Awhile back I had to hire an attorney when the state of California was erroneously notified from another state that I had been convicted of a DUI...resulting in a suspension of my California Driver's License. In California, one is only entitled to a DMV hearing for an administrative suspension. To contest a suspension resulting from a criminal conviction, one has to file a petition for a writ of mandate against the department ordering the suspension be set aside. My attorney notified me in this instance that he had heard that, on occasion, the department will effectively assert its equality with the court and refuse to remove the suspension...in which case one then has to move to the federal arena and get it ordered by a district court.

I'm curious as to whether this is actually true. **That is, can a state agency simply assert that it is equal to a state court and ignore a *bona fide* order from that court?** In case this is "too broad", answers restricted to the laws of the State of California would suffice.

Can a state agency, asserting "equal footing", ignore an order from a state court


I'm not asking about a specific case, but I'm interested to know about the general principles that would cover the following scenario:

A CGI artist makes a tutorial on how to design and make a digital render of an object: let's say, for instance, a doughnut. Another creator lawfully (i.e. having bought it or watched it on a free platform) follows this tutorial and, based on that, makes a digital render of a doughnut, but this time laid on a different plate and with differently colored sprinkles, that they intend to sell to a client for a commercial publication.

Because of the digital nature of this artwork, it's possible that, by following the steps very closely, the core part (i.e. the doughnut) will be extremely similar to the one created by the author of the tutorial.

If this scenario is not clearly mentioned in the tutorial's T&C (if any), does the buyer/follower of the tutorial have the rights on the work they created?

---

PS my doughnut example is based on a popular free tutorial targeted at amateur users of a CGI software, Blender. This tutorial has been followed [many many times](https://www.reddit.com/r/BlenderDoughnuts/).

Copyright on a artwork based on a tutorial


My company, based in the U.K., had a software development contract with another company, also based in the U.K.

The contract was mostly standard, as far as I could tell when comparing it to other contracts I have worked with.

I would work for a daily rate of £n/day, invoiced monthly and then paid within 30 days of invoice. There would also be some other clauses relating to such things as, for example, after termination, my company cannot provide services to any major competitor of the other company for a period of 6 months, poach existing employees, or share confidential information.

Unfortunately, after submitting an invoice in April for works in February and March, the other company failed to make payment after giving multiple assurances that it would be paid, then suddenly raising issues at the end of June for works in March, and making demands and other unfortunate behaviours.

After minor legal action, all invoices owed have now been paid, a total of 80 days after the initial invoice was submitted (50 days overdue).

My question is: can the other company enforce any other clauses, such as restrictions for 6 months after termination to work for other companies, not approaching company employees for other work, etc as outlined in the initial contract? Does non-payment and the legal action so far constitute a breach of contract that makes the rest unenforceable?

I appreciate the answer *may* be "it depends" and is not legal advice, but comments would be useful. Thanks.

Can some clauses of a contract be enforced when there is a breach of contract (caused by non-payment)?


If I commit a crime and many years later (> 25 years) send an email to the police claiming to have committed a crime, can they arrest me?

(assumming they do not think it is just a "prank email")

Severity of crime:

Level 3 or 4 as defined by <https://pap.georgia.gov/sites/pap.georgia.gov/files/CSL-s_Post_1-1-2006_considerations.pdf>

---

Some time ago, I took a criminology course and was told by the instructor that around 1000 people were known to have raped and/or killed Aboriginals in early/mid 1900 but were not sentenced since it "happened too long ago" (although there is evidence that the crimes have been committed)

Expired Punishment


I am looking for cases where a educational non-profit organization was successfully sued for violation of copyright/Fair Use (US).

I am particularly interested in borderline cases (i.e. cases where many observers would consider the non-profit's use "fair", but the non-profit still lost anyway).

Cases where a educational non-profit organization was successfully sued for violation of copyright/Fair Use (US)


Some time ago I became a university student and with that I got an access to serveral programming tools, such as Jetbrains' products, for free. The licences I got are of course only for academic purposes, which got me wondering: How do they enforce these types of licenses? When you load a .cpp/.h/etc files in for example notepad you can't tell in which program they were typed before, so how do they know if that commercial code was written in a program with non-suited license for a such usage?

Another thing I thought about is: How do you "free" your code from the license of the program you wrote it in? For example, if I copy the contents of my file written in editor XYZ (with license only for academic purposes) to an open source editor, can I still not distribute it? What if I wrote my source code in XYZ program, but futher changes occured in the open source program? Is that "old" part of the code is still under that program license?

Enforcement of programing tools licenses


Assume, there's a model called **CustomerDetails**, which contains the following properties:

* ContactEmail - an email address for contacting purposes,
* ContactAddress - a postal address for contacting purposes,
* DefaultDeliveryAddress - default address for delivery when creating orders,
* DefaultInvoiceAddress - default address to be printed on invoice, when creating orders,
* and other properties.

All entities in the system are by default audited, ie. they contain change log / revisions history.

Any user can change own CustomerDetails data by himself/herself.

If user changes that information via web-interface, then what is correct:

* there can be no trace of previous information: no revisions history for the CustomerDetails entity, or
* there must be a possibility to delete own revisions for user: extra user interface to view+delete revisions, or
* there is only obligation to delete revisions of CustomerDetails, if Right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’) is exercised?

Is revision history (audit/change log) compliant with GDPR's right to rectification?


Congress is about to pass a 9/11 that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi Government. Does this open a 'Pandora's box' where other foreign governments like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc..can sue the US government? Very interesting bill.

What does the 9/11 bill mean for foreign governments?


I have a contract that was signed on Nov 4, 2016. It says that we can cancel the contract within three business days from the above date. Additionally, it also says "To cancel this transaction, mail or deliver a signed and dated copy of this cancellation notice to" followed by an address and "no later than midnight of Nov 9, 2016". I am wondering if midnight of Nov 9 means a minute after Nov 8 11:59PM or it is after Nov 9 11:59PM.

What does "No later than midnight of a day" mean?


Is it legal if we do not offer an explicit opt-out option in our app for non-persnonal data collection?

We planned to explain to the user what data we collect and at the bottom of the screen there would be a button that would say something like "I understand". By pressing that button user would be able to open the rest of the app and use the app. The above mentioned screen would be the first screen new users would see. All users could opt out afterwards in the app settings.

GDPR no opt out option


I was wondering if you are able to call an Android Application after a name of a film. I have tried researching online and have found information regarding character names and graphics etc but couldn't find anything about the names of films. I am not planning on using any graphics or sounds from the film simply just the title. I have created the application myself and am planning on putting it on the Play Store soon with both a free and paid version being available. I was thinking as I will be earning money from it maybe it then does become an issue.

[![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jraxF.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jraxF.png)

Android Application named after film


I made a bot program which only visits some websites automatically (not a virus, worm, trojan and etc) and I'm planning to install it as an additional program near main program.
I know it is illegal but if I wrote some information about this bot in the usage statement which people should accept that before installing the main program, would it be legal?

Is is legal to include a bot software into an installation by explaining to the user?


I have just become aware of this particular Article 29, which has one good side: it is short.

>
> The processor and any person acting under the authority of the controller or of the processor, who has access to personal data, shall not process those data except on instructions from the controller, unless required to do so by Union or Member State law.
>
>
>

Then in Article 28 about "Processor",

>
> (a) processes the personal data only on documented instructions from the controller, including with regard to transfers of personal data to a third country or an international organisation, unless required to do so by Union or Member State law to which the processor is subject; in such a case, the processor shall inform the controller of that legal requirement before processing, unless that law prohibits such information on important grounds of public interest;
>
>
>

Not to mention Article 32.

If I were to be asked about any instructions, "I don't know" kind of answer would probably be the only one. I have mostly developed new features for a MVC framework and installed those new features to the production system. Things like checklists and guidelines have not been provided.

Right now my own conclusion is that I should not to copy or modify any database or install any code update that changes how personal data is processed.

I have been employed on a small company for some years, i.e. before and after gdpr come to effect. The company acts as a processor for multiple controllers.

I'll probably make some phone calls anyway tomorrow.

GDPR: Can I do anything that touches a system with live customer data if I have no instructions at all


I've just understood the concept of writing a contract. It is just an agreement between two people written on the paper and signed by all the parties involved. So, if it is possible to write contracts, then why do we need a specific law for companies? Can't we construct a company simply wording our terms and declaring all the rules of the "company" in a contract without registration?

For example, one of the benefits of registering a company is its liability shield it gives us. So why not mention in the contract "no individual mentioned in this contract is liable..." (please forgive me if my question is naive). Another benefit of a company is, being able to issue shares. So to cover this, the contract could contain "All assets mentioned have a shared ownership. Each person in the contract is assigned certain 'ownership points' (a different word for shares). And these ownership points declare each individual's ownership of the asserts..."

Couldn't we implement all the features of a company, one after the other, simply by writing a contract? Please tell me why this isn't possible and what I don't understand. And again, sorry for this naive question.

I would like to hear this answer in the context of any country. Though I would be able to relate well, when answered in the context of India.

Is it possible word a contract such that it brings in all the features of registering a company?


I work for a company that produces recordings of conference lectures. From what I can tell, there are at least three parties that can lay claim to the copyright on the recorded lectures.

1. The recording company (my company)
2. The conference organizer
3. The speaker

The recording company records video of the speaker *and* their slides presentation at no cost, explicitly for the exclusive right to sell the content. This is always true. (When working under a service for hire scenario, there is always a written agreement that explicitly denies the recording company the copyright, so I do not want to focus on that).

The recording company is doing the work, creating the original work, without any consideration (money or payment of some kind) from either the conference organizer or the speaker. This seems to support that the copyright belongs to the recording company, assuming at least spoken permission to record was given, and [is supported by another answer.](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/6316/is-consent-required-by-law-to-take-a-picture-or-to-record-audio-video-of-a-con)

There is a somewhat unique set of particulars that may affect who owns the copyright, and not all dealings with conference organizers or speakers include them. These particulars lead to questions:

* The speaker usually has a signed contract with the conference organizer allowing the lecture to be recorded, but sometimes they do not. Does the speaker have a claim on the copyright if their permission to record is only spoken? Only implied (i.e. they are clearly being recorded, with a huge camera in their face)? What if a written contract does not explicitly mention the capture of their slides as well?
* The recording company pays a "royalty" on future sales to the conference organizer, which is

	+ sometimes only spoken,
	+ only sometimes a specific percentage,
	+ but sometimes very explicitly written.Does paying a "royalty" automatically imply that the recording company is admitting non-ownership of the copyright? Is using the word "royalty" especially important in this case, or is there a benign word that could be used that is not associated with copyrights? Does the specificity of these payments agreements affect copyright ownership?
* Explicit written contracts often include a perpetuating allowance that sales may continue indefinitely so long as the "royalty payments are met on time". Is this a legal contract?
* Does the phrase "exclusive right to sell" affect the copyright ownership?

I know copyright varies by country, so let's focus only on US law, because that is where most conferences are recorded.

Who owns the copyright when video recording lectures at a conference (with permission)?


When a contract is signed, then the adoption agreement (that is supposed to mirror the contract) has a conflicting statement, which takes priority?

Priority between signed contract and adoption agreement


I am an architect on a redesign of an old software system into a new system. One of the big problems of this older vendor based system is that it only communicated out on its interfaces in the vendors proprietary format. Many other systems and vendor systems interfacing to this were tightly coupled to the vendor product because they were programmed to talk in a proprietary format. One of the design principles I am adhering to here is that interfacing systems not talk in any proprietary format to the new system.

*Related: [Is it legal to write software to convert data from a proprietary format?](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/8277/is-it-legal-to-write-software-to-convert-data-from-a-proprietary-format) I was told from management that Legal has in writing, explicit permission from the new vendor that we are allowed to convert their proprietary XML formats into another data format.*

The new software system is also a vendor product which in turn has its own vendor proprietary formats. The project is not doing so hot at the moment and we are not likely to meet our dates. Project managers are trying to convince me and the developers that they can save time by simply removing the namespace declarations of the proprietary XML formatted messages, and that by doing so that the document no longer declares its namespace thus cannot actually be considered in the proprietary format.

I don't have the authority to say for sure that the PM is incorrect, however I know for a fact the PM has no authority to make that assertion. I do have the authority to say that XML messages they transform from proprietary must have a declared namespace meaning that they have to transform the message into some format that is distinctly different.

The PM is now trying to ask me what are the minimum possible changes and transformations required to where we can no longer consider the resulting message to be proprietary.

Is there in fact a black and white answer for these sorts of things or is it like most things in Law where it is incomprehensibly a gray area? I don't want to have to raise the flag for legal help on a trifle like this because that would be an expenditure of what little political capital I have on an increasingly stressful and chaotic project.

Proprietary data formats: When converting to another format, when is it no longer proprietary?


There are a lot of textbooks (typically out of print, I think) that the publisher/copyright owner has decided to make freely available online as a pdf. (see [this](http://www.paultaylor.eu/stable/prot.pdf), for example of what I mean) Is it legal to print such texts for personal use as long as it is not explicitly stated to be prohibited in the copyright notice on the pdf?

It seems to me that this should be fine, since if something is put online not under a pay-wall or on a private database, the copyright holder is presumably fine with people making (digital) copies, then why not physical copies?

Of course, I think the answer ultimately is: "Ask the copyright-holder for permission if you want to be absolutely sure", but I wanted to ask the legal community if this sort of thing is legal in general, either because of specific copyright laws, or legal precedent on this sort of thing.

Is it legal to print (non-pirated) textbook pdfs that are made freely available online by the copyright-holder?


Suppose a UK employee who works for company A, where Company A is owned by company B, and parent company B has created a new company, company C. Company A is now transferring all assets about the company, employees included, to company C. The whole chain of command, boss, CEO, CTO, etc will change, processes will no doubt change. Such a change was dictated rather than discussed and agreed with the employees of company A.

There is nothing specific about such a situation in the employment contract, so hopefully there can be some presumption about "standard employment law", whatever that may entail to a layman such as myself. How might this affect a contract? If a person wanted to get out of a contract after such changes were made, would this be sufficient to be a break in existing contract and thus allow the employee to get out without serving notice?

Company has transferred team to another company, does this count as breaking contact?


When making a Subject Access Request to GCHQ I was told that I would have to pay a fee for this Request. The GDPR does not allow for such a fee, while the UK Data Protection Act does(Part 4 – Chapter 3 - Section 94). My Subject Access Request concerns the website of the GCHQ, and not the GCHQ's surveillance activities. Does the GDPR supersede the UK Data Protection Act in this case?

Fee for Subject Access Request to GCHQ, Data Protection Act 2018


I would like to develop a mobile application that makes it easier to make appointments with private individuals and doctors and dentists, similar to the existing solutions but with additional health information articles.

I have the application on a technological level, but I decided to call one of my childhood friends who is currently studying interactive design in Tokyo, Japan to create the graphical interface and to think with me about the ergonomics of the application.

I chose the name Doctora for the application and the name of the future company I want to create at the end of the month in Sydney, Australia.

The questions I ask myself are the following:

1. What are the different laws applicable to my application?
2. What precautions do I need to take to be 100% owner of my
application?
3. What means can I put in place to protect my application but also the
services and data accessible to the application?
4. How can I protect my trademark with peace of mind?

Advises for a mobile app


This is going to be a long question:

I'm working on creating a company to stream the latest and greatest movies that haven't reached Netflix yet. In order to do this, my plan is to buy, say, 10 Harry Potter DVDs, and rip one of them. We will then monitor how many people are streaming it and limit it to 10, the number of DVDs we have. It won't hurt the sales of the movie, because we're purchasing the correct number of DVDs.

This is equivalent to just sending a DVD to a user, just online. We won't lend out(a.k.a. stream) more DVDs than we have.

Update: How is Vidangel legal if they do just this?

Is it legal to stream DVD?


I'm considering buying a Windows 10 Home 64-bit (not OEM) license. Since Microsoft claims there will be no Windows 11 and at the same time this license is not tied to a specific machine, does that mean I'll be able to not pay for Windows ever again and still use it for the next 10, 20, 40 years?

I read a couple of articles about how MS will still earn on Win10 as computer producers will need to pay to MS to sell them with Windows 10 on board. But if I already have a BOX license that is not tied to a specific machine, wouldn't I be able to buy laptops/PCs without an operating system and always install the Windows 10 I bought?

This doesn't seem like a sustainable strategy for a company so I wonder where's the catch?

Link to the Microsoft Store page: <https://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/Windows-10-Home/productID.319937100>

Does Windows 10 Home non-OEM license work forever?


Is the amount of claimable damages greater during a breach of contract or is it greater during a fraudulent misrepresentation?

If company A wants to sue company B due to them being guilty of a fraudulent misrepresentation, would it be better for company A to sue company B for a breach of contract instead, if the particular fraudulent misrepresentation also created a breach of contract?

Are claimable damages greater for a breach of contract or fraudulent misrepresentation?


I have been employed on renewable annual contracts with the same employer since 2012, with contract dates of 01 Jan to 31 December. I am now told that I was erroneously overpaid an my previous contract on backpayment of a salary increament that I was eligible to receive in March 2018. I am now on a new contrac effective 01 Jan 2019.

Am I liable to pay back the overpayment?

Annual Contract of employment with the same employer


On the 6th of september I booked a photoshoot in Miami (I am from germany), my trip was later canceled and I can't go to Miami Beach. I think you all know about Hurricane Irma...
My Photoshoot costs overall 2k and I already paid 500 upfront. The contract says that if I cancel the shoot the 500 dollars will be kept by the photographer. Which I can understand, since he might lose other clients the same day.

However, do you think this is okay? I lost my complete flights to the U.S. and suffered already some k in money.
The 500 dollars i paid were agreed by both sides, but it could be 300 or 600, we simply thought there will be no reason to not make the shooting.

If you need any more information, please let me know.

Booked a shooting (pictures) in Miami - my trip was canceled


Referring to the [O.J. case](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/14268/why-did-double-jeopardy-not-apply-in-the-o-j-case), how can a civil court (or any legitimate court system) determine that you have indeed beat someone to death, now we are ordering you to pay damages and then you may walk free... this goes so badly against my sense of justice that I was wondering if anyone has a justification for it. In Finland where I'm from, the charge for causing a death in any way is always a criminal charge; you can't start a civil suit over it (as far as I know).

Why a civil court can order damages for killing a person?


With regard to the Brexit today, I was asking myself when exactly it goes into effect. It should be 31st January, 2020, 23:59:59, but which time zone?

This leads me to the question, if there is an official - or default - time zone in the EU or even worldwide when a contract states a start or end date?

Is it undefined unless the contract specifies it?

P.S.: Not sure if this is more a political question..?

Is there an "official time" in the EU, and if so, which is it?


If I were to take license texts of publicy available licenses, such as the WTFPL, to add some paragraphs and create my own license, which I then ship with content created by me, would that be legal? What about AGB's for example?

I'm sure companies put a lot of work/money in form of lawyers into writing the terms, and often it can't be prevented to make them open source.

Three options seem to be plausible to me: (a) license not yet specified and anything possible (b) public domain (c) same license as the license if a license.

(Initially intended to include the here used CC BY-SA 4.0, but after some additional search I found out that all CC licenses are itself licensed public domain. The question remains for the WTFPL for example, which is clearly copyrighted but without a license for the license given. Could use of the text be revoked / sued?)

What's the license of a license?


I am writing a book on best practice branding for entrepreneurs and want to demonstrate my points using well-known (as well as our own client) logos.

The logos will be used for illustrative, educational purposes and shown in a good light. I can put a line at the start of the book explaining that the use of the logo does not imply any endorsement or sponsorship from these brands.

Will this be enough?

What are the laws on showing another company's logo in my book on branding?


If I download a YouTube video, dub it in another language, and reupload it on YouTube, can I be prosecuted by law (or can YouTube remove my video) for infringement?

Is dubbing a YouTube video in another language illegal?


I'm posting here, because I'd like to do something but I'm concerned about the legal aspect of it.

A lot of websites propose to sell t-shirts, goodies, etc. based on your designs. I'd like to sell t-shirts with the direwolve emblem of the "House Stark" in Game of Thrones, and of course, I've been immediately asking myself if HBO which produces the serie actually had some copyright on that emblem. I've searched a lot, but didn't found anything.

I also saw this video, where a girl who used a simple sentence from the serie was threatened to be sued, so you get my point : <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4032504/Game-Thrones-threatens-SUE-autistic-schoolgirl-13-girl-used-phrase-winter-coming-artwork-competition.html>

Of course I do not intend to use some copyrighted content, so that's why I'm asking, but how to know what can be used freely ? what sentence ? what sigil ? For example can a sentence as "The North Remembers" be copyrighted if there's no image under it ?

Thanks for all your legal advices !

Is there a copyright on that content?


This question is about a complex situation that I will try to keep as concise as possible.
I was named trustee for a moderate sized trust. The attorney who drafted the trust did so in such a way as to alter the intent of the deceased. I believe he did this intentionally. The same attorney lied on the witness stand. His testimony was directly countered by a witness whose veracity was beyond question. The judge for the trial had already decided the outcome of the trial before it started. This is known because of statements he made to attorneys before trial. The judge also actively advocated on behalf of the plaintiff, was very biased as well. The net result was, I was removed as trustee. An accounting was ordered. The Judge retired. Jump ahead 18 months. A trial was set because of objections to my accounting. After 3 days of trial, the new judge over ruled all objections. It was determined that the attorney for the trust I had hired had given me poor advice, bordering on malpractise. My current trial attorney had, unfortunately, neglected to enter the exhibit that supported this conclusion as evidence. Even though the judge had the information, he said he was unable to use it as it was not entered as evidence. So I was surcharged these fees, which is a high 5 figure. This judge also stated that he was satisfied in all respects with my performance as trustee and expressed surprise that I was removed. Now, my current trial attorney , the one who neglected to admit the exhibit, wants to go after the original attorney for those fees on a contingency basis, his fee to be 50% of the recovered money. That would leave me with nothing except still owing the trust the other half of those fees. I don't know where to go with this.
There is a lot more to the story, but I have tried to be concise. Any ideas?

Should I pursue a lawsuit for legal misconduct?


If I enter an establishment that offers drinks/coffee/food and say "I'd like a coffee/beer/whatever" and the waiter gives it to me, shouldn't they explicitly mention that it's not for free?

If some person is handling pens with ads on a corner, and I say "I'd like a pen" could the person just reply that it's $1?

Would the scenarios above be any different if a mentally challenged person went through them?

Contract law: implicit payment?


This is a follow up to [this question](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/21325/286).

If I record my own work (original texts, phrases, sentences, etc.) using Amazon's Polly, who owns the copyright on those recordings?

In the [AWS TOS](https://aws.amazon.com/service-terms/) section 65.5, they say:

>
> The distribution of audio output files created by Amazon Polly may
>  require that you obtain license rights from third-party owners or
>  licensors of content that you include in your text inputs into Amazon
>  Polly. You are solely responsible for obtaining these licenses and
>  paying any necessary royalties or fees.
>
>
>

From this excerpt, should I infer that I'm the owner of the copyright on the audio files, if I own the content used as input?

Who owns the copyright on a Polly recording?


Can a customer of mine waive negligence caused by me when doing any business activity on assets/property? What if the property belongs to someone else, but I state that they take all responsibility as well? Provided that I am specific and the waiver is clearly written, is it enforceable? Can this replace the need for general liability insurance?

For an example, I pressure wash property for a living. While washing, I scratch a vehicle, however, the customer has signed a waiver that protects me from being sued/pay for damages. What if the car is leased, however, I state that they are responsible to pay X for all damages caused by my negligence?

All activities are based in Ontario, Canada.

Can a contract waive negligence in Ontario, Canada?


In the UK, can you search and learnscience materials from websites, found throught search engine eg google, even if the teaching material is not referenced accuratelly or at all (references towards the past scientific studies eg. This protein function is .... (Name, year) because I suppose the papers the information is from could be behind paywall, so it would be a copyright infregement by the website author, to use the info from the paper for teaching. But than wouldnt wikipedia also be going against copyright as some papers might be excluded from text references and wiki could use information in articles for the public to view, even if it is behind paywall. How would one differentiate which materials can be viewed and which cant? Eg. If you want to learn basic chemistry eg. Moles the academic papers would be really old and probably open access so it is okey to search and find websites teaching this info but it would not be okey for searching for something relatively new in the field and learning this from the individual website, wiki, articles? Does everything need to be referenced?

Copyright of academic teaching material eg wikipedia, other websites


My neighbor that lives in the apartment below mine repeatedly makes ridiculous complaints of us making noise which include "being able to hear our fan" while we use it during a hot summer night, or that we are "talking too loud" when we are talking at a normal volume in our own rooms. It it important to note that his roommate has no issues with our supposed noise, just him.

A conversation with him last night began with him hammering loudly on our door with his fist and ended in him punching our door before storming off, and given that he seems to have very little control of his anger, my roommates and I are worried he might physically lash out. Given that he did not punch the door hard enough to leave physical evidence, what legal action can we take against a potentially violent neighbor to ensure the safety of my roommates and myself? Can this be considered a form of harassment?

**Edit**: I sent an email to the management company regarding his behavior informing them that I wanted it on record that I notified them in case something happens again and nothing was done on their part. But since "he complained first" we are in jeopardy of being evicted, because if he complains again we would be in violation of our lease agreement (which states we cannot annoy, disturb, inconvenience, or interfere with the quiet enjoyment of another tenant).

I looked up the noise laws for my city, and they state that the noise must be loud for a "reasonable" person of "average sensitivity." I definitely feel that my neighbor does not meet either of these criteria, but is there a way to go about showing this?

Legal action regarding a potentially violent neighbor


As an employee of a software company they own my personal time projects, this is not in question. That said, my employer is quite reasonable about said things and at least verbally quite willing to review something and say "this isn't related to our work, you can have it."

It being a small shop, verbal acknowledgement has been all they used before; they have no form for assigning a particular projects IP back to an employee. For a project I want to make and open source I would like something in writing. My employer is receptive to that but they want me to provide the form.

I have been looking for either a template or some resource to help me write a little thing that they can sign that says something like: "The company transfers back all rights related to this project to employee, and we cannot take this back later."

I suspect I don't know the correct terms to search because all I find are templates for employers to have new hires sign that assign their IP to the employer or articles talking about how really the employer owns all IP anyways.

Is there a particular term I can search for this? Do such templates exist?

Resources for assigning employee intellectual property back?


So say somebody asked Bob if he'd broken a civil injunction, which Bob hadn't, but Bob admitted to having broken that injunction. Bob was taken to court, but it quickly became apparent Bob could not have committed the crime, because he had an undisputable alibi.

(Bob is any person.)

Is these a feasible situation? Could Bob be charged with wasting someone's time or something? I'm interested in this in the UK.

(Apologies if the style of this question is innapropriate, I'm not really sure how things work round here:) )

Falsely admitting to breaking a civil injunction


An author knows when s/he has copied material and possibly infringed on someone's copyright, and a publisher is supposed to take "reasonable" steps to determine whether or not an author has done so.

But can a printer be held liable for such infringement? The printer's position is something like, "I was hired to print such-and-such and so I did. How would I know if it infringes on someone else's rights?"

Can a printer be held liable for e.g. copyright infringement?


I am in full term employment in the UK. My notice period set out in my contract is 3 months. There is no probation period (I know this is unusual). I have only been working for 10 weeks and have handed in my notice. My employer is insisting I work for the full 3 months to hire my replacement. There is someone else in my team at the same level who does the same job. Do I have any options to work a shorter notice period?

Long notice period when in employment a short amount of time in UK


*Apologies if this is not the right forum for this question. Please feel free to close if it should be asked elsewhere.*

I was recently terminated from employment due to poor performance. About a year ago, my mother passed away, and the psychological trauma was extreme. I already suffer from clinical chronic depression, and this even took a toll on me.

For a six-month period, there were several instances where I missed work without notice. Admittedly, I could have communicated an out-of-office status, but my depression seemed to overwhelm me to a point where it was difficult to communicate. Upon a conversation with my manager, I communicated that I understood the need/requirement of communication, and I began seeking intense therapy (both alone and with group support) on Mondays. My employer made accommodations to this and allowed me to work only Tuesday-Thursday.

Two months ago, I was asked by my manager when Mondays were going to be available again, and I was told my team/colleagues were feeling a lack of cohesion with the team on my part. I told her I'm still working through this loss and therapy has been immensely helpful, but she pushed the cohesion issue again. I felt guilted/pressured into willfully terminating my Monday therapy.

A month ago, I accidentally only requested 2 days of PTO (in our PTO system) for a trip to celebrate my mother's passing. I communicated effectively with the team that I would be gone for three days, and they even marked it appropriately in our team-level capacity sheet.

I was confronted two weeks ago by my manager stating that I am not communicating well enough with my team, and that no one was aware of this extra day. To that end, I was given an ultimatum.

I was told I had to perform the following tasks every day:

* An end-of-day status, consisting of what I planned to accomplish today, what I actually accomplished, and plans for the next day
* Attendance to all scheduled meetings, unless I was sick.
* In our team chat software (Slack), I must "@here" anytime I was away from the keyboard, or send an e-mail to all team members. @here sends a notification to all team members' screens in case they have the software minimized.

Each of these things are not required by any other team member. While I don't mind guided direction to regain team cohesion, these requests--especially the "@here" portion, felt extremely degrading, especially if I just had to use the restroom. Furthermore, throughout these next two weeks, it also felt like a slap in the face when other team members would just send a non-notifying message if they were going to be away or offline.

Last week, I @here'd that I was feeling under the weather and would work remotely from home. That afternoon, I was feeling light-headed, and so I communicated that, accidentally without the "@here." I was terminated yesterday explicitly for this.

I am in an at-will employment state, so I do understand that employment can be terminated at any time, but I still feel concerned that my reason for termination was that I was not following rules that only I was given as an ultimatum for employment. If it matters, all my team members are of the same role/level as me.

Update: Part of my concern is that I was also encouraged to terminate therapy, even with knowledge that I am suffering from a medical condition exacerbated by recent events.

Is it legal in California to require extra behavior/communication from a single employee?


[This article](https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/aug/27/virgin-media-contract-cancel-bills-charge) in The Guardian says:

>
> Virgin Media is one of those companies – Sky is another – that insist customers terminate their contracts verbally, rather than by email or letter. It is very frustrating for some customers, who have claimed it would be easier to leave the mafia than their phone/TV company. Virgin cites data protection reasons, but is likely making you call to cancel so it can try its hardest to keep you as a customer by offering a new deal.
>
>
>

Is this legal? Can a company ignore a contract termination letter or email on the grounds that they want to do it over the phone?

Can a company insist that contract terminations be done over the phone?


I really like a drawing someone posted. It was an image someone's friend drew for them so she could put it on her car. she was just showing it off in an online forum. thx

If I cant trademark it, can I redraw something similar and trademark my own drawing?

I want to use the drawing as a logo/image for my business.

can i trademark an image someone posted online from their friend


I signed a contract with a company that was going to do some work on my house. I have already put money down on the job. However, the agreement states that the job WILL be completed between date A and date B. But, I saw a later statement in the contract that says the job will be completed approximately between date A and date B. The date has already passed for when the job was to be completed. Am I obligated to stay with this company based on the confusing terms in the agreement?

Contract I signed appears to have contradictory statements


If I were to order custom t-shirts from a t-shirt printing company with some copyrighted brand on them, (when) would it be legally OK for me to do so without the copyright owner's permission?

* Is it legal if I do not distribute them to others at all?
* Is it legal if I give them to my family/relatives for free, e.g. as a gift?
* Is it legal if I give them away to others for free (meaning I'm losing my own money on them)?
* Is it legal if I sell them to others at-cost (i.e. for the same price I obtained them, meaning I'm not making any money from them)?
* If the answer is "yes" to any of the above, can the copyright holder explicitly prohibit me from doing so, or would such a prohibition be unenforceable (e.g. if this would be fair use)?
* Any other factors that are relevant but which I'm forgetting?

It's hard for me to tell, because copyright seems to be about "commercial" use, but none of these seems to be commercial use to me, yet I don't know if I'm interpreting the law correctly.

Printing copyrighted logos on t-shirts/jackets/apparel without permission: in which situations is it legal?


I want to create from scratch a map that resembles the world described in the novells "A Song of Ice and Fire". My map will have a similar coastline and will use some of the names of the places from the books.

Am I legally allowed to do that? Are there some restrictions to what I can do with this map (e.g. share it for non-profit purposes)?

EDIT

I have seen the map a while ago in a web site and I am recreating it from memory.

Copyright of the world described in the novells "A Song of Ice and Fire"


The terms and conditions for the use of Getty images allows the free use of embedded images legally. As it says at the web site (<http://www.gettyimages.com/embed>)

"Share more than 50 million images. It's easy, legal and free."

However the terms and conditions page says this:

>
> Content may not be used: (a) for any commercial purpose (for example, in advertising, promotions or merchandising)
>
>
>

So my question is this: If a church, a bona fide 501c3, is having a food festival, and the church's web site is used to publicize (one might say *advertise* the event) may the Getty content be properly used according to these terms? To put it another way, the imagery will be used in advertising, but the purpose is not commercial. The terms and conditions seems to assume that all advertising is commercial. Can I ignore their error, if it is one?

To be clear: The church will charge money for food and use the resulting revenue to offset its operating expenses.

Thanks

Does the term "commercial" exclude nonprofit?


I have first posted this question on *Super User*. Since I tagged it with Android (as I use WhatsApp on Android) it got migrated to *Android Enthusiasts*. There one decided that it was not on-topic for that site and got closed. This question does address the technical side of uploading only a partial address book, but it mainly focuses on the legal perspective. So perhaps it is on-topic here.

---

A year ago I gave into the nagging and started to use WhatsApp. With the recent update I have agree to new terms of use which contain this (italic emphasis mine):

>
> **Address Book.** You provide us the phone numbers of WhatsApp users and your other contacts in your mobile phone address book on a regular basis. You confirm *you are authorized to provide us such numbers* to allow us to provide our Services.
>
>
>

So in principle I would have to send a message to each and every one of my contacts in order to ask. And while I am at it, I would actually also ask for Telegram, Hangouts, Wire, Skype, Duo, Signal; perhaps just a general authorization would be the easiest.

Then I get back a bunch of messages which I archive somewhere securely in care somebody sues me about it. Then I can prove that they gave me permission to upload their contact details. This is just tedious and a lot of work, but technically it can be done.

What do I do about the people who do not agree? Android 6.0 on my phone does not seem to allow to give only selected contacts to WhatsApp. This means that I would have to delete the number on my phone which sounds utterly inconvenient. My contacts are stored in my Google account. Should I have asked my contacts for that already?

Is there anything I can actually do about this? I think my options are the following:

1. Continue to use WhatsApp (like virtually everyone else) and ignore that I could potentially be sued by somebody who would not consent to his contact information being uploaded.

As I am a German citizen living in Germany, I am not sure where I would be sued, actually. WhatsApp has no department in Germany, so the US law covers my relationship with WhatsApp. Can another German citizen sue with under US law in Germany? Can only US citizens sue me, would I have to fly to the US? All in all it seems like a non-issue in personal life.
2. Delete the WhatsApp account (if possible) and not use the service any more. In principle I would have to get rid of all the other messaging apps as well. I couldn't store my contact list in my Google account then either, right? That is also sharing the data with other people.
3. Attempt to ask every one of my 532 contacts whether it is okay to upload their phone number. Otherwise delete the phone number or the whole contact from my address book. Keep track of these numbers in a paper notebook at home (in a safe).

My actual question: Is the third option actually possible? And what could happen if I stick with option one?

Ask people for WhatsApp address book consent; what to do when declined?


Imagine I write a non-fiction book, in which I make references to Simpsons characters, starting with the title.

I assume I can't take a picture from the cartoon and put it on the cover without running into legal difficulties (correct me, if I'm wrong).

But I could hire an artist, who would draw a new, original picture of the characters. The results of the artist's work would be my intellectual property. Let's assume the artist does everything right and sells me the image he or she created for me (i. e. didn't sell it to multiple people; I'm the one and only owner of the image). Then I could put that illustration on the cover of the book.

If I start selling this book with this cover on Amazon and SmashWords, how likely am I get in trouble with American legal system on a scale of 1 to 10?

1 means nothing will happen. 10 means that 5 minutes after I publish the book, black helicopters will take me to Guantanamo.

Am I allowed to put an illustration based on Simpsons on the cover of my book?


I want to purchase a domain: curion.com

It is unavailable because it is held by godaddy (as shown on whois.net)

Question is, Can a web hosting company hoard a domain name to itself. Is it even allowed? The domain doesnt function either.

How do I legally pursue this matter? What is the law?

Whois details:

Domain Name: CURION.COM

Registrar: GODADDY.COM, LLC

Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 146

Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com

Referral URL: <http://registrar.godaddy.com>

Name Server: NS1.JACKSONNATIONAL.COM

Name Server: NS2.JACKSONNATIONAL.COM

Name Server: NS3.JACKSONNATIONAL.COM

Status: clientDeleteProhibited

Status: clientRenewProhibited

Status: clientTransferProhibited

Status: clientUpdateProhibited

Updated Date: 11-feb-2013

Creation Date: 11-jul-2002

Expiration Date: 11-jul-2018

GoDaddy hoarding domains. What is my legal recourse?


I have been working in a company in Cambodia for about 5 months now and I am thinking of leaving the company for various reasons. When I asked them for resignation, they said that the minimum prior notice is 60 days. Reading the contract once again, it seems like the contract contradicts itself. Please read the below agreement:

>
> Termination of Contract:
>
>
> 1. During the probationary period, either the Employer or the Employee may terminate this Contract by forwarding seven days' prior written notice with an indication to terminate this Contract.
> 2. Upon satisfactory completion of the Probationary Period, either the Employer or the Employee may terminate this Contract without a prior witten notice.
> 3. Subject to the "minimum period of prior written notice" requirement pursuant to Article 75 of the Labor Law of the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Employer may cancel the Contract for a valid reason including the Employee's lack of skills, inappropriate behavior, or failure to satisfy the requirements of the Employer (the "Lay Off"). However, the Employee may cancel the Contract with prior written notice, minimum 60 days before quit.
>
>
>

As I understand, 1.) If i were in the probation period, then I need to give seven days prior notice before I can terminate the contract. 2.) After probation period, both parties (employee & employer) can terminate the contract without any notice.

Is there anything wrong with this Analysis? The second point is stated that both parties can terminate the contract without any notice, but point 3 state something else?

So any people can give me an explanation about this so I can get this more clearly?

Note: I have passed the probation period now (3 months require only).

[Cambodia Labor Law reference](http://www.cambodiainvestment.gov.kh/the-labor-law-of-cambodia_970313.html)

What does the contract really mean?


I'm developing a mobile app and I'm using GitHub for source code which is set to public, so I can show my friends.

I was using some free icons from www.flaticon.com/home , which required the developer to attribute the authors to the icons.

But I decided to go ahead and just create my own icons and delete all the icons I was using the flaticon, but the problem is in the previous commits on GitHub, the old images of the icons are still visible in my resource folders.

Is this a problem I need to address at all? Do I need to mention anywhere that I WAS using icons from FlatIcon or am I good to just act like it never happened?

Thanks!

Do I need to attribute icons not used anymore but visible on GitHub's previous commits?


The maps on Google and Bing are mostly, if not all, copyrighted images. Suppose I use the "Earth" view and zoom in on a building. If I were to draw an outline of that building (with the help of the map), would the drawing I made be infringing on the copyright of the map?

Does tracing an aerial photo infringe copyright?


I was reading on a new Chinese company called "UnderMartian" which seems to be openly ripping off of UnderArmour and not even trying to hide it. UnderArmour has stated they will attempt to pursue all "legal action" possible, which has raised my question.

Since this is a company in a different country, to what extent is even possible for UnderArmour to enforce or bring legal recourse to UnderMartian? Can a United States (I believe it is) company even have the right to say what China can/can't do in terms of copyright? If so, then what about Didi Kuadi (the Uber competitor) in China, TanTan (the Chinese Tinder) and companies related do and why have they not attempted legal action (though I can understand that these are a far more stretch).

What is the extent of copyright laws? (UnderMartian)


A torrent works by breaking a file into small chunks, each of which can be shared between peers. This speeds up downloads because peer A could be sharing chunk 1 with you while peer B could be sharing chunk 8 with you etc. (See [BitTorrent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent) and [Torrent file](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_file).)

The torrent client would need to reconstruct the file in order for you to use it.

None of the chunks is useful on its own. Each is typically 1/1000th - 1/2000th of the entire video file. None is generally even viewable as video without adjacent chunks due to the type of video codecs in common use.

In Canada, is it copyright infringement to use a modified (say, self-written) torrent client that simply downloads the chunks and immediately discards them from memory upon receipt, **never storing any chunk on disk, and never reproducing any portion of the original file larger than an individual torrent chunk, and doesn't host or otherwise make the chunk available to other users.**

Does the analysis change if you only download and immediately discard one of the chunks?

To simplify answers, let's assume that the fair dealing user right is not implicated.

Is downloading a torrent chunk copyright infringement?


my Roomate has been calling my physician and disclosing my health information including when my appointments are and what medications I am taking. I have not signed or told anyone working there that this was okay. Do I have legal rights as I am now finding out they have contacted more people than my Roomate.

Medical right to privacy- HIPAA


That is, the company employs you and pays you wages in return for money (even though you do no work for them).

Is it legal to pay a company to employ you in the UK?


[This earlier question](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/37775/can-pricing-be-copyrighted) asked whether a pricing scheme could be copyrighted. I wonder if pricing could be trademarked.

Suppose Christopher Columbus Pizza was famous for selling a large pizza for $14.92. Can they obtain a trademark on $14.92 to prevent competitors from also advertising their pizzas for the same price and confusing customers as to the quality or source?

Can pricing be trademarked?


Game art is under copyright of the designer or their company. When I play the game and take a screenshot, whose is the copyright?

* Mine, because I played the game to that point and created the screenshot file;
* The designer or their company, because they made the art?

What is the copyright status of game screenshots?


I live on a private non-city-maintained road. There are ~30 houses, and I'm roughly in the middle, it's a dead end road. There's no HOA and since we get snow there's one neighbor who has done the job of asking everyone to chip in for snow plowing, and then another neighbor got a quote for repaving and most of the residents paid that too. It's an old road and no one on the street is interested in doing the work and expense of getting it town-maintained. On the county's parcel viewer the road itself is not owned by anyone.

About a year ago a neighbor moved in that drives very fast on our small little street. He's almost hit me, and more importantly I have two little kids who I'm terrified are going to get hit by a car. I called my police officer friend (in this city) and he said there isn't much he can do. There's no speed limit since it's not a town road. We've talked to the neighbor several times and he always just says "I drive fine, I slow down when I see the kids, I can stop fine." He's really a jerk, to be honest. My wife and I, and another neighbor with small kids, is genuinely scared of him hurting out kids.

I went out and bought some speed bumps, like actual industrial versions that can be bolted to the ground. They're yellow and black with little reflectors in them, the kind a condo complex would install. They're removable so I can pull them in the winter for snow plows to operate.

A friend of mine said that by installing them I'm introducing liability on myself because if anyone has an accident right there they can blame the speed bumps. I'm trying to figure out if I have legitimate legal exposure, and what I can do to mitigate it. I'm planning on putting them (two of them, about ~5 apart) in front of my property on the road so I can put signs up. I can write letters and hand deliver them to every neighbor. I can put a public notice in the local paper yearly. I don't really care what I need to do, but I have to get this guy to slow down before he kills someone.

**Cliffs: I want to put down speed bumps on a private road that I live on to slow down dangerous driving and don't want to get (successfully) sued for it.**

Any advice would be appreciated.

Speed bumps on private non-hoa road (California)


I want to publish a book, which will be sold at a modest price. I will be self-publishing. I'm in the US.

My book is, by its nature, very specific. It is basically a "how to" guide for how to write in a certain voice. As an example, my book is basically something like,

**"How To Write *The Simpsons*"**

1. My question is, can I legally use this trademark (*The Simpsons*) in my book title?
2. If not in the title, what about in my book's pages?

The issue here is that the book is really focused on one show, not one genre, or even sub-genre. So, "How To Write Animated Comedy TV Shows" is not the focus of my book, and thus a somewhat inaccurate title. My book goes into considerable depth into writing for this one show, and exclusively this show.

The book references quotes and dialogue from the show, but other than these bits, it is totally original. In other words, 95% of the text is my original writing. I have really put a lot of time into it, and I am not simply trying to "milk" a brand name for my own gain, and this is obvious to anyone who reads the book.

3. If I can't use the brand name directly, am I safe if I am cheeky about it? For example, "How To Write For That One Show With Yellow Characters".
4. Or what if I write on the back of the book or wherever, "Author is not affiliated with *The Simpsons* whatsoever"? I certainly will make no indication that I am in any way affiliated with *The Simpsons* (because I am not).
5. In reality, do the rules still apply if I am not attacking a behemoth like 20th Century Fox and instead am infringing on a much smaller brand? (I'm asking this one out of curiosity.)

I really hope I can use the name in my book title. Otherwise, my target market has pretty much nil chance of finding/reading my book. I know absolutely nothing about trademark law. Please advise.

Can I use a brand name in my book title?


I read in a [blog post](http://www.burnsautoparts.com/blog/2014/09/24/i-hate-stories-like-this/) that to file an infringement suit, I need to have registered my work registered with the US copyright office before the infringement took place. However, I can't find anything about this on the website of the US copyright office, just that it needs to be filed before the suit is filed.

When do I have to register my work with the copyright office to file an infringement suit?

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


Does the capitalization style/usage or spacing of a registered trademark (wordmark) affect trademark protection?

For example, say the name "MegaCorp" (no space) is a registered trademark with the USPTO. Are capitalization and spacing variations protected as well or must these also be trademarked?

E.g. "Mega Corp", "megacorp"

Does Capitalization/Spacing Affect Trademark Protections


Is it a crime if someone is aware a device looks like a bomb and brings that device to a public place?

Is it a crime to bring a device that resembles a bomb to a public place such as an airport?


I will be interviewing with Google in the upcoming months, I plan to share an interesting Idea for something I want to implement during my 20% time during the interview, because showing that one can come up with new product ideas has to help in an interview. In theory Google could then refuse to hire me, but implement my idea I presented to them and profit off of it without crediting me if they chose to.

Now I'm not really concerned about this, even assuming Google deemed my idea worth implementing I don't see Google trying to steal it (It's not worth the bad press that would result). Furthermore this particular idea is essentially only viable if implemented by Google, meaning even if the idea was stolen I wouldn't really be at a lost since I can't do anything with the idea without Google.

However, I am curious what the legal status would be if I was concerned about my idea being stolen. Would someone in the theoretical position of having someone implement a product they pitched (without getting a contract signed ahead of time) have any recourse to try to get recognition for their idea? Would there be any steps, short of forcing an interviewer to sign a contract before pitching your idea, someone in such a situation theoretically could take prior to presenting their idea to help ensure they got recognition for it?

I imagine the answer is no, but maybe I'm wrong :)

How to prevent potential employer from stealing an idea persented in an interview without giving credit?


All software development contracts I've seen specify that x piece of software will be developed for y dollars within z amount of time. This works out for traditional [Waterfall](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_model) model projects, where you do a lot of forward planning and it is reasonable to expect that you will know how long the project will take near the beginning of the project. It doesn't match up at all for [Agile](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development), where you can start without having any idea exactly where you will end up and you are expected to be able to deal with requirements changes.

How would a contract for Agile software development differ from a contract for Waterfall software development? Is there a place where I can find a sample contract for Agile development?

How should a contract for Agile software development differ from a contract for Waterfall software development?


My workplace allowed employees to add custom Slack emojis and as expected they went nuts and added thousands of awesome emojis. Mostly memes like party parrot, suspicious raptor and such. Some of these have origins from copyrighted material. The most clear would be a sports team logo.

Is there any real legal concern here?

Can my company get into legal trouble for employees using custom Slack emoji icons of copyrighted material?


I am developing a website and want to list the logos of the technologies I used in the footer. For this purpose, I am looking to use `svg` images as it would be scalable at resolutions. I am able to get the relevant logos from the technology developers' press kits but some of them are not in the format I want (like they are in `jpeg` or `png`). I can easily convert these images using freely available tools to `svg`. My question is, am I allowed to do so, or am I restricted to use only those formats that were supplied by them.
The technologies in question are:

[MongoDB](https://www.mongodb.com/pressroom)

[Express](https://expressjs.com/) - note: They don't have any guidelines on how to use their image

[Node.Js](https://nodejs.org/en/about/resources/)

Converting the image format of logos


Hypothetical facts

1. Alice buys a hardback book from the publisher for $70.
2. Alice makes a digital copy of the book and posts it online to an account only Alice can access.
3. For one week, Alice rents exclusive access to the online file for one day each to Melanie, Tanya, Wanda, Tammy, Francis, Sam and Serena for $10/day per person.

Question

Have any copyright laws been broken? If so, which ones, specifically?

U.S. copyright law


Canada's constitution is not a single document, but [many documents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_constitutional_documents) passed over time.

Is there existing case law as to whether parts of an older constitutional document can be found unconstitutional in light of newer constitutional documents?

For the purposes of this question, I'm excluding cases where the newer document directly repeals older documents, or parts of them.

Can older parts of Canada's constitution be found unconstitutional?


I am living in India. I gave a Google review on a bike shop. Since I was not happy with their interactions, I wrote a negative review. Later I talked with an executive, he was nice, and I promised him that I will edit my review, but I forgot to do so, now he just called me and said he is going to file a case. Is it possible?

Can anyone file a case against us because of our negative review?


I am from a non law background and reading Indian Constitution. After reading Laxmikanth and PM Bakshi, what I could get is that both the Articles deals with law made by parliament related to Citizenship but I am unable to get the finer details of it.

What was the need to make 2 articles? If someone can explain with an example that would be most welcome.

What is the difference between Article 10 and Article 11 of the Indian Constitution


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). p. 135.

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

1. How's the red underline true? How's "third parties" ambiguous? The textbook refers to the [Introduction](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/31/introduction) that doesn't define "third parties", but [Section 1](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/31/section/1) does:

>
> (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if—
>
>
>

2. I don't understand why "C, when he is a promisee, would be well advised
to make his claim in the alternative." Wouldn't judges follow the Law Commission's standpoint as I underlined in purple? Davies doesn't expatiate why courts wouldn't?

Why ought a third-party promisee to a contract make his claim in the alternative?


I am co-Administrator of a private FaceBook group of former students who attended my high school. I frequently take photos with my camera of photos printed in our high school yearbooks & post them in the group. Members enjoy seeing the old 50+ year old photos of students & teachers.
 One lady announced on the private FB page that I was breaking the law by posting photos of people without their permission. That I had no right to do so. I told her the yearbooks were sold to the public, so there was no expectation of privacy, plus I was taking the photos with my camera from the printed pages. (Many of the students are already deceased.) What is the law?

Posting School Yearbook photos on private Group FB page made up of former students


I recently wrote a clone of the famous Jeopardy! game. It is copyrighted but I believe that if I my copy was made for educational and recreational uses only (no commercial) it falls under FAIR USE, am I right? If so, can I publish it on the public internet?

I am using the main screen and concept of a game, the name is the same, and the audience will just be me and the code reviewers. I am in the EU. (Something like 10 people will play the game so might it count as private use?)

Is it ok to post a clone of a famous game up for review or in a website?


According to [this link](http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm) if a work was published in 1969 then the copyright would be for 95 years after publication date.

If the original author has died, is there any method for descendants to modify the copyright, specifically something like releasing the work into the public domain?

Maybe related that would help answer the question would be this - can copyright be transferred to descendants? If it were transferred, e.g., in a will, does the original length of the copyright still apply, just that the ownership would be to the new owners?

Can descendants modify copyright of parent's work?


I was just informed of this situation that occurred somewhere by a co-worker, and was wondering what the legal ramifications are (U.S. Law). To be clear, the scenario is as follows:

* I tell my boss I've been offered a position at another company.
* My boss later comes to me with a counter offer of a raise, if I choose to stay with them
* I accept the counter offer, and inform the other company that I have chosen to stay with my current employer
* After a week, my boss then informs me that I'm being let go, and that this should serve as a lesson to not mess with him.

For the above scenario, regarding U.S. law, do I hold any legal grounds against this? What options would I have to defend myself (and my family) from being blatantly told that I was fired because I was willing to accept another offer without some other counter-offer from my current employer?

>
> As for the chap this did happen to, I'm informed that he contacted the company who originally gave him the offer, and they were still willing to bring him on-board. So, yay (somewhat) happy ending to an otherwise terrifying situation. However, I'm specifically asking about the scenario in which he was forced to be unemployed for some period of time, while looking for another job (i.e., the other company no longer had the position open)
>
>
>

Do I have legal rights against a company that offered me a raise to not leave, and then promptly fired me after turning down the other offer?


In the U.S. if I anchor my houseboat for an extended period in the middle of a large lake connected to a navigable waterway can the city or municipality bordering the lake charge me taxes?

Who owns the the lake?


I read that many laws are unenforced. What did the DA do to decide what to enforce and what not?

For example. Say some states have laws against cohabitation. Say a DA choose to enforce the normally unenforced laws. What happens? The DA don't get reelected?

Or look at this case

<https://nypost.com/2017/11/28/mom-faces-jail-for-secretly-recording-daughters-bullies/>

Some kids got bullied. DA don't press charge. Someone record the bullying, and she gets charged.

Why?

Also I've heard that many fraud are simply not enforced by laws. These are samples

[Why are some obvious fraudster not in jail?](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/31197/why-are-some-obvious-fraudster-not-in-jail)

What factors do DA do when deciding when to press charge?

Bribes? I don't think so. Not in US. But that's got to be something and it doesn't look like justice to me.

The result varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In, Indonesia, my guess is

1. Bribe. Before Jokowi it's common for vengeful party to just pay DA to do his job. Defendant often have more incentive to pay DA to look the other way.
2. Political opinion. Ahok is prosecuted because so many wants him down.
3. Most fraud is not prosecuted. I don't know why.

In US, what happens?

Jurisdiction specific or "in general" answer is fine.

Perhaps, a better more useful version of this question is

How to motivate DA to prosecute or not prosecute a certain case?

Jurisdiction vary. I know.

Note: I've heard in US, DA is an elected office. So it seems that DA's motivation is to pick cases that gets him elected. That's the kind of thing I would like to know. What's the "politic" and "incentive" behind prosecuting a case.

Saying that there is a large backlog of cases is not "clear" enough for me because it's a "collective" problem. The one that makes decisions is the DA. Why should he care about backlog? If prosecuting a case leads to world war that is not HIS problem. It's societies' problem. Because that gets him elected? Now it makes more sense.

I need reasons that's why is it more profitable for a DA/cops to decide one case over another.

Basically I am looking for incentives or cynical reasons those people have when prosecuting someone

What "incentives"/cynical reasons DA/Cops have when prosecuting someone?


I have a device that captures digital media content. The manufacturer of the device claims in their terms of service that, while I own the copyright to all of the raw content captured, that they own all digital copies of that content!?

Can anyone tell me if this even makes sense let alone would be legally enforceable in any meaningful way?

Thanks.

Digital media; Are copyright and ownership the same thing?


So I met this talented guy who designs graphics for apps and such and I asked him if he can make a background image for my app..He agreed and made one for me and I asked him if it was ok if I use the image for my app and he said yes..Now the question is, does it mean I can freely use the image in my app WITHOUT crediting him or paying him?

Can I freely use this image?


I was working for a Indian IT company that hires people from Mexico and sends them to work within other companies in USA. This company has been stealing money from me each month with taxes, and I'm ok with that, because its a small amount.

Now they won't pay me for the last month I worked there. And they want me to fill a W2 form where I say I got paid. This is a Michigan based IT company, but I worked in Florida.

How can I sue a USA company while I am in Mexico


*[EDIT: Please assume U.S. jurisdiction, since that's what relevant to me.]*

I was recently reminded of this interesting talk, '[Don't Talk To The Police](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE)' by Regent Law Professor James Duane. Therein, he says (at 0:20) that he will "never talk to any police officer under any circumstances," and the bulk of his half of the video is him explaining why we should all resolve to do the same.

His 8 reasons are very compelling, but I can't seem to get over the utter absoluteness of the "never ... under any circumstances" bit.

What about these manufactured examples:

* Suppose I come to discover physical evidence that an adult has been sexting a minor. In such a case I believe the law compels me to report my discovery to law enforcement. Not only must I talk to them to convey the problem, but I'm certain they will have followup questions for me.
* Suppose my epileptic spouse has a seizure in our residence directly behind a locked bathroom door that swings inward-- hinges are on on her side-- and I call 911 after I tear out the door to aid her. A police officer shows up along with EMS, sees the broken door & blood from a chewed up tongue and gets suspicious. Let's say my spouse is still unconscious & can't corroborate. I'd need to communicate with EMS about my wife's condition & what happened, but the officer is standing right there listening. If I take the 5th, not only might my wife's medical care be impacted, but I will likely be arrested by default on suspicion of battery. (*As defaults go, this would actually be prudent on the officer's part, but would completely suck for me.*)
* Suppose a police officer shows up at my house to investigate a burglary a few houses down the street, and is just knocking on doors asking neighbors if they saw or heard anything.

**In which of those circumstances should I say "sorry officer, I'm not going to speak with you," and at what point?**

How absolute is the advice, 'never talk to the police'?


I'm having difficulty in that I accepted a no-contest plea for a (supposed) harassment charge, and agreed to do either A) 8 days in jail or B) do a domestic violence evaluation and courses depending on outcome. That was the "contract".

Going to the domestic violence course provider, the counselor evaluating me for domestic violence found that it was unwarranted, and sent that back to the judge (under whom I have my probation) - the domestic violence program is unwarranted.

I later learned the judge then called the manager of the counselor and "demanded that I do something", and the manager overturned the counselor. I then returned to take domestic violence "group" from a the other main counselor there (per the judges requirements). I was not given another evaluation.

The other counselor was horrible and after 10 sessions totally threw me out and literally filed lies into the judge (covering his horrible actions toward me), saying I was kicked out. The judge then gave this letter to the prosecutor, but not to my defense attorney (the same public defender re-assigned to me that I did the plea with).

This letter together with what the counselor's manager sent in, so inflamed the prosecutor against me, that the prosecutor demanded 180 days in jail, totally ignoring/forgoing my original contract of either 8 days in jail or domestic violence courses, which my new private attorney says is fully incorrect, also the judge should have stuck to my evaluation result (that was part of the contract too). So with the contract broken twice and now someone coming in fully lying, and me trying to correct multiple times with other court staff, I chose to flee my home and state (Arizona), later to return and be arrested, and post bail. The court/prosecutor continues to come after me even though I did 18 days in jail, "unendingly abusive."

A civil attorney just told me that in civil cases, any information a judge receives, the judge must give to both sides/parties. My new defense attorney agrees, but it's vague as to whether the judge has done non-correct-law practicing behavior, in not giving the letter to my public defender.

Must a criminal judge take a provider's information and give it to both the prosecutor and the defense?

Does a judge receiving information from a provider need to give it to both prosecutor AND defense, in criminal law/cases?


Topical example (concerning the Facebook bias controversy of May 2016): if Facebook knowingly discriminated against conservative stories in its Trending feature, but told users and the press that there was no bias, could Facebook be prosecuted under U.S. law?

Is lying to your customers prosecutable?


I remember reading a case years ago where a woman named Sharon Corr sold a product called "Corr's Ginseng Up." (Adolph) COORs (a beer company) sued for trademark infringement and lost.

The two names were similar but the woman WAS using her own name.

In another [case](http://www.leagle.com/decision/19971493965FSupp528_11426/HAVEN%20CAPITAL%20MANAGEMENT%20v.%20HAVENS%20ADVISORS), an investment firm called Haven Capital Management tried, and failed, to prevent a woman named Nancy Havens from naming her investment company after her own (maiden) name.

Under what circumstances might a company with an established brand prevent someone from using their own name?

Can a trademark supersede or preempt a person from using their own name?


Let's say I run a basic website with no special legal concerns. What legal issues does every website have that I should know about?

What are the basic legal requirements I have as a website owner?


I'm 17 still in sixth form, but I'm currently on holiday break. Yesterday I started "training" at a fairly new tea shop (opened last december, running for roughly 7 or so months now) but I helped with everything from setup, cashier, drink making, cleaning and closing shop working 9:30am to 7:30pm. It was my first day and although I didn't help with making most of the teas (since they hadn't taught me yet) I thought it was a lot of work for "unpaid training". I signed myself up for 6 more days of training in a row, but the manager said everything will not be paid. She said only after I complete an 80hr training and pass an on-boarding test will I be get to be paid the national minimum wage £4.05 an hour.

I've only worked one day but it was 10hrs.

Is this legally right in the UK?

I asked my co-workers today and they said they completed unpaid training too. The second youngest after me said she applied to a different restaurant before saying she had unpaid training too, although most of my friends had jobs with paid training.

How can I respond to her?

Is 7 days unpaid training legally right for a 17yr old?


I work with electronics and some of it requires working with potentially dangerous voltages which could cause severe injury or fatality.

So my question is this: If I decided to start a blog and write an article describing how to build a high voltage power supply, am I liable for providing such information? Especially if someone injures themselves after trying to reproduce my project/experiment.

Will the warning shield me from liability?

I ask because see a lot of hobbyist websites posting large warning notices at the top of each page or throughout the article. Though, sometimes there is no warning.

Liability of posting potentially dangerous articles on blog


Let's say an elected official have a Twitter account.

And let's say this elected official is using twitter to communicate information to the public relevant to the elected position.

And let's say this elected official decides to block users.

This means he is in that case actively withholding information from selected individuals.

It that censoring?

Of course there is a big loophole here if the elected officials private Twitter account is not used in any way to tweet information about the government office he holds. But the minute he tweets about his work as the position he holds after he entered the office things would change.

I am asking because there was a case in Sweden where a government organisation (just one of the many organisations within the government) had a Twitter account and for some reason blocked a user. Then, without even going to court, a judge said and I am paraphrasing: "You may not block users on a medium you are communication official information with because that is censoring." The kicker in that case was because Twitter was used to give information from the government and thus they could not block people and they have to unblock everyone. Would the same thing apply in the USA?

Edit:

1.5 years later: <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-23/trump-told-by-judge-not-to-block-users-from-his-twitter-feed>

2.5 years later: <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/us/politics/trump-twitter-first-amendment.html>

Is blocking on twitter censoring in the USA when elected officials does it


I play a lot of video games and some items/buildings/plants/vehicles (even entire villages/cities) look great. What if I had the money (and technology) to create the real deal? Would that be perfectly legal or do I need the permission from the copyright holder?

Internet searches haven't been fruitful. There are tons of examples where it's prohibited to create new art from old art or "base on a true story", but what about "reality based on fiction"?

Copyright: Is it legal to create real objects based on fiction?


We are a sports website covering news and have found a user on YouTube copying our written content and images and pasting it in whole in their videos.

We have put in a copyright claim and got some videos taken down but they have put in a counter claim saying it is fair use and they will Sir is if we don’t remove the initial claim.

Where do we stand on this as they are using 100% of our article content including images and not even putting in any original content of their own.

Copyright claim / fair usage


I have purchased the company name Xxxxx Media in a province in Canada, but I recently realized that the product Xxxxx® is trademarked in the United States. I wish to sell my products in the US soon so I am wondering if I should purchase a different name instead so that I do not get sued by the company who has trademarked Xxxxx®. Will I get sued?

Will company with product with ® sue me if my company name is the same as their product?


I am creating a game that has a great deal of items in the game. For these items I wanted to add some "educational" pop-up text when players hover over a certain item in the game. My idea was to simply take text from websites like Wikipedia (I understand the "reliability' issue already) and put them in as extra "flavor text" in my game like in the picture below (The text is in the while box at the bottom of the tool tip):

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

Most of the content in Wikipedia that I want to do this with is under the "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License" (CC-BY-SA) and this is where I get very confused.

I have been doing some very exhaustive research on this. And to try to put this as simply as possible. Even though the content on Wikipedia can be freely distributed. Apparently under the CC-BY-SA license, it is argued that wherever the content is used with that license, ALL MEDIA attached to that content is now also under the CC-BY-SA license.

So from what I read, it may be inferred that my entire game, images, artwork, source code, and everything else, is now under CC-BY-SA license, and I must make my entire game publicly available for free because I have added this one line of text.

So my question is: Is this true? Should I just do my own independent research on the each subject and put all of the descriptions in my own words?

Also I plan to sell this game commercially, so I do not wish to make my game freely available obviously. Also I plan to have hundreds, even thousands of objects in the game, and doing research for each one is a great deal more time to come up with a paragraph or two for each object. I am just trying to see if I can avoid that, as my time doing actual game development is much more beneficial.

I have no problem giving the citation credits for each passage as in the image. But is this CC-BY-SA licence going to make it so I cannot give anyone credit at all, and I just do my own research?

Using Wikipedia Text in a Video Game Copyright Issues?


So just wondering, will it be legal to use a few lines of song lyrics as your service/company's slogan? For example, "You just gotta ignite the light, and let it shine" (Katy Perry's firework) as a slogan for something like fund-raising platform? Like maybe a whole song is copyrighted (not familiar with copyrights on songs), but is it possible to legally use part of it if you like the meaning?

If can, how about adding `TM` or registered sign next to it? Since most slogan has it.

Song lyrics as (trademarked) slogan


Can a prosecutor make changes to a plea deal once all parties have signed?

For example: If someone was to plea (deal) to and was convicted of manslaughter. However then the prosecutor changed the paper work to homicide, but did not inform the defendant or the courts. Later they conceded that they made the changes without telling anyone.

Is this lawful, and can your sentence be vacated if this were to happen?

Consequences of making changes to plea after all parties have signed the agreement


I'm starting a course about building website backends with NodeJS and I was wondering is it legal to use the [NodeJS](https://nodejs.org) logo as **part** of my course cover?

Can I use nodejs logo as part of my course cover?


As an official translator, I need to be loyal to the text in such a manner that no words are omitted. In translation of title deeds there’s a section which specifies the metes and bounds of the property in question. In this very part, the specifications of the parking space has been mentioned in to the bargain where there are TWO words meaning “ entangled parking”. To be more specific, there are some old buildings with the capacity of 4 parking space. These four cars, particularly the ones which have been parked ahead, cannot leave the parking since there are two other cars parked behind them! Now how can I translate this?

How to say “ entangled parking space”?


**[This is the continuation of the prior question.](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11500/does-downloading-and-posting-audio-content-on-my-private-company-blog-infringe?noredirect=1#comment20536_11500)**

I had confessed prior to receiving their ( NPR ( kindly see the above question. )), very specifically, having had revealed our homepage and the their materials that had been posted before, such as like in this e-mail.

>
> Message: I am a director of a company, in English, "In Home Teaching Agency XXX." I've been listening to your Yokosuka navy base station ( I assume it would be so. ) since around 1997 and I enjoyed yours and since I always heard "support for NPR..." and you've been saying you are a "public radio". Granted, so that with that reason above, and after having read your "material" chapter, I was not able to comprehend for 100% sure if I had breached your copyright. We already uploaded used your products such as here <http://www.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX>
>  without your permission, so if I had breached your copyright, just kindly let me know and I will delete them. This is a blog, but I am almost 95% sure I had infringed your copyright. However, can' we "compensate" for the possible breach by paying certain amount of due? And also, we would like to ask your permission to use your products even with certain amount of payment.
>
>
> Sincerely
>
>
>

And their copyright department replied,

>
> **Unfortunately NPR does not allow** other websites to post our content, nor do we allow our material to be translated. **You are welcome to link to NPR content from your page, along with a description of the report, if you would like**.
>
>
> Here are the rules for linking:
>
>
> (from NPR's Terms of Use page at NPR.org)
>
>
> **NPR encourages and permits links to content on the NPR Services**. However, NPR is an organization committed to the highest journalistic ethics and standards and to independent, noncommercial journalism, both in fact and in appearance. Therefore, the linking should not (a) suggest that NPR promotes or endorses any third party's causes, ideas, web sites, products or services, or (b) use NPR content for **inappropriate commercial purposes** or in any way that is unlawful or harmful to any other person or entity. We reserve the right to withdraw permission for any link.
>
>
> I hope this meets your needs.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>

Actually, their message didn't "meet" my requirement.

I wanted an answer such as "Yes you can, or No, you can not."

Or

Such as "You can use our content should you pay XXX dollars per the product."

Could anyone guide me about their e-mail please?

Thank you in advance.

Could anyone translate crystal clearly an American radio's copyright department's e-mail?


I run a film and TV show reviewing blog using the Google Blogger service.

On this blog, I frequently use pictures taken from the film/episode/TV show that I am reviewing in the article.

The pictures that I use are always gathered by simply using the Google Image search to find a picture that suits my need. As such, the pictures come from a large variety of sources, including others peoples reviews, promotional material and even frames from advertisements.

Is the use of these images on my blog protected under Fair Use, regardless of the source of the original images? What about if I started earning money from my blog?

Using (presumably) copyrighted materials in reviews


What are the legalities for a website article transcribing service for the blind. Essentially a service that reads articles to create audio files so that the blind can listen to the content instead of having to read it, which they obviously cannot do. Fees would be charged for the service of transcribing, not for the content which is available free online. Obviously, if the content is only available through a paid service, then that would be a different story, but I am focused on the transcribing of content available free online.

Transcrbing Website Articles for the Blind and Copyright Laws


My employer is trying enforce new rules about how we use our annual leave. Among other points they require the following are the ones of concern:

1. 50% of annual leave must be booked (planned, bot necessarily taken) by September
2. There must be at least two people in the office on all working days
3. The manager has priority over leave during the Christmas break this year as he missed it last year (due to the enforcement of rule number 2 that he introduced).

Due to the slightly chaotic nature of my life outside of work, planning leave a long way ahead is extremely difficult. And although I'm not too concerned about needing 2 people in the office at any time it is obviously more of a concern at Christmas. I don't live very far away from my workplace, we have full remote access and I have said I am prepared to be "On Call" for an emergency but am not physically required in the office. However my manager is adamant that I physically need to be here. Also denying out leave during that period to give himself priority seems an abuse of his position.

Am curious what restrictions they can legally enforce?

Can an employer dictate when an employee can take annual leave?


Am I less responsible/liable for stuff that I break while doing someone a favor, and neither doing anything intentional to cause the break nor being negligent?

For example:

* someone on the street asks you to take a picture of them with their phone. You drop the phone and cause a visible damage.
* some friend asks you to drive his car since he's intoxicated. You haven't drunk and his home is near yours. In the way home you crash the car by being slightly inattentive and wrongly calculating the braking distance.

Breaking stuff while doing someone a favor


I have extensive training in voice analysis and advanced degrees in linguistics -- but I wonder if I need a special certificate to serve as a forensic linguist on a court case e.g. performing accent recognition, speaker identification, etc.

Is this state-specific or is there a national-level or international-level certificate that would qualify me on a list of qualified experts available for legal service?

What are the requirements to offer legal consult as a forensic linguist?


I am a web designer that works with a range of clients on a project basis. I complete a project and then offer my services at any hourly rate for any other work required in the future.

Do I have a legal responsibility to ensure any projects are GDPR compliant which are:

1. finished before 25th May 2018?
2. finished after the 25th May 2018?

GDPR liability for Web Designer


Some countries return tax to tourists in airports.

I don't understand it. Why is it happening? What was the logic behind the decision? Why is it only related to purchase tax and not to income tax? Why is it so important to preserve original packaging?

It is obviously a sort of segregation and nationalism. Why did people vote for it?

I have heard that European countries are doing it along with Japan, Australia, and maybe some other countries are doing it as well...

GST/VAT tax. Why some countries return tax to tourists?


On Youtube I often see videos of songs or other short memorable scenes from various movies posted. Since these are non-transferable I assume this is technically a violation of copyright, even if it's done for a very popular movie.

Is it a violation of copyright to post or watch such clips?

Does posting short memorable scenes or songs from a movie constitute copyright violation?


I'm writing a book largely based on a OASIS open standard. I assume this would constitute derivative work. I wondering about the following phrasing in the copyright.

>
> The document(s) and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works...
>
>
>

If I do a derivative work it says the copy right notice and paragraph needs to be included. Does that mean that I just add this as a attribution att the end, or will this copyright then cover the entirety of the book and allow others to copy it freely?

Copyright notice in full
<https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ciq/copyright.shtml>

Implications of including copyright notice from other work