government be able to pass a law preventing states from making sports betting illegal? The way I understand it, this couldn't be done without amending the constitution. Am I right?

Can the federal government override a state making something illegal?


I buy a lot of old photos off of ebay. Most of these photos are photos of ships, and date back to the early 1900s or sooner. These are not photos taken by a professional photographer. These are one-of-a-kind photos that were taken by someone unknown, and the person who sold them to me is not a family member of the photographer. As the person who owns the actual photos, what are my rights? Do I own the copyright, and if I post them online, do people need permission from me to use them? Thanks.

Unknown photographer copyright


Some time ago a substance used as a food preservative which is believed by some to be carcinogenic was allowed to be used. If in a case like that it is found at the time that it actually is so, is someone legally responsible for allowing it to be used, or at least not warning people about its consequences? I suppose this is something similar to the use of cigarettes, how does this work in these cases?

If in a country it's allowed to be sold a product with a harmful chemical, is the government or state legally responsible for it?


My friends and I want to start selling merchandise of pictures of two celebrities. The pictures are of two celebrities. We want to make sure that we won't have a lawsuit on our hands if we start selling. The pictures we want to use are available and posted publicly by them. The pictures are not copyrighted. Is this legal?

Can I legally sell merchandise with the face of a celebrity without their permission?


My friend caused a hit-and-run involving slight damage to another vehicle (allegedly and without her knowledge) and received a letter from police for investigation.

She consulted a lawyer and carried over the case to him. The lawyer is looking at the case and says it will be close to three months before the case is completely closed.

My friend also wants to go overseas for some time, during that period. She is confused whether to mark *yes* or *no* in the section that says “criminal history in the past 5 years”. What should she fill, if asked "convicted in a criminal case?”

If under investigation for a minor incident, how do I answer immigration questions about my criminal history?


This is inspired on a story in a TV show: The police have the DNA of an unknown murderer X. Search of DNA records finds a person A who is most likely a close relative of the murderer (but totally innocent himself). Based on this result, the police finds the criminal X. It turns out that A's DNA should not have been in the system, and A's rights have been violated.

Can X claim that the evidence should be inadmissible because A's rights were violated? (In the TV show he claimed so successfully, which I found dubious).

(I think a real case was the Unabomber, where on one of his letters the police found the finger print of a copy store employee who had sold copier paper to the Unabomber).

Result of illegal search, but against another party


Suppose I want to draw a horse. I don't know how to draw a horse so I buy a How to Draw Animals book and follow the instructions of the book to draw a horse. Now can I use my drawing for commercial purposes?

Is copying from How to Draw books copyright infringement?


I want to ask for a quote, but I don't want the service provider to be legally bound to the estimate. What should I disclaim in my quote request?

How can I free a service provider from estimate liability via disclaimer?


If a heavily famous person (let's suppose a famous football player [I don't call it soccer]) kills an other ordinary civilian and there's proof of such an act, will he get away with his crime, realistically talking, by simply being wealthy or will he be landed to jail like everyone else?

Accountability for famous people


I am currently interested in doing some research performing various measurements and algorithms on the most common words in the English language. I have found a few good word lists online that would be suitable, but I am concerned that they may be subject to copyright and would like to be sure about their status before I use them. The lists are in the form of a simple text file with one word per line.

I understand that collections of words such as dictionaries are subject to copyright because they contain a large amount of words and their definitions which can be considered to require original work and creativity, but what about just words without any definitions or additional information?

I have seen [this other Law Stack Exchange question](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/6597/copyright-fair-use-and-online-dictionaries-translations-word-list?rq=1), which mentions lists of words, but the author seems to have been interested in also using some short definitions, and I am not certain the answer refers to plain word lists.

Is a list of common words copyrightable? If so, would it still be considered fair use to use the word list to generate data not related to the words themselves?

Is a list of the most common English words copyrightable under US law?


recently I stumbled upon an EU law about cookies. It is quite unclear to me. I understand that all sites that use cookies has to have some kind of informational popup to tell the users that they use them. What is unclear to me is if it is sufficient to tell the user something like " If you are using this site you are agreeing with our cookies policy" or if it is required to have user give specific permission before any cookies (or any data to localstorage, sessionstorage, etc.) will be saved?

Thanks for the anwser!

Do I need to add the option to disable cookies or is just informational popup sufficient?


I recently saw this update from Comcast's XFINITY. This is mostly a question out of curiosity, but also borne out of skepticism at Comcast.

>
> Under the new agreement we require you to notify us of changes to your telephone number and other contact information so we can ensure that we are contacting the correct person in accordance with applicable laws.
>
>
>

My first question is this: if we fail to update Comcast with our contact information (particularly if not on purpose, say, we change phone # but forget to update), are there legal consequences?

My second question is this: What are these "applicable laws" that Comcast is referring to? This is where my skepticism comes into play - is this appeal to the law merely a "power play" by Comcast in the TOC to get compliance?

FWIW, I am all for keeping my service companies updated with my info, particularly if there are updates. I just find this section kind of 'coercive' [1] - it seems quite natural that we customers would want to keep our service companies updated, and so "requiring" this for the purpose of "lawfulness" seems kind of weird.

[1]: not sure if this is the right word, just the first word that came to mind

Requiring customers to keep contact information updated?


I'm applying for an open vacancy and the HR is asking me:

>
> What type of cooperation are you interested in: personal contract,
>  business contract, full-time contract?
>
>
>

I spent some time searching on internet but it's not easy for me to grasp clearly the difference.

What is the difference between personal contract, business contract and full-time contract?


Let's say that someone comes onto your property with the intent to commit a crime. Not only that; let's say that you suspected this person would come to commit a crime, and you created a one-way door that traps them in a room when entered. You essentially set up a non lethal "booby trap".

Is this legal? Perhaps you didn't force them into the trap, but they wondered into it by themselves.

Can I legally trap someone on my property that has committed a crime?


I am making a game, and I have a worries is it legal to use the Trademark Symbol in the logo of the game?

Is it legal to use the TM symbol?


As I understand it, the President of the United States has an Attorney General (AG) that serves at the pleasure of the President. That means the President can fire the AG at any time. Can you take a look at Maine? Its legislature elects the AG and as I understand it, the AG has a special common law status as a constitutional officer.

The Governor of Maine is supposed to ensure that the laws are executed faithfully. Does he have power to do so when it comes to the department of the AG? I'm not only interested in the AG, but I am also interested in the assistant AGs who serve at the AG's pleasure. I assume that if the Governor can't fire the AG, then the Governor also can't fire any AAGs.

I'm trying to understand who is in charge.

Can the Governor of Maine fire the Attorney General? Otherwise the department of the AG seems like a 4th or 5th branch of government.

Can the Governor of Maine remove Maine's Attorney General?


I was surprised by [this comment on liability](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/7836/why-may-liability-be-a-hindrance-to-self-driving-cars/7837#comment14818_7838). The context was about self-driving cars, and why it is such a big deal whether the owner/passenger is liable, or the manufacturer, in case both are insured.

>
> Because I can jail whoever is liable, and insurance does not cover in cases of gross misconduct -- so liability matters, and as you point out the product manefactures has liability as well, but that is regardless of the car is driverless or not. – [Soren](https://law.stackexchange.com/users/4059/soren)
>
>
>

In what context can Soren *jail whoever is liable*? I thought [debtor's prisons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debtors'_prison) were mostly a thing of the past. Is jailing someone for failing to pay a fee for which s/he is liable still practiced in any country in Europe or North America?

*(NB: I do not literally mean that Soren personally jails whoever is liable.)*

Can I be jailed for being liable?


I'm wondering if a movie of 1955 is completely copyright free and so if I'm allowed to write and add English subtitles, and distribute it (per download or stream).

It's a Dutch movie and I want it to be accessible with English subtitles for everyone to download and see it. To share about Dutch history and culture in The Netherlands.

Is a movie from 1955 completely copyright free?


Suppose a have a non-disparagement agreement with corporation X. I happen to discover that someone (John) in a different state has filed a class action lawsuit against X. I have information that may be helpful to John, but John may or may not know that it is there.

Now clearly, from what I read, if they were to ask me for this information during the discovery, I would be able (required in fact) to provide it. My question is this: Am I allowed to contact John out-of-the-blue and provide him with, or at least direct him towards, this information?

Can I break a non-disparagement agreement on my own initiative to aid another in a civil suit?


I know this is a confusing matter and there's been number of questions here and articles elsewhere, but maybe it would be simpler in the situation explained below.

Assume there's a non-US company selling software on App Store and providing certain subscription services. The following information has to be provided to Apple:

1. Do you have any U.S. Business Activities?
2. (if Yes for 1.) Are you required to file a US income tax return with respect to the payments you receive from Apple?

Assume the following:
The company is located in a country that has a tax treaty with US. The company does NOT receive any income other than from Apple. The company does NOT have any employees, contractors or any other personnel, office or any physical assets in US. The only thing US-based that the company DOES have are cloud servers physically located in US provided by a US cloud company, used in order to provide subscription services mentioned above. The location of these servers is not critical for the business, chosen for latency reasons and can be changed for the same or other reasons at any moment later.

Based on this, how should the questions above answered?

Furthermore, what exactly having or not having "effectively connected income" would change in this situation, what's more beneficial? Is there a "if in double choose ..." option?

What are "US Business Activities" and "Effectively connected income", again?


I was trying to find a definitive answer to this question but it seems to be very hard. My DVD collection is rotting in the sense that soon some of them become unusable since the discs are so old. In many countries there is a law which states that you cannot bypass a copy-protection measure in order to make a backup of the rotting DVD's.

Technically some copy-protections are implemented simply by encrypting the contents of the disc. Personally, I would argue that if I do not decrypt the contents of the disc and simply make a backup of the encrypted data, I am not bypassing any copy-protection.

Is there any cases that confirm or object this viewpoint?

I'm not located in the US but I'm interested in the US copyright law as ours is very similar to it. In my country some guy turned in himself to the police in 2006 on a slightly similar case since he wanted to find out whether decrypting DVD's for watching is OK using non-licensed open source software. The court of appeal decided that it was illegal. So technically in Finland it is illegal to watch DVD's using various open source operating systems like Linux.

Legality of a raw DVD backup


I am in the midst of writing a play based on the Persian poem Layla and Majnun by Nizami Ganjavi. To do this I plan to make use of quotes from an English translated version of the poem. Archive.org has a [copy of the poem](https://archive.org/stream/TheStoryOfLaylaAndMajnun/Leyla%20and%20Majnun_djvu.txt) which it lists as of being Public Domain Mark 1.0. From my understanding, this would indicate that using quotes from it will be allowed (with attribution) without contacting the original copyright holder. Is this correct?

Write Play based on translation


As someone who is not a lawyer and needs to sign contracts, I often find the conventional writing style as an instrument to justify the inclusion of clauses that represent a client/provider relationship as if it actually were a master/slave one. This is noticeable in cases where a small company intends to sell its services to a bigger one. In my experience, the language used in these writings acts as a protection for imbalance, as if the "master" were allowed to pretend that an otherwise abusive clause is just regular jargon. At the same time, this accepted language seems to indicate that its author (a lawyer) is more interested in creating the conditions that would favor a conflict, rather than assisting the parties in avoiding them.

My question is whether there exists any serious new framework, guidelines or proposal for writing contracts in a way that avoids verbal aggression, underlying instead the spirit of collaboration and commitment that a client/provider agreement should protect. I'm asking this question because I would like to learn of a valid alternative that I could propose to the other party.

Finally, note that I'm not asking why things are the way they are. I'm asking where to look for alternatives.

Is the usual contract writing style being questioned and a radically new one proposed?


I recently learned a high school coach of mine used a website (athletic.net) to track meets, etc, and posted there is quite a bit of PII (full name, High school, graduation year, events competed in, etc.). I would obviously like this deleted but according to their forum Q&A section they can't / don't do that:

*"Coaches use Athletic.net for meet entry, tracking athlete results and progress, as well as compiling school history and records in the sport. For all of the above reasons, athlete profiles, and results are never deleted."*

Do I have any legal standing to make them either delete, anonymize, or privatize (make not publicly searchable) the information posted about me?

Do I have legal standing to force a website to remove my Personally Identifiable Information (PII)?


>
> This agreement is issued pursuant to and incorporates by thisreference
>  the terms and conditions set forth in the Schedule statedabove, and
>  the Agreement and Attachment(s) set forth in such Schedule,by and
>  between the parties to the Agreement, Schedule and Attachment,
>  respectively.
>
>
>

Does this "respectively" modify "parties" or the verb "incorporates"? I am not sure if this "respectively" means "parties to the Agreement, parties to the Schedule, and parties to the Attachment" or "incorporates respectively".

How to interpret “respectively” after a comma


On a recent foreign prank show the following scenario took place.

A group are dressed in realistic [Hazmat suits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazmat_suit).
The group are scanning an area with fake [radiation detectors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_detector).

The detectors are set to emit a sound that indicates danger, more specifically high levels of radiation.

When the detectors emit the sound, the group run away making a scene to ensure the surrounding public take notice and react.

All of this being a façade to purposely incite fear in to the public.

I am sure that this wouldn't be tolerated in most countries, and would be breaking the law.

Which laws would cover this behaviour?

Inciting fear in the public


We are working on software that we are planning to sell to businesses.

We are looking at using many components from the open source community to speed up development.

The software we are using so far is released under one of the following licenses:

* Apache License v2.0
* JSON.org license
* Eclipse Public License v1.0
* MIT License
* CDDL License v1.0

We have already included the license information (LICENSE.txt) files from all the open source components in the bundle.

We would like to be 100% compliant with the licenses mentioned above. Is there anything else we have to do to before we start selling the software?

What are the actions to take when using software licensed under the Apache, Eclipse, MIT and CDDL licenses?


Thanks in advance for any suggestions or help.

I work for a large software corporation and have in my employment contract the standard clauses saying the company owns essentially any idea of mine regardless of if its during or outside office hours.

I have a handful of hobby project ideas that I believe could earn good money that are completely outside the industry I work in. I understand because its "software" my corporation could claim ownership regardless.

Is there any loopholes I could use to avoid this as the corporation doesn't seem interested in the idea of having contact amendments to allow the ownership with me.

If I was employeed by Microsoft and then took a sneaky second job at Apple, could Microsoft claim ownership of any IP I worked on while working at Apple? Could I say create an organisation or a trust or something that "owned" the solution which would only mean i have violated my contract and be sacked, over them taking ownership?

This is likely dependent on country, region etc. but just seeing what options there are as currently I feel my only option is to leave the organisation.

I understand I would need proper legal advice, just trying to work out if its worth pursuing lawyers to help on this or just giving up.

Employment intellectual property ownership loopholes


If I download a copyrighted photograph of prominent person (e.g. a politician or celebrity) and hire an artist to make a portrait of that person, using the photo as a guide, is that legal?

I'm thinking of the famous Obama "HOPE" poster. If I remember correctly, the person who made it was sued because it was based on a copyrighted picture. However, I'm guessing it was illegal because he essentially modified a copyrighted image, rather than making a "free style" rendition.

To put it another way, if I opened a copyrighted image in Photoshop and used some filters to alter it, I would be pirating a copyrighted item - even if my work didn't look like the original. But if I use a pen (or a computer graphics program) to draw someone's portrait while using an actual photo as a guide, would that be legal?

This kind of begs another question: If you hire an artist to create a portrait - either realistic or a caricature - how can you tell if they created the final product free style or by simply modifying the original image?

But I guess that's a question for a graphics forum.

Legality of "Artist's Renditions"


I have an idea to record **videos** based on some **books** and **then publish the videos in my channel in Youtube.**

**Of course, i will write a clear reference to the book and the author.**

But, i am wondering, if i am allowed to do so or not?

Here is a copyright rule of a target book:

>
> All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or
>  transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
>  including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and
>  retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
>
>
>

So, my question is, is it legal to build a youtube channel based on other people books?

Can i record a video based on a book and then publish it in Youtube?


[*O'Sullivan & Hilliard's The Law of Contract*](https://www.amazon.co.uk/OSullivan-Hilliards-Law-Contract-Janet/dp/0198807821/ref=dp_ob_title_bk) (2018 8 ed). p. 200.

>
> [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CY3iQ.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CY3iQ.jpg)
>
>
>

[Click here to download judgment](https://docdro.id/9Mk7TkX). [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olley_v_Marlborough_Court_Ltd) quotes the germane para.

>
> In cases where it is clearly a common inn or, indeed, where it is uncertain whether it is a common inn or a private hotel, I am of opinion that **[2.] a notice in these terms would not exempt the hotel company from liability for negligence but only from any liability as insurers**. Indeed, even if it were clearly not a common inn but only a private hotel, I should be of the same opinion. **[1. Red] Ample content can be given to the notice** by construing it as a warning that the hotel company is not liable, in the absence of negligence. As such it serves a useful purpose. It is a warning to the guest that he must do his part to take care of his things himself, and, if need be, insure them. **[3. Green] It is unnecessary to go further** and to construe the notice as a contractual exemption of the hotel company from their common law liability for negligence. I agree that the appeal should be dismissed.
>
>
>

1. Red underline : What does "ample content can be given to the notice" mean?
2. Sentence 2 : Denning judges that the notice wouldn't "exempt the hotel company from liability for negligence but only from any liability as insurers". But how can content be "ample" (Question 1) if it doesn't exempt liability for negligence?
3. Green underline : Why "unnecessary to go further"?

What meant LJ Denning by "ample content can be given to the notice"?


I want to register a trademark. It's a word that I've been using for my website domain for a long time (over 3 years).

I just want to make myself feeling more safe so I want to register a trademark.

However, I'm not a US Citizen and I do have a lot of visitors from the US.

How can I get started? Thanks for any kind of tips. I even don't know what to search on Google.

Thanks,

How do I register a trademark in the USA if I'm not in the USA and I'm not a US citizen?


I participated in Google Summer of Code and received a stipend from Google. I worked with volunteer mentors associated with free/open source projects not associated with Google in any direct way.

[Google is clear that there was not an employee/employer relationship with them](https://developers.google.com/open-source/gsoc/faq):

>
> Is GSoC considered an internship, a job, or any form of employment?
>
>
> No. GSoC is an activity that the student performs as an independent developer for which they are paid a stipend.
>
>
>

As far as I could determine, the form of self-employee closest to describing a GSoC student is "independent contractor". However, I am uncertain that it fits completely. The [definition I found](https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-defined) says:

>
> The general rule is that an individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work and not what will be done and how it will be done.
>
>
>

Google did not really control or direct the results or anything about the work.

---

Is participating Google Summer of Code considered "self-employment" under US tax law?

Does receiving a stipend for participating in GSoC constitute self-employment?


I am 16 years old and interested in selling a website. After creating a thread in stack web development I wanted to ask a law question and that's why I got redirected here.

I live in Albania, Europe and I would like to know; Am I able to sign a contract such as a buy-sell agreement by the age of 16 in Europe or in my country in specific?

At what I age could I sign a contract in Europe?


I got a remote work offer for a company based in UK , they asked me if i would be able to confirm if it would be acceptable for me to invoice them monthly for my services or whether i would need to be a salaried employee .

and in case i decided to get paid for invoice , they proposed an initial starting payment level per month.

So what is the difference between each option ?

invoice for services with specific monthly payment vs salaried employee


Let's say it's 1910 and a photographer takes a photo but never publishes the original. Later someone else (with permission) uses that original photo to make a colorized postcard and publishes it. If the post card was published in, say, 1911, then it is public domain in the US, correct? But what about the original photo? Since the colorized version was published, is the original black-and-white version considered published as well? Or does it remain unpublished and therefore copyrighted for the usual creator's-lifetime-plus-70-years?

Original unpublished, derivative work published, is original now considered published?


I have a cool app a couple of high school librarians use. It's pretty simple: students scan their IDs when they enter and leave the library. Librarians then can then see who's in the library at any given time via simple dashboard. Student usage is then stored and is downloadable by the librarians should they want a report.

I'm interested in adding a facial recognition feature to my app because I'm interested in machine learning. The idea is to replace card scanning with just looking at a camera. To do this, I'd have to train a model with the faces of the students. I was thinking of creating a webapp that allowed students to submit photos of themselves should if they're interested in the feature - otherwise they can keep card scanning if they want.

Considering that they're all under 18, do I need parental approval if the students want to submit their own photos? Who else should I contact to get approval for such a feature?

Other potentially relevant details:

Currently the app tracks ~200 unique students per day, but has ~5000 students in it. I own the physical server that the webapp and proposed facial recognition feature would go on. I also have librarian approval for this feature. The high schools that use this app are in Washington state.

Facial Recognition Data of Minors


I've heard that there is a doctrine in contract enforcement.

The doctrine is that the written contract is a "proof" of a contract rather than the actual contract.

One such question that touch this issue is [When a contract is being analyzed in court, is it the understanding of the parties or the written contract that is to be established?](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/6225/when-a-contract-is-being-analyzed-in-court-is-it-the-understanding-of-the-parti)

What about contract that contains hidden or obfuscated terms?

For example, in Sim Lim case, one of the seller obviously hide insurance term.

The term is very unfair. By signing the contract, the buyer is presumed to agree to pay another $1500 insurance for a $950 worth of good.

<https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/sim-lim-square-still-reeling-from-jover-chew-case>

<https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/sim-lim-scams-student-reduced-tears-after-being-charged-1k-iphone-warranty>

Here, the written contract says that the customer agrees to pay $1500. However, we also know but the customers would never have agreed to pay if he knows there is a $1500 fee.

In case of Sim Lim scam, the seller is put to jail.

What about in other jurisdiction?

In particular, what about in Indonesia?

Basically how court deals with grossly obfuscated written terms when there are evidence that the drafters of the contract try to obfuscate the terms?

To simplify:

The very bad term is technically written. For example, say there is a fee for an insurance that cost $5000. The normal fee for such insurance worth only $50.

No customers would agree to pay $5k for something worth $50. So instead of writing $5k fee, the insurance would write that certain percentage some terms are invented. Then the terms are written a bit differently on other pages.

So a customer that want to know there is a $5k fee will have to combine info from a few different pages with slightly different terms. Otherwise, the way it's written, it's kind of expected that most customers would fail to see the fee.

And that's what the insurance company wants.

Of course there is a term that says that you understand the whole contract bla bla that users tend to sign.

A judge can see the contract and see that the very unreasonable fee is technically written. However, a judge can also see that it's grossly obfuscated.

Sample:

<https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kaskus.co.id%2Fpost%2F5c7f0655facb955ae505b6df%2F%3Fref%3Dprofile%26med%3Dpost>

You may need to translate the letter. However, from the letter and simulation, it's pretty clear that the life insurance coverage is $20k (worth about $40 a year), and the letter complicatedly explain that there is a $4000k fee in first year and about $9k fee in first 5 years.

How does principle that written contract is proof of a contract and not the contract?


I wasnt able to find an explanation inside the GDPR whether a data privacy officer (or similar responsible) is allowed or required to document cases where individuals claimed the right to be forgotten.

**Is it against the law to document the individual cases?**
edit for clarification: Such as "on Feb 26th Mr. John Doe inquired via e-Mail and requested to purge all his data". Now there is another data set about John Doe, documenting his deletion request, whereas he initially inquired to have his data erased. Instead of being forgotten, he is now remembered in one extra data collection. /edit

On one hand documenting the process allows a company to prove they obeyed the law and the request, should this be questioned later on by the individual.

I can even imagine a former employee first claiming his right to be forgotten, and then - a week after getting the confirmation - claiming his right to receive a resumee (a right in existense in Germany), which a company would not be able to fulfill as it hasnt got any data to base the resumee on. In case they do not have documentation, that the former employee requested to be forgotten, they cannot tell this.

On the other hand documenting such cases is 180 degree against the original request to be forgotten, as the individual ends up being stored in yet another data processing process.

GDPR: What is the legal situation on documenting cases of "Right to be forgotten" claims?


* An Internet forum logs their users' IP addresses for moderation purposes (fighting abusive sockpuppetry, temporary banning a dynamic IP address range in case of a spam attack, permanently banning static IP addresses in case of persistent toxic behaviors, etc)
* An abusive user request the deletion of their IP address from the logs under GDPR
* This seems to be in an effort to prevent the moderators from exercising the aforementioned tools, so that the user can abuse the forum undisturbed
* Do I need to comply?

Can a user request the deletion of their IP address that is stored for moderation purposes?


If I'm opening a hosting company and would there be any legal reason or requirement to obtain the home or business addresses of my clients?

Are there legal reasons to maintain addresses for my clients?


In the USA, a document is subject to copyright when it is "fixed in a tangible medium". What counts as "fixing in a tangible medium" for a digital document? Is it enough to save a copy of the file to a local, private disk, or must said file be made available to another person (e.g. via publication on the internet)?

To make this concrete, let's suppose Alice has a version control repository (such as [Git](https://git-scm.com/)), which is initially private and is later made public. In the USA, at what point does the contents of the repository become subject to copyright? (Assuming that the contents are of a type of material eligible for copyright.)

Consider the following hypothetical timeline:

* 2010: Alice initializes a Git repository. It is initially empty and is stored only on Alice's local computer.
* 2011: Alice creates and adds file A to the repository. (The repository is still private.)
* 2012: Alice creates and adds file B to the repository. (Again private.)
* 2013: Alice makes the repository publicly available.
* 2014: Alice adds file C to the repository (which is now public, so the file is published immediately).

Now, what is the correct copyright year to apply to each file in the repository? (Let's assume the files are not modified after they are added. Let's also suppose that the version control system metadata, including timestamps, is correct and hasn't been altered.)

For file C, the answer is fairly obvious: the file was created, added, and published in 2014, so the copyright date has to be 2014.

For A and B, the answer isn't so obvious. I used to think the answer was 2013, since that was the time at which the files were made publicly available. However, I recently talked to a laywer about the case of a physical document which is later published, and said laywer (though **not** providing legal advice) said the copyright date would be the time at which that physical document was created, rather than published (since at the time of creation, it is already fixed in a tangible medium, even if it hasn't yet been published). If that is true, the copyright dates for A and B would have to be 2011 and 2012, respectively, since that is when those files are authored and created.

When does a digital document become subject to copyright?


"Doxing" is a neologism, describing the act of publishing identifying information (or 'docs'), typically personal identifying information, on the internet. It's usually done with the intent to bring indirect harm against one individual, and is typically associated with "hacktivism" or vigilantism, but is sometimes an isolated individual act (retaliation against an unfaithful spouse, for example).

Doxing is illegal, per state and common law, but not federally, as far as I know. It also typically violates Terms of Service agreements for many types of internet services.

However, I'm interested to know what would constitute "doxing" as it's defined in case law or state laws, generally. What information would be legal or illegal to publish publicly?

Some information is publicly available. Full names, names of spouses or other family members' addresses and home phone numbers are published in phone books and on voter registration databases I can't understand how it would be illegal to essentially "re-publish" that information, but obviously information not publicly available like social security numbers or cell phone numbers.

What constitutes "doxing", as defined in the law?

In the United States, what constitutes illegal "doxing"?


Imagine writing an article or book about philosophy that includes an examination of the lyrics to Don McLean's song *American Pie*.

Obviously, it would be illegal to post the complete lyrics, since they're copyrighted.

But would it be legal to post the lyrics one verse at a time, followed by a discussion of that lyrics's meaning?

For example, the first section/chapter would begin with the lyrics...

>
> A long long time ago
>
>
> I can still remember . . . And maybe they'd be happy for a while
>
>
>

Or if six lines is too excessive, that verse could be split into two sections...

>
> A long long time ago
>
>
> I can still remember how
>
>
> That music used to make me smile
>
>
>

The lyrics would then be followed by a brief comment or analysis, like this...

"McLean was simply reminiscing about the music he enjoyed when he was younger."

Quoting lyrics one verse at a time


I see it on products that look similar to others. Is there an authority that checks new products and decides that people will get confused with other products? Why not just require them to change the packaging?

Here is an example:

<https://shop.riteaid.com/rite-aid-shampoo-dandruff-medicated-formula-11-oz-325-ml-0325336>

What is the law requiring a product to be labeled : "This product is not manufactured by..."


I am signing a contract for an apartment. In it, there is a section stating that I agree to the apartment using images, video, and/or audio clips of me wherever they'd like (Facebook, their website, etc.) I'm not comfortable with this, but I want to live here. Can they really make me do this?

Apartment requires that I consent to them using images of myself on social media


I have requested my personal data removal from one shady company that has gotten to my email somehow.

They said they've complied, but i am still getting newsletters from them.

What can i do as a consumer now? What authorities can i contact if my requests are being ignored? Can i report the company somewhere?

What can i do if my GDPR requests are being ignored?


I'm being asked to sign a letter of engagement with an attorney.

One of the numbered paragraphs is blank and just says "Reserved". What is the reason for it, can the attorney just insert whatever terms they want later? Clearly not, but it must have some purpose.

This letter is being presented on an online signing service if that matters.

What is a "Reserved" clause in a contract? (letter of engagement)


I have found an online video course that the user is selling for around $200, and it says on the website that the course is copyrighted in the footer. However, I have checked everywhere online but there is no mention of the copyright on the online libraries. I have found a URL that has this course available for download for free, but I am skeptical of downloading it since I feel I may be subjecting myself to piracy, but at the same time am unsure on the other end since there is no mention of any copyright on this course in the online libraries, which means the person who is claiming to have a copyright may be giving a false claim. What should be my course of action? Is it legal to download the course then?

Is downloading a non-copyright paid video course illegal?


I know we have two types of obligation: "Obligation of means" and "Obligation of result".
The Obligation of a government to fulfill of articles in "Constitution" is which of them?

For example in article of 30 in Iranian Constitution:
**"The government must provide all citizens with free-education up to secondary school, and must expand free higher education to the extent required by the country for attaining self-sufficiency."**

The Obligation of Government to fulfill this Obligation is which type?

What type of obligation do governments have in enforcing the Constitution?


I often get asked by some fast food restaurants and other businesses to make a donation to such and such cause when I try to pay at the cashier.

If I say yes, who gets the tax credit?

Me or the business?

Who gets the tax credit, if I say yes to "Would you like to donate a dollar to xyz" at the cashier of a shop in the U.S.A.?


I know that in most of the Western world, original creative works are protected by copyright for the entire life of the author plus 70 years after the author's death. But how is the term of protection determined when there is not a single identifiable author? For example:

* For a piece of music recorded by a four-man band, when does the +70 years part start? (presumably on the death of the last surviving band member?)
* For a motion picture that is produced by a major Hollywood studio, involving the work of thousands of creative staff, how is the duration of copyright protection computed? Whose "life" is the relevant one for calculating life+70 years?

Copyright protection: life + 70 years. But whose life?


Say there is a manuscript such as [this](https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/aelfrics-colloquy) that *isn't* in the Public Domain. I have seen one (don't remember where) where it was a manuscript that the museum said they wanted to share online but is "unreleased" and so copyright protected in some way. In that case, and other cases like it, I am wondering if you are allowed to transcribe the picture of the manuscript into say electronic text form, or what the rules are generally around that.

Are you allowed to transcribe a copyrighted manuscript?


I recorded a polling call and forgot to ask the person if it was OK to do so.

Massachusetts, where the company is located, has a two party consent law for recording.

<http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/massachusetts-recording-law>

New Jersey is one party consent.

<http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-jersey/new-jersey-recording-law>

So what the law when the person making the phone call is in Massachusetts, and the recorder/recipient is in New Jersey?

NJ has a 1-party consent, and MA a 2-party consent, for recording conversations. What if MA calls NJ?


A common feature on that old *Dukes of Hazzard* show was the idea that once them good old Duke boys crossed the county line, they'd be safe from the mean old sheriff and his deputy.

Under what circumstances, if any, would that actually work?

Answers focusing on 1970s America are welcome, but so are insights into other times and places.

Does fleeing across the county line actually work for the Dukes of Hazzard?


Poole, Shaw-Mellors. [*Contract Law Concentrate* (4 ed 2019)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contract-Law-Concentrate-Jill-Pool/dp/0198840446/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p 5.

>
> The key distinction: bilateral and unilateral agreements
> ========================================================
>
>
> Broadly, agreements will be one of two types:
>  • bilateral
>  • unilateral.
>
>
> Definition
> ----------
>
>
> **Bilateral agreements:** by far the most common in practice and consist of a promise in
>  exchange for a promise. Bilateral means both parties are bound on the exchange of promises,
>  although there has yet to be any performance of those promises.
>
>        A typical sale of goods agreement is bilateral.
>
>
> ### Practical example 1
>
>
> Alex offers (or promises) to sell his bicycle to Becky for £150 and Becky accepts, thereby promising
>  to pay £150. (We will use this as our example of a bilateral agreement and look at variations and additions
>  to the facts throughout this chapter.)
>
>
> Definition
> ----------
>
>
> **Unilateral agreements:** consist of a promise in exchange for an act. It follows that only one party is
>  bound at the outset by a promise. The other’s acceptance is the performance of the requested act.
>
>        For example, a typical unilateral agreement will involve an offer of a reward and may be
>  phrased as an ‘if’ contract: I promise to pay £50 to anyone who finds and returns my lost dog.
>
>
> ### Practical example 2
>
>
> Daniel offers (or promises) a free watch to anyone who returns three tokens from the packets of
>  cereal he manufactures, together with a cheque for £5. Emily accepts by returning the three tokens
>  with her cheque for £5. (We will use this as our example of a unilateral agreement and return to this
>  example later in the chapter.)
>
>
>

p 6.

>
> Making the correct distinction.
> -------------------------------
>
>
> It is not possible to accept a unilateral offer by promising to
>  find and return the lost dog or by promising to collect and return the tokens and the cheque. By
>  comparison, the agreement to sell the bicycle cannot be unilateral. Students sometimes suggest
>  that a simple sale contract is unilateral by interpreting the act of paying for the bicycle as the
>  requested act. This is incorrect since, as long as it is possible to accept by promising to buy (which
>  it is in the example), the agreement will be bilateral.
>
>
>

I don't fathom what's "incorrect" about "interpreting the act of paying for the bicycle as the
requested act". In the end Alex will require £150 from Becky, not just Becky's promise to pay £150.

I agree Becky promised to buy the bike for £150, but at some point she must pay the £150. She can't just keep promising to buy for £150 without paying the £150!

Why isn't a simple sales contract unilateral?


[Laura Ashley](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Ashley) is a UK furniture and fashion company named after its founder. But there probably are plenty of people named Laura Ashley.

Some years ago, I was considering giving the name "Laura Ashley" to one of my fictitious heroines because I liked the name. (Unlike my completed works, this one went for about three pages.) The heroine was an ambitious mid-level biotech executive trying to make it to the top. (The field is nothing like furniture.) A friend of mine told me to "expect to hear from Laura Ashley's lawyers" if I published the novel.

The answer to [this question](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/7401/can-a-trademark-supersede-or-preempt-a-person-from-using-their-own-name) showed that a company cannot (normally) prevent someone from using their own real name in a different (non-confusing) line of business. Does this "protection" apply to my fictitious character as well? Or can the similarity of names somehow be held to damage the company's repuation? (My heroine acts "normally," and does nothing out of the ordinary.)

Could Laura Ashley Co. prevent me from giving that name to my fictitious heroine in the U.S.?


I bought a parking permit for a private lot attached to my apartment but today when I came to park I found that no spaces were available. What can I do?

The parking spaces are not marked off in any way, people park where they want to.

I have a private lot parking permit but there are no spaces available, legal remedies?


Paul Davies. [*JC Smith's The Law of Contract* (2018 2 ed)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Smiths-Law-Contract-Paul-Davies/dp/0198807813/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). pp. 75-76.

>
> [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qdgs4.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qdgs4.jpg)
>
>
>

Can the two hypotheticals (orange and red) be distinguished? Why's the red a gratuitous promise but the orange an offer to contract?

I can't? Both stipulate £5K/year and the phrase "so long as you remain unmarried" The orange has "Please do not remarry", but this feels superfluous as "so long as you remain unmarried" is already stipulated.

"so long as you remain unmarried": Why a gratuitous promise in one fact pattern, but a contractual offer in another?


I recently asked if I could [expense Starbucks trips that I make to buy myself a coffee](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/4599/can-i-expense-a-trip-to-a-coffee-shop-small-business-owner). This has become frequent due to the long hours I'm putting in.

Since I cannot expense coffee trips that I take by myself, can I have my business buy *me* a Starbucks gift card as a reward for the long hours I'm putting in, and have it expensed? Can I also do this for future employees?

*Business type: Single Member LLC*

Small Business - Can I expense small gifts to myself as a reward (i.e. gift card)


1. I don't understand the boldened phrase at the bottom of the quote. Recoverability of cost or repair may affect the quantum of damages awarded by the judge, but why ought recoverability affect how the obligation broken would have been treated?
2. Please see the question in the title.

Poole, Shaw-Mellors. [*Contract Law Concentrate* (4 ed 2019)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contract-Law-Concentrate-Jill-Pool/dp/0198840446/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p 157.

>
> When can the cost of repair be awarded?
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
> ### *Ruxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyt*h (1996) (HL)
>
>
> **FACTS:** The D employed the P to build a swimming pool and specified the maximum depth and the
>  depth at a point for diving. The swimming pool depths did not meet these requirements but were
>  safe and there was no difference in value as a result. The D argued that he should be able to recover
>  £21,560 to demolish and rebuild the swimming pool to the depths specified in the contract.
>
>
> **HELD (agreeing with the trial judge):** The cost of demolition and rebuilding was refused. Instead
>  the HL awarded damages of £2,500 for loss of amenity (recognizing concern over diving depth).
>
>
> • Recovery of cost of replacement had to be reasonable, i.e. not out of all proportion to the
>  benefit to be obtained.
>
>  • Intention to rebuild was relevant to assessing the loss for which compensation was required—
>  and hence was relevant to the reasonableness of awarding cost of replacement.
>
>
>

---

>
> Cost of replacement tends to be relevant to land and buildings on land. It has the effect of
>  guaranteeing the result of the obligation. Thus if a surveyor is employed to survey a property but fails
>  in his duty to exercise reasonable care and skill (breach of qualified obligation)—so missing property
>  defects which need to be rectified—usually only the difference between the price paid (at least
>  where the purchase price is the market value for the property as represented) and the actual value
>  of the property can be recovered ([*Watts v Morrow* (1991)](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff8c360d03e7f57eccd0e)) [[summary](https://webstroke.co.uk/law/cases/watts-v-morrow-1991)]. **If cost or repair were recoverable, the
>  obligation broken would have been treated as if a guarantee**.
>
>
>

If cost or repair weren't recoverable, then how would've the obligation broken been treated?


Say I own website a.com, and this website is a streaming content website (People goes to watch Illegal movies and Series).

But the website itself is not hosting any of that content, it is only allowing the users to watch those "videos" through links from 3rd party sites (Dailymotion, Rutube, videome, etc..).

Is there **any legal action that can be undertook against the website itself**, or **should they be made against the 3rd party**, which is where the actual copyrighted content is hosted ?

The website is in some kind, helping the distribution of copyrighted content, but is not the one hosting and distributing it to begin with. The website has nothing else than links in it's hard disk and database.

Thoughts on such a situation ?

What legal actions can be taken against a streaming video website?


I wanted to ask whether it is legal to screen publicly Chaplin's The Kid (1921). In US according to Wikipedia, all movies made before 1923 are in the public domain. In UK I think the srory is different and the copyright lasts for the author's lifetime + 70 years. Charlie Chaplin was born in London, but spent most of his movie making years in US. Wiki says that The Kid was made by Chaplin (directed and produced) in his studio in US. So which copyright law is in power here, US or UK?

I would think that in this case US law is in power as the movie was made in US under a contract with US distributor, and thus the movie is in the public domain but then there is [this](http://www.charliechaplin.com/en/contacts/articles) company which claims it owns copyright to all movies made by Chaplin after 1918. So who is right and what are the ways to find out. US copyright registry is digitized only for the period after 1978 :(

Who owns copyright of Chaplin's movies (The Kid)


I want to poach customers from my competitor. Is it legal to email my competitor's customers, advertising my service as an alternative?

Details

* I can obtain a list of my competitor's customers, through a 3rd party product review site. This site allows those customers to review the competitor.
* For each of those customers, I can obtain their publicly listed contact email address from their business website.
* I would then email each of them, with a promotion email. Prompting them to consider me as an alternative.

Is this legal? Also, is it legal to refer to my competitor in the email in any way?

Is it legal to email my competitor's customers?


If Montana police want to question a Canadian citizen about a crime committed in the US, could the Canadian be compelled to cooperate?

Canadian witness/suspect in an American crime


Can a building management company charge me for work - cleaning up, fixes, etc. - that are the result of other residents' actions?

Eg If another resident(s) makes a large mess in a common area and there's a cost to clean it up - is it fair (correct legal term?) for me to be expected to pay?

Building management company: Can I be charged for something not my responsibility?


My friend wants to make a 'risk table', which would have the risk board carved into it, as part of a larger game board challenge. He would be making all the pieces and the board himself.

I'm wondering if he can do this legally, assuming he stops using the word Risk? The game mechanics can not be patented, so in that regard he is safe. He would, however, be remaking the board itself which I assume is copyrighted. Since the board is just the world map divided into specific countries I don't know if this counts as 'recreating' the board?

Is the fact that he is using the same countries that the original risk board used enough to count as recreating the board/game?

Can I recreate the Risk board game for personal use?


Here's the link to the [Turbosquid Ford Agreement](https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-modeling/general-info/terms-agreements/ford-artist-agreement/). Here's the [TLDR version](https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-modeling/general-info/general-information-faqs/ford-artist-faq/)

Basically, the agreement claims that Turbosquid is the only place to sell Ford 3D models legally. (and that it is agreed with Ford)

Yet, there's a whole [cgtrader.com](https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/ford) section for Ford 3D models.

What's the basis for Turbosquid's claims? Can Ford use its copyright/trademark against distributing 3D models?

what's the legal basis for Turbosquid claiming to be exclusive channel for Ford 3D model distribution?


I have seen several contracts that have terms such as "by accepting this offer you agree to sign a NDA/Non-Compete/Anti-harassment/Etc". How can this be fair prior to even seeing the NDA?

I work for a company that during the on boarding had a website say

>
> I acknowledge that I have downloaded and/or was provided with the
>  Company Employee Handbook on the previous page of this onboarding
>  portal. All Company policies contained in the Handbook are subject to
>  change or modification at the Company’s discretion. Complete and
>  current versions of all Company policies and the Handbook are
>  available to me on-line once I am an active Company employee.
>
>
>

I recently was in violation of a rule that I believe contradicts the law. I honestly don't remember being provided with any handbook. I remember the website being very buggy and think the recruiter advised me just to click ok on everything.

I have a few related questions that I ask out of curiosity

1. if the policy in the handbook was enforceable, would I be in breach of the contract if I didn't follow it? It seems unreasonable to say the handbook can be updated from time to time and that I had agreed to always follow it no matter what
2. Is the contract void if I was never provided with a handbook?
3. Is this even a contract? Hypothetically speaking could the company fire me or do more for a breach of policy in the handbook which I had been given?
4. In general if you were given instructions just to "click ok" could that make the contract void because of not having agreed to it?

When can a contract require the agreenment of another contract?


I'm reading a textbook on Ancient Greek that has readings at the end of each chapter. After I finish the reading, I would like to publish my translation to my blog, and above my translation reproduce the original reading. These readings aren't from classical authors, but were most likely written up by the author of the textbook, to provide simple readings for beginning students.

However, I'm not sure if it's legal to reproduce the Greek readings written by the textbook author. Would it be enough for me to cite the textbook within each blog post? Or am I required to actually write the author and receive permission?

---

**Relevant Details**

I live in the US and the book was printed in the US, and is still in print. It was copyrighted in 2000. I'm simply reproducing the textual content by laboriously typing up the Greek using the Polytonic Greek keyboard on Mac OS X. No pictures or scans.

The blog is a personal blog, devoted to my interests. Two of these main interests are Greek and Latin. I would say the blog has two purposes. First, it's an educational tool which helps me track my progress and access my materials. Second, it allows me to share my enthusiasm with others.

Is it legal to reproduce readings from a textbook on a personal blog?


Please comment if I need to separate out some of these "1-liner" questions.

Can these 3 parties (prosecutor, defender (public or private), and defendant all talk together at the same time, or the defendant listen while the prosecutor and defender talk?

How can a defendant gain a better sense of the prosecutor and what he or she really wants?

I'm also trying to understand, (perhaps a separate question, feel free to comment/advise), when a defendant represents himself, is he playing 2 roles with the prosecutor, i.e. "negotiator" and the regular defendant role?

[United States, Arizona]

Is a meeting including prosecutor, defender (public or private), and defendant allowed?


I'm thinking about making my own games / applications and trying to make money from it.

I have two questions related to this:

1. I'm not sure if I should become a sole trader or create a business. I know the pros and cons of both of them, and the extra commitment is a bit of a turn off when it comes to creating a business. On the other side I'm also scared of getting sued so I want to protect myself as much as possible. Which option do people typically choose for the type of work I'm trying to do? I'm not sure if I'm over thinking the possibility of getting sued and I should just save myself time and effort and go the sole trader path, or if this fear is genuine in this line of business and I should put the time and effort into protecting myself as much as possible.
2. If I was to become a sole trader am I allowed to create a company alias to make it look more professional? So on the website I could say "Created by so and so studios" rather than "Created by insert name"? Even though technically the "so and so studios" doesn't exist.

Sole trader / business for app/game development


I am learning a PHP course from Udemy. Can I upload the whole code in my Github without facing any copyright issues ?

Uploading code of php course to github


Can a public speech be copyrighted or otherwise protected with regard to intellectual property ?? *(with regard to Melania Trump’s speech before the Republican National Convention)*

Intellectual Property Issues associated with a Public Speach?


If someone infringes another's copyright and the owner publicly says it's ok, does he lose any further right to enforce it?

For example, party A has written a book creating a fictional character. Party B uses that character without notifying the copyright holder. Party A is made aware of this during a media interview and says that he is fine with party B's use and has no intention of suing.

How much does a public announcement like that affect the owner's copyright? Can he later change his mind and sue for infringement? If party B continues to use the character in future works, such as a sequel, can party A then sue? Can a third party legally use the character, acting on the assumption that party A has no wish to enforce his copyright?

What are the ramifications of a copyright holder publicly stating they will not sue an infringer on that right?


In the Jeffrey Epstain case in which a pyramid scheme of international sex trafficking and abuse came to light, the FBI filed a fifty three page indictment in June 2007.

However, the then Attorney-General of South California. Alexander Acosta agreed to a 'plea-deal' which more or less granted immunity to Epstein and four other named Co-conspirators and incredibly, any unnamed potential Co-conspirators. This agreement shut down the FBI probe completely.

However, a federal judge later found that the victims rights had been 'violated' in this agreement, and called the deal a 'conspiracy' and ordered the case to go ahead.

The Trump administration later selected Alexander Acosta to stand as Labour Secretary. When the the evidence for the secret back room deal, or rather 'conspiracy' came to light, the ensuing outrage forced his resignation from his post.

**Given that it appears that he was defending the rights of people involved in a pyramid scheme of sexual abuse of young and vulnerable women, why hasn't Acosta been charged with obstructing justice and/or conspiracy?**

Why wasn't Acosta arrested on conspiracy charges and/or the obstruction of justice?


No matter how much remixing today's culture is and no matter how many people have made at least one form of fan work whether it be fan art, fan fiction, fan characters, fan films, fan games or anything fan-noun, there has always been the issue that none of that is actually legal due to the fact that fair use doesn't explicitly protect a fan's good intention to contribute to the creation of their favorite franchise.

There have been many lawsuits against fan workers, especially from Nintendo. In the last few years, Nintendo has shut down hundreds of fan games of the Super Mario franchise and many others. Super Mario Bros X the fan game got shut down as well as Super Mario Bros Z the animated crossover Flash movie. The only game I know surviving so far is Mario Forever.

However, there are companies that use their fans as resources to make good games for them for real money. The perfect example of that is Sega when they allowed fans to create their own hacks of the original Sonic the Hedgehog games as well as their own engines, original games and even games that are original offsprings such as Freedom Planet and Spark the Electric Jester. Sega allowed the hosting of many game jams and hackathons for game developers to learn how to make games by remixing the original Sonic games and trying to make something awesome out of them. There have been fan game collections such as Sonic Megamix and very popular Sonic fan games like Sonic Robo Blast. Sega has never had any problems with fan games or any kind of fan work and they have always allowed their fans to use their intellectual property for their own enjoyment.

The question now is, is there a list, an article, an analysis or a method of analysis such as Freedom to Operate, in order to find out which companies are okay with the remixing of their intellectual property. Another question is if there are any open source video games that allow fan work to be done and under which license types (copyleft (GPL), copycenter (MIT)). Has anyone ever tried to figure that out? Please let me know as well as many other people who are too poor to hire a lawyer to tell them what's legal so that they can peacefully make their own fan works.

Is there a whitelist of video game developer companies which are friendly with fan works?


When I was on a cruise ship, the song "Hungry Heart" was played on a daily, almost hourly basis on the ship over its p.a. system. Does the ship need to get a license/pay royalties for the right to do this? Or is this "fair use?" Put another way, does a DJ need to pay royalties every time s/he plays a song over e.g. the radio? Or can they get a "pass" by claiming that they are not earning money on the song itself, only the advertising that the radio sells? (It could be any song, but the Bruce Springsteen song was the one I remembered.)

Is there a legal mechanism whereby the cruise ship can "escape" paying royalties? Theory 1 is that the cruise is in international waters. 2) Theory 2 is that the cruise ship is merely "rebroadcastng" a radio or TV show that contained the song. Obviously, the radio or TV show had to pay for the original song use, but does that apply to viewers/listeners of a TV show?

My understanding is that the cruise ship has to pay royalties on "live" performances on the ship, so my question is about "canned" performances. For example, does a bar have to pay directly for the playing of say, songs on a jukebox, or is that the responsibility of the jukebox lessor? Put another way, does the responsibility for paying for "canned" music fall on the "canner", (radio/TV/jukebox provider), or on the "can opener," (ship or bar)?

Source of permission/license to use song on a cruise ship?


I see a bar at the bottom of the screen that reads:

>
> By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.
>
>
>

My question is how can I read and understand those policies without using your site? It seems a little late now, doesn't it?

How can I read your cookie policy without using your site


Some ISPs in Europe offer data plans that are capped at certain amount of GB per month.

But in [this europa.eu page](https://berec.europa.eu/eng/netneutrality/) one can read that:

>
> The best effort internet is about the equal treatment of data traffic being transmitted over the internet, i.e. that the ‘best efforts’ are made to carry data, **no matter what it contains, which application transmits the data (“application-agnosticism”), where it comes from or where it goes**. The benefits of the best effort internet notably include the separation between application and network layers of the internet.
>
>
>

(emphasis added)

Is it actually legal under EU law to offer Internet services that do not treat all services/apps/websites equally when it comes to data caps?

Is offering uncapped access to certain services but not others by ISPs legal under EU net neutrality laws?


[Prof Richard Taylor](https://www.uclan.ac.uk/staff_profiles/richard-taylor.php), [Damian Taylor](https://www.slaughterandmay.com/who-we-are/partners/damian-taylor/). [*Contract Law Directions* (6 edn, 2019)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contract-Law-Directions-Richard-Taylor/dp/0198836597/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p 41.

Kindly see the last sentence, emboldened, at the bottom.

>
> Acceptance by silence
> ---------------------
>
>
> The law often makes a distinction between positive conduct and omissions—in criminal law it is
> an offence to push a man off a cliff but not normally an offence to omit to call a warning before
> someone steps off the edge. The same is true in contract law. Whilst conduct may amount to an
> acceptance, doing nothing, i.e. silence, will rarely count. The reasoning is the same as in other
> areas of law; a man must not be put under a duty to act without good reason. If silence was
> readily accepted as a mode of acceptance in contract law then I could go around telling everybody
> in sight that I would assume they had accepted my offer to buy all their property for 10
> pence if I did not hear from them within one hour. This would place a duty on everybody I met
> to reject my offer within one hour if they did not want to be bound—clearly a ridiculous situation.
> Therefore, the general rule established in *Felthouse v Bindley* (1862) is that silence cannot
> constitute an acceptance. In that case a nephew and his uncle had negotiated the sale of the
> nephew’s horse. They misunderstood each other and became confused about the agreed price.
> In a letter, the uncle suggested that they split the difference and that if he heard no more about
> it he would consider the sale done for this middle price. The nephew said nothing more to the
> uncle but clearly accepted the new price because he told his auctioneer to withdraw the horse
> from auction in which it was to be sold as he had already sold it to his uncle. The auctioneer
> nevertheless sold the horse in the auction by mistake and the uncle sued him for interfering with
> his property rights over the horse (known as the tort of conversion). It was held that the uncle
> had not become the owner of the horse, and therefore had no title to sue, because the contract
> of sale between the uncle and nephew lacked an acceptance and so never existed. You should
> note that it was the uncle (the offeror) who claimed there was a contract and it was he who had
> introduced the idea that acceptance could be by silence—**if instead it had been the nephew, who
> sought to enforce the contract, a different result might have been appropriate**.
>
>
>

In Felthouse v Bindley (1862), why didn't the nephew claim?


Let's say you're in a supermarket on the day before Christmas and there's a huge 20-person line to each register. Assuming you knew exactly how much the goods in your cart are worth, would it be a crime to leave said amount of money to a random employee (e.g. the information desk) and then just proceed to leave? By "crime" I refer to a situation where you can be charged with theft.

Would it be a crime to take goods in a supermarket and pay by leaving cash to a random employee?