Some background first:
----------------------

When I was in college for engineering, the student-run IT department in the general dorm absolutely insisted on seeing every device on the network, and all the traffic too, to the point of banning even "dumb switches" (which are still smart enough to figure out which port a specific device is connected to, and only send its traffic to that port) and issuing hubs instead (which blindly broadcast everything they receive to all of their ports, so that the IT guys could see what I sent to my networked printer).

This was when Windows XP was current, which allowed unrestricted access to its Public folders by default. (they *are* PUBLIC, after all, right?)

Put that together, and we have ***a bunch of college kids with officially-mandated direct access to the other students' Public folders!*** (there are several things in that bold part, that the combination of should raise flags)

Also at that time, the Public folders were the default save location for a number of things. So quite a few of them had what appeared to me to be extensive music collections, which leads to:

The question:
-------------

I decided to be honest, and NOT copy that music for myself, but if I had, who would have been guilty of what?

My understanding of copyright law suggests that:

* The student that I copied *from* would be guilty of unauthorized distribution, and could be fined accordingly, despite knowing nothing of what was going on or even how it was possible, simply because it was in their Public folder and thus made freely available to others. Nevermind that "Public" was simply their software's default save location, and they again knew nothing of the ramifications. Thus, this poor student gets slammed, completely out-of-the-blue, for something they had no idea about.
* The developer/owner of that music-management software may also get sued for making it easy for this to happen. (Public by default)
* The dorm's IT department might get a not-so-nice call as well, from a high-powered lawyer, about making it easy for this to happen. (requiring access)
* ***\*I\**** could simply claim ignorance, that the officially-enforced arrangement implied permission, and that I had accepted the offer on good faith. I would then get off with little more than an order to delete everything that I had taken. (and whatever the IT guys decided to do with me for their troubles) Unless of course I had distributed it myself, knowingly or not, in which case I'd be in the same boat as the student that I had stolen it from.

Is that true? Did I put the concepts together correctly? Or am I all wet?

Who would have been guilty of what in this scenario?


Q re U.S. Copyright registration:

I understand that by leaving blank the space asking for an author's (legal) name but indicating the author's pseudonym that the two names won't be linked and thus the correlation will not be made publicly available online or otherwise. That's what I understand.

I also understand that it is not wise to copyright solely under a pseudonym, as it can get rather tricky to prove that I (the legal 'I') am the author should any legal issue arise.

Now, if I were to use my legal name as the claimant do have my cake and eat it too, or are the terms 'claimant' and 'author' looked at as two separate things?

In other words, If my legal name is Bob Roberts and I leave blank the author name but say that the work is pseudonymous and use the name Bill Williams as the pseudonym, will my using Bob Roberts as claimant make it clear that my legal self is, in fact, the author?

Legal Name and/or Pseudonym and Record Keeping


Whats happening?
----------------

Recently, the Trump administration has announced their intention to ban the popular social media application TikTok. The Trump administration claims this is on the grounds of national security, accusing TikTok of being an agent of the Chinese Communist Party. TikTok denies these claims and counters with statistics of American ownership/employment. As a result, TikTok is currently in a fire sale mode in the financial markets - with potential buyers being Microsoft amongst other tech giants.

How will he do this?
--------------------

What specific legal mechanisms will the Trump administration use to enforce this ban?

Are there any restrictions?
---------------------------

What conditions must be met in order for the executive branch of the government to employ these mechanisms? Can these mechanisms be arbitrarily leveraged by the current/future President? Do these same laws apply to domestic companies?

**Would it be plausible for these same legislative mechanisms to be used in the future for the purpose of selecting winners/losers in the tech industry at the personal discretion of the President?**

For example: *banning Twitter on the grounds of national security and force it to sell to another domestic platform that is more aligned with the president's world view?*

How will Trump ban TikTok? And are there any restrictions on these mechanisms being arbitrarily applied to other companies?


Bing shows Youtube videos directly on its own page instead of sending the traffic to Youtube. How do they get away with copyright etc? Do you have legal support by only writing who uploaded it and linking to the source?

I assume that Bing is a competing business to Youtube and if Youtube could have, they would have forced Bing to send over the traffic.

How does Bing get away with showing Youtube videos on its own site?


**Can a person be convicted in their home country A for something that is considered a crime in country B (but not a crime in A)?**

Take for example something less extreme like, reputational damage of a company, not something like murder, which international police would deal with. The action itself is not considered a crime in country A (i.e. not enshired by any law), however, in country B it is. The reputational damage is what would derive from it, and that is a crime in both country A and B, however, the company of country B has no presence in country A.


Say I pose as another person on social media and use their name, photos, etc.

Given that it's just a mock-up account and it's not used solely for criminal activity or among other means to harm or damage the person in question, would mimicking their profiles alone be illegal?

Is posing as another person illegal if all you're doing is re-hosting their images and using their name, but not engaging in any questionable activity under their name (for example, saying racial slurs, etc.)?

Posing as another living person on social media -- illegal or no?


**[Russian firm charged in election interference case pleads not guilty](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/05/09/concord-management-arraignment-russia-investigation/594454002/)** (USA TODAY)

>
> Mueller's office charged in February that 13 Russian nationals and three businesses sought to meddle in the election election ... one of them, Concord Management and Consulting, LLC, dispatched a pair of lawyers to federal court in Washington to plead not guilty to the charges. One of the lawyers, Eric Dubelier, said Concord would "exercise our **right to a speedy trial**." ... Mueller's office said in a court filing last week that Concord's lawyers had already demanded that prosecutors turn over "sensitive intelligence gathering, national security, and foreign affairs information," including details on electronic surveillance of the company and its employees.
>
>
>

**How soon must Mueller produce the evidence?** (And will it be made public?)

[Indictment: USA vs. Internet Research Agency et. al.](https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download)

Russian firm charged in election interference case pleads not guilty - "speedy trial"?


So, this might sound like an odd question, but at a very simple ethical level there is a clear problem with using an adblocker. There is, after all, a very clear understanding that ad providers are paying them for your access to the content or put differently: You pay for the content by watching those ads (of which selling your privacy is often (though not always) a part). Unethical however hardly means directly unlawful/illegal, so I have often wondered about the legal mirror of those ethical rules.

Our hypothetical case
=====================

So, some ToS's explicitedly have statements like

>
> You agree not to alter or modify any part of the Service.
>
>
>

taken from the [YouTube ToS](https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms&gl=US). So let's assume our theoretical service has those as well possibly even explicitly addressing adblockers. Note clearly that I am not saying that the quoted statement is the best legal way of putting this, it's purely an example.

Now, lets say that a user uses this service for a year whilst an adblocker is running. Lets also say that the user has signed up for the service and explicitly consented the Terms of Service. Is there any way that the service could lawfully get this user to pay up for his usage of the service (the loss of income)? Or if not, is there *any* form of 'punishment' the user could face? (Beyond being blocked from the service, but he could also be blocked from the service even if he didn't use an adblocker if the service answer would feel like it) And if yes, does it require such an explicit segment in the ToS or is this already a natural given?

PS. I have selected the [united-states](/questions/tagged/united-states "show questions tagged 'united-states'") as the main focus of the question, simply because it's most likely to get a quality answer, however if you also know how the same would work out in a western european country I would love it if an answer could include a *very* short rundown of that as well.

Is it illegal/unlawful to use an adblocker?


This is the situation: I have a booklet that contains sketches (2D drawings) of human teeth. I would like to use them as reference materials to build 3D models (using blender) and publish the models on Sketchfab and a mobile App.

I'm not sure about it since I see people, for example, making car models and selling it on Sketchfab, for branded cars, like Mercedes or Corvette etc... Did they need permission to make this work from the original designers?

What are my legal responsibilities in this aspect? Is this considered a copyright infringement?

Thanks in advance for the advice.

Will I need permission from the work owner of a 2D sketch to make it a 3D model?


I live in a mobile home park in California. Recently, the park announced that our TV service will be provided by the park and instead of paying the TV provider, we will be paying the park directly.

[CA Civ Code S. 798.25(e)](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=798.25) says

>
> Any amendment to the park’s rules and regulations that creates a new fee payable by the homeowner and that has not been expressly agreed upon by the homeowner and management in the written rental agreement or lease, shall be void and unenforceable."
>
>
>

However, [CA Civ Code S. 798.32](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=798.32) says

>
> (a) A homeowner shall not be charged a fee for services actually rendered which are not listed in the rental agreement unless he or she has been given written notice thereof by the management, at least 60 days before imposition of the charge.
>
>
> (b) Those fees and charges specified in subdivision (a) shall be separately stated on any monthly or other periodic billing to the homeowner. If the fee or charge has a limited duration or is amortized for a specified period, the expiration date shall be stated on the initial notice and each subsequent billing to the homeowner while the fee or charge is billed to the homeowner.
>
>
>

These 2 sections seem to contradict each other. Is this a violation of the first section? Or is this in compliance with the second section? Or something else completely?

Mobile home park in California charging extra fees for television service


I want to know if it's legal to crawl some websites, let's say cnn.com and bbc.com, and display the title, descripton, the image, as well the link to redirect to the actual link for the news?

Is it legal to crawl news from any website, maintaining a link to their news?


I plan on starting my second company as a corporation and filing as an S-Corp. Would my new business name still be

>
> Business Name Corporation
>
>
>

or is a different form used?

Do S-Corps and C-Corps both end their business names in "Corp"?


>
> In this Act, 'industry' includes establishment, undertaking, work, trade, business and any other workplace;
>
>
>

As a non English native speaker, sadly, I can't gasp the differences of the meanings of the words completely. Help me.

The differences : 'industry' includes establishment, undertaking, work, trade, business and any other workplace;


I have taken a book from my university's library and it states in the second page :

>
> The law of March 11, 1957 authorizes only "copies or reproductions strictly reserved for the private use of the copier and not intended for collective use".
>  Any representation or reproduction, in whole or in part, made without the consent of the publisher, is unlawful.
>
>
>

It is a book written in french and a french address containing "Paris" figures in the same page so this is probably a french law.
Any of you have an idea on whether this law is still up or not?

This allows me to take photos I guess but I am not sure on the validity of the law as I stated in the last phrase.
[![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6kw6E.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6kw6E.jpg)

Capturing photos of a book


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?


Do the two that-clauses below bewilder you too? How can they be rewritten more basically?

1. 1 flummoxes me as it contains 2 "opinion"s. But I grasp that "opinion is held on reasonable grounds" modifies, and thus is the, "false statement of fact".
2. 2 flummoxes me as it contains 2 "intention"s. I grasp that

>
> a false statement of fact that intention/opinion is actually held = You don't actually hold that intention/opinion.
>
>
>

But what the heck does it mean to intend a false statement of fact that intention (opinion) is actually held?

[Richard](https://www.uclan.ac.uk/staff_profiles/richard-taylor.php) and [Damian](https://www.slaughterandmay.com/who-we-are/partners/damian-taylor/) Taylor. [*Contract Law Directions* (6 edn 2019)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contract-Law-Directions-Richard-Taylor/dp/0198836597/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p. 180.

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

"Intention that implies false statement of fact that", "Opinion that implies false statement of fact that"


The 1st contract was signed by both parties but the services were misrepresented to Party A. This made the contract void. Party A attempted to back out of the contract, but Party B amended the contract and Party A signed the amended contract. Both parties received consideration in the amended contract. Is the amended contract, that is based on the first voided contract, valid and enforceable?

If it is valid and enforceable:
What if Party A felt pressured (due to financial reasons/limitations) to sign the amended contact? Is it enforceable?

Can a voided contract be amended?


I want to register a software package with the US copyright office but it is not new. There are many versions. What versions should I register? Should I register the very first version as the original work and then select versions as derived works?

For example, let's say there are versions like:

```
1.0.0
1.0.1
1.0.2
...
1.0.88
1.1.0
1.1.1
...
1.1.46
2.0.0
2.0.1
...
2.0.26 (current)

```

and so on. Should I register 1.0.0 as the original work and the current version (2.0.26) as a derived work for a total of only two versions?

What if I want to file suit for infringement regarding 1.1.22? Is that version covered if I only register 1.0.0 and 2.0.26 in my example?

Note: I know this [question was asked before to some extent](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/22453/should-i-copyright-my-original-code-before-registering-the-current-version) but it was not actually answered.

Retroactive Copyright Registration Versions Original and Derived Works


let's say someone wishes to loan money to his brother, but has little expectation of repayment and no intention of pursuing the matter if his brother defaults. would the irs consider this a gift, a loan, or a gift loan?

details:
14k$ at 12% interest for a fixed term of 3 years as a strictly oral agreement without any signed document. let's assume there are some emails or text messages discussing the issue, but nothing documenting a final agreement.

can small loans be considered gifts for tax purposes?


Simple question, maybe not an easy answer: my employer gave me an MSDN subscription linked to my home hotmail account.

Can I download Visual Studio and write code at home with this license? I would be working after business hours on my own personal projects.. Would my company own the personal project because I used their Visual Studio license?

edit: just to be clear: my personal project is a video game, and my company does not make games, and in fact is in a completely different industry

Does my employer own code I write at home using the Visual Studio license from work?


So, in everything from World of Warcraft to Dungeons and Dragons, even Warhammer and an assortment of other games, both table top and computer based, there's Arcane magic. I've written a few books and, without thinking, I used the term Arcane to be the general name for magic practiced by witches and warlocks and prayer magic used by the clergy. I never thought about it until now, but is Arcane, or Arcane magic, a copyrighted word/phrase/term?

To clarify, the spells in my work aren't direct copies of any from those other games, it's simply the usage of what I at first considered a generic word. Could there be trouble down the line?

Examples of spells used in my work:
Portal magic to move across large distances,
"energy beams" for combat purposes, and
magical infusion.

Not entirely sure if this is the best place for this question, but I'm just wondering if there's any danger of it becoming problem down the line. Also, I apologize if I'm misunderstanding the usage of copyright, but as a relatively new author, I'm trying to make sure I'm not setting myself up for trouble in the future.

Copyright law for an author: Can a word be copyrighted?


Is it legal/ right if I create a texture pack of about 20 downloaded textures and 20 normal maps, and then sell it on an online store? All the textures are CC0 licensed.

Sell cc0 images


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


Can we have a product X which gets both a copyright & a patent?

I'm particularly interested in the case of Software since its content overlaps with both Copyright & Patent. But someone told me that the same subject matter cannot be protected under different IPRs (Copyright & Patent).
So, Pure Software is protected by Copyright and Software with a Technical Component is protected by Patent.

I'm trying to figure out if the TRIPS agreement places any such rule (same subject matter cannot be protected under different IPRs).

Any rule in the TRIPS agreement which prohibits same subject matter to be protected by different IPRs?


I was wondering whether watching a video that was uploaded without permission from the copyright holder was illegal. Also...

1. Which country’s laws apply if a lawsuit were to arise? For example, if a person in Country A accessed content owned by a company in Country B using software from Country C, which country would the person be legally liable to, in case of a lawsuit?
2. Does it make a difference whether the site is legal or illegal? It seems reasonable to expect pirated content on an illegal site, but on a site like YouTube, it would be difficult for users to know whether the copyright holder is okay with the file being uploaded.
3. YouTube actually runs on a download system, storing the file in the browser cache. How would that affect legal complications?
4. What is the expected maximum penalty for streaming privately? I read that it was $750 per clip, but I am not sure if this is correct.
5. How much of a video clip could be considered Fair Use, approximately? Clearly, taking a few minutes of a movie is generally considered Fair Use, but a full movie being uploaded is probably not. Where is the threshold approximately?

How do various factors affect the legality of streaming?


I am just entering the field of web development and I was wondering if the Javascript language has a license for the development of web applications for commercial purposes or there is a fee to pay for its use (for commercial purposes). I have been looking for information but I am not sure if it is in charge of Mozilla or Ecmascript, I have even read that "Javascript" is a registered trademark of Oracle, but in either case I cannot find anything regarding the license. Could you help me by indicating if the use of this language to develop web applications commercially is free or if you know the license, please indicate it to me?

Thanks,

Daniel

Javascript license


An art instructor who charges for his courses is using one of my photographs in his class. All the students including himself have painted the photograph and he has posted his painting on his site. I did not give permission to any of these people to paint my photograph. This is my most popular photograph which I sell in many shops in the area (I live in Canada). Is my copyright infringed and what can I do to remedy it?

Copyright infringement in paid course


If a company brings on a new director, are they obliged to share their IP with that new director?

And what about if they were to bring on a new shareholder — would they be obliged to share their IP?

Do Directors of a company have automatic right to access that company's IP?


I was wondering if manufacturers of any country are legally bound to print the true origin of the product while exporting to other country? If yes, who makes sure they are printing the real origin of the product?

What stops Chinese companies from printing “Made in US” on their products?


How can I protect the personal information contained within my C.V., cover letter, letters of recommendation from unauthorized sharing?

I have been a victim of identity theft, so I seek to now find ways of limiting the exposure of my personal information to any entity I come across, including employers.

I thought it would be to my benefit to have a confidentiality disclaimer page stating that I do not consent to the sharing of this information without my prior approval. I've heard of employers selling applicant information, or sharing it, and I just want a way to protect against that; if that's even possible.

How to protect privacy vis-a-vis sending resume to potential employer?


I do not want to serve a complete notice period (3 months) for the MNC (multi-national company) in India I currently work for. I would like to serve only one month notice period, and although I am ready to pay for not completing the full notice period, HR is not allowing me to do this. Instead, they keep insisting that I need to complete the full notice period. This is creating an issue for me and it is not allowing a smooth transition for my new job.

What legal action can be taken?

3 month notice versus 1 month notice


[Does this contract meet the requirements to be enforced by a court](https://docs.google.com/document/d/17axpOjt3IKJSsX3ofCxW7NFUtOZjHGjxpmLQUfylQyM/edit?usp=sharing)? If not, what challenges might be raised?

>
> ### Promissory Note
>
>
> Principal Amount: £500.00 GBP
>
>
> Date:
>
>
> 1. For value received, the undersigned (the “Promisor”) at \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, promises to pay to the order of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_(the “Promisee”) at \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ the sum of £500 shall the Promisor fail to meet his target of 47.5 work hours per week between 6th - 26th June 2016.
> 2. Sum shall be paid in full within seven days of the end date of said period.
> 3. This agreement will be governed and interpreted according to English law. All disputes and claims arising under the Agreement (including non-contractual disputes and claims) will be subjected to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts.
>
>
> Promissor (name):
>
>
> Promissor (signature):
>
>
> Date:
>
>
>

Is this contract valid?


Related to this question [What is the point of authority to sign clauses in contracts?](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/56207/what-is-the-point-of-authority-to-sign-clauses-in-contracts/56217#56217)

The simplest example I can think of is a work contract. Manager Bob signs a contract saying you will get paid $20/hr to work at Jo Pizza. Is the contract between you and Bob or you and Jo Pizza (an incorporated business)? Are there any common terms in contracts that make it clear? Do 'authority to sign' clauses have anything to do with it?

Is this why contracts are often written in the form:

>
> This Agreement is entered into by and between Sam (an individual) and
> Jo Pizza (a Delaware Corporation).
>
>
> Sam will make good pizza and get paid $20/hr. Payment happens on ...
>
>
> In witness where of:
>
>
> Sam's signature:
>
>
> Bob's signature (general manager of Jo Pizza):
>
>
>

How do you know if person agreeing to contract is agreeing as an individual or binding company?


I have an online resume website that I created, and I list the logos of companies I've work with over the course of my career. Rather than a dry date list of work experience, I'm just listing the names and logos of the companies on the website. I even have a disclaimer stating this in no way represents endorsement or sponsorship.

I assume this use of the names / logos is considered fair use, an anyone can put a companies name or logo on their resume to state where and who they've work with when talking about their work experience / history. This is exactly what I'm doing here, and what happens when people fill out their LinkedIn profiles too.

Is is considered trademark fair use to use a company logo on your resume?

My website is an online resume / portfolio to use as a digital resume outside of LinkedIn or other places. For reference, it's located here: <http://chrispietschmann.com>

Is it trademark fair use to use company name/logo on your resume?


In the European Union (EU) there is a clash between direct and indirect personal data.

1. Internet Service Providers (ISP) can use the IP address to identify personal data.
2. The provider of the webservice cannot use the IP address to identify personal data.

This does mean the provider of the webservice can identify the personal data only indirectly via the ISP.

So in Germany, there usually is the term in **General Terms & Conditions**:

>
> "Eine Nutzung der Internetseiten der (...) ist grundsätzlich ohne jede Angabe personenbezogener Daten möglich."
>
>
> (Translation: The usage of the internet sites of (...) is basically possible without any expose of person-bound information.)
>
>
>

Following a [text of the EU](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:html) there is a line:

>
> "(a) 'personal data' shall mean any information relating to an
> identified or identifiable natural person ('data subject'); an
> identifiable person is one who can be identified, directly or
> indirectly, in particular by reference to an identification number or
> to one or more factors specific to his physical, physiological,
> mental, economic, cultural or social identity;"
>
>
>

Says that IP addresses for

1. Physical
2. Physiological
3. Mental
4. Economic
5. Cultural
6. Social

identities are personal data, no matter if directly or indirectly.

Question
========

Assuming we have a website in a social identity, so an IP address is a personal data. Can we still say:

>
> The usage of the internetsites of (...) is basically possible without
> any expose of person-bound informations.
>
>
>

?

IP address as privacy-data in European Union (EU) for specific social identities


If an amateur filmmaker wants to use a short clip of a popular song, sung (covered) by a singer other than the one who wrote and popularized it, what permissions, if any, are needed?

I want to use a cover of a song by Alicia Keys and want to know if anyone here can help me figure it out


Is there any way to present a case to the grand jury if the prosecuting attorney is unwilling to do so?

Is there any way to bring a criminal case before the grand jury without the support of the Prosecuting Attorney?


I am thinking of running an algorithm on TV shows which will output a written account of each show's contents. An example would be a written copy of the recipe used in a cooking show, which would be almost verbatim, but not a complete transcript and probably without any overall synopsis; just a few parts of the show. That being said, the algorithm would have to "watch" the whole show to discover the relevant parts.

Would I need a license from the owner of the show's copyright before doing so?

Would the answer be different if I watched the show myself, copied down the recipe by hand, and put it on a (commercial) website?

Commercial "natural language processing" algorithm on TV shows


Is it legal for a company founder to add to the bylaws that nobody has the power to fire him as ceo (law in Colorado, The United States of America)

Can a founder use bylaws to prevent being fired by the board


The Srebrenica massacre of Bosnian Muslims constituted one of the main charges of genocide against the Serb forces at The Hague International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia. Here, the Serb forces deliberately mixed up the remains of the victims in five separate locations so as to hinder identification.

But does not this itself show that the Serb forces were well aware of the gravity of the crime against them by how they were attempting to hide the evidence? It's not a question of hindsight, they knew well what was international and customary law.

**Q. Why was it neccessary for the Hague to establish 90% verification of the identity through DNA analysis when such a bar of evidence wasn't neccessary at the Nuremberg Trials?**

Why was it neccessary for The Hague to establish the identity of all the people murdered in the Srebrenica Massacre?


We purchased a wordpress plugin with a perpetual license. The software plugin constantly phones home to check the license is used on the domain it was purchased for use on. However, if the our wordpress administration panel, where the plugin is installed, is accessed from the IP address of the site and not the domain, the license is deactivated, because the plugin phones home from the IP address and not the domain. As a result, we need to reactivate the license.

Do we not own the software?

Does the concept of "quiet enjoyment" apply here?

What about the concept of "hidden defects"? The fact that every time, for whatever reason, our site is accessed from its' IP address and not the domain, it triggers a revocation of the license. Moreover, this time it caused damage to our business by both disabling the software/plugin and as a result the website, and when it was reactivated the database was corrupted and we lost all data between the deactivation and reactivation and ever since until it was fixed, about a week.

[This is the license.](https://codecanyon.net/licenses/terms/regular)

Can a software company deactivate my licensed software remotely?


Imagine a disorderly charge for a first-time offender who pleaded guilty.

The defendant appealed the case and was granted a remand.The defendant now has a charge on his record for disorderly conduct, and has paid high court costs and fines.

Could the defendant file a motion to vacate, withdraw plea or what?

Municipal Court Remand New Jersey Help


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

Legality surrounding reverse engineering protocols?


During the House hearing today (July 7, 2016) Director Comey implied that section 793 of Title 18 might be unconstitutional as to applying the "gross negligence" standard to Hillary Clinton. What is the law that supports this reasoning as to unconstitutionality?

Why might Title 18 Section 793 be unconstitutional?


Suppose a Canadian subscription website is created providing valuable information on certain properties of a product to consumers.

Unfortunately, a mistake was made where some images on the website were taken from an online source that broke copyright laws in US. These images were quickly taken down to settle this problem. However, the opposition in question continued to try and sue for more, claiming that the information on these properties were taken from them (which is apparently incorrect and lacks proof), but they continue to drag this on in an assumed attempt to try and make the defendant basically spend all their money fighting this off before it gets before a judge.

**My questions is**: to what end can something like this continue to be dragged out?

Question about US law being sued in Canada


I'm currently writing a companion to the popular game Overwatch, and have realized early into development that I don't want to put time into this and then find out I can't use it for legal reasons.

My program will contain information that is copied from different sites and locations, including Overwatch itself, as well as several websites. I am fully willing and even eager to include the authors of the information, but I'm worried that Blizzard will try to murder me legally for attempting to use data from their game.

It will not cost anything, and I will not make any money except for donations. How legal, if at all, is this?

Legal Binding on a Game Based Companion


The Indian wife of the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer has now said that while she will in future pay UK tax on her foreign income, she will retain her non-domiciled status.

Is there any choice here? The question of domicile, as I understand it is not one of form but of fact. Domicile, as I understand it, is a common-law status which is determined by the circumstances. It is not something for which one can apply, or discard when no longer needed.

There are two types of domicile - domicile of origin (that with which one is born) and domicile of choice, determined by a multiplicity of one's life choices concerning where to live etc. And most importantly one's future intentions - as expressed in such things as what nationalities, residence statuses etc that one has acquired.

And presumably, if she now begins to file tax returns as a UK domiciled person, it will add to the evidence that she has lost her Indian domicile - will it not?

But having said that - I don't think she has said she will file domiciled returns - merely that she "will pay UK tax on her overseas income". Anyone can pay more tax that they need pay - one can I assume voluntarily choose to do that.

Does Mrs Sunak have any choice in the matter?


I'm not a law student, but I'm very interested in the topic and learning in general.

I got curious about contracts and signatures recently, so I wondered if there have been cases where contracts have been voided because of invalid signatures.

What constitutes a person's official signature, and what are the criteria (if any) for the validation of one's signature?

How to prove the genuinity/nongenuinity of a signature?


Is a dislocated shoulder or broken arm bone more severe?

My argument is that a dislocated shoulder has potential for repeat dislocation and therefore is a more aggravated lasting injury. Which is considered more severe, a broken arm bone or dislocated shoulder?

Which is more severe in an aggravated assault case?


['reduced into possession' isn't just worded for animals.](https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/204909-(Legal)-reduced-to-possession)

1. 'reduce' here doesn't feel like ordinary meaning. What does it mean? I quote [Etymonline](https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=reduce) because legalese can deceivingly use common words today but actually aim for some bygone meaning.

[![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xZfs3.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xZfs3.jpg)

2. Why not just use 'possess'?

Herring, [*Criminal Law: Text, Cases, and Materials* (8 edn, 2018)](https://global.oup.com/academic/product/criminal-law-9780198811817?cc=ca&lang=en&). p. 493

>
> ### Wild creatures
>
>
> These are dealt with by section 4(4) of the Theft Act 1968, which provides:
>
>
>
> >
> > Wild creatures, tamed or untamed, shall be regarded as property; but a person cannot steal
> >  a wild creature not tamed nor ordinarily kept in captivity, or the carcase of any such creature,
> >  unless either it has been **reduced into possession [emboldening mine]** by or on behalf of another person and
> >  possession of it has not since been lost or abandoned, or another person is in course of **reducing
> >  it into possession**.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> The key distinction drawn in this section is between tamed creatures (e.g. pets), wild
>  creatures kept in captivity (e.g. wild animals kept in a zoo) or **reduced into possession** (e.g.
>  wild animals which have been trapped), and wild creatures not kept in captivity. Tame
>  animals are treated as property and can be stolen. Similarly, wild animals kept in captivity
>  or **reduced into possession** can be stolen.8 However, wild animals not kept in captivity are
>  not property and cannot be stolen.
>
>
> [....]
>
>
> 8 *Cresswell v DPP* [2006] EWHC 3379 (Admin) held that wild badgers were not property.
>
>
>

reduce into possession


Mindy Chen-Wishart. [*Contract Law* (2018 6 edn)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Contract-Law-Mindy-Chen-Wishart/dp/0198806353/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). [Scanned p 225](https://i.stack.imgur.com/P6gae.jpg).

>
> 1. Where the claimant refuses to continue with the contract, the court must decide whether this amounts to rescission (limiting her to reliance damages) or termination (preserving her right to expectation damages).
> 2. Since the threshold for termination is very high (it is only available for ‘serious’ breaches (12.2.2)), a claimant may find that she has unwittingly rescinded the contract (eg by returning defective items), thereby extinguishing her right to potentially superior contractual damages.
>
>
>

I don't understand 2. Why would returning defective items be worth less than contract damages?

Why would contractual damages be superior to returning defective items?


I am doing an interview process with a company and and they want me to sign a contract which says that i agree with their economical offer before i do the final round of interviews, i am thinking that this is very weird, because depending on what they say to me on the last round of interviews i may not want to work with them, or they do not want to work with me, they what should i do?

It is my first time here, if there is anything else i can do to improve my question, then please let me know.

Should i sign a contract agreeing with an economical offer to work for a company before the last interview?


I was recently made redundant after working at the company for just over a year.

I was given no indication before hand that I personally might be made redundant (although other departments in the company had just gone through redundancies, but this was over a month before) and did not go through a consultation period, I was called into a room with HR and my manager and basically told I was being made redundant and that while given a months notice I was not expected to work it and made to leave the building.

My question is that it was my understanding that the process of redundancy was the employees had to be notified about the potential redundancy or at least have a consultation period so they can ask questions or raise any objections?

This was in the UK.

Redundancy with no consultation


Can an illustration from a Children's book be drawn by an artist (muralist) on a wall of a public building without asking the artist's permission? I think that some things, like songs, written before a certain year are in the public domain and therefore allowed to be used -- does the same apply to artwork? Specifically, I'd like to paint a scene from Sendak's *Where the Wild Things Are* for a public library and need to know if this can be done. Thanks.

Can I legally copy a book illustration for a wall mural in a public building?