Datasets:

ymoslem

/

Law-StackExchange

like 12

[ { "answer_id": 1098, "body": "<h2>Go to the Source</h2>\n\n<p>If you follow the <a href=\"http://stackexchange.com/legal/terms-of-service\">Legal</a> link at the bottom of the page and read the terms of service, among other things, it says (my emphasis):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p><strong>1. Access to the Services</strong></p>\n \n <p>Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Stack Exchange may offer to provide the Services, as described more fully on the Network, and which are selected by Subscriber, <strong>solely for Subscriber’s own use, and not for the use or benefit of any third party</strong>. ...</p>\n \n <p>Subscriber certifies to Stack Exchange that <strong>Subscriber is an individual</strong> (i.e., not a corporate entity) at least 13 years of age. ...</p>\n \n <p><strong>2. Network Content</strong></p>\n \n <p>... <strong>The Network is protected by copyright</strong> as a collective work and/or compilation, pursuant to U.S. copyright laws, international conventions, and other copyright laws. Other than as expressly set forth in this Agreement, Subscriber may not copy, modify, publish, transmit, upload, participate in the transfer or sale of, reproduce (except as provided in this Section), create derivative works based on, distribute, perform, display, or in any way exploit, any of the Content, software, materials, or Services in whole or in part.</p>\n \n <p><strong>Subscriber may download or copy</strong> the Content, and other items displayed on the Network for download, <strong>for personal use</strong>, provided that Subscriber maintains all copyright and other notices contained in such Content.</p>\n \n <p>From time to time, <strong>Stack Exchange may make available compilations of all the Subscriber Content on the Network (the “Creative Commons Data Dump”).</strong> <strong>The Creative Commons Data Dump is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license</strong>. By downloading The Creative Commons Data Dump, You agree to be bound by the terms of that license.</p>\n \n <p><strong>Any other downloading, copying, or storing any Content for other than personal, noncommercial use is expressly prohibited without prior written permission from Stack Exchange, or from the copyright holder identified in such Content's copyright notice.</strong> In the event You download software from the Network, the software, including any files, images incorporated in or generated by the software, and the data accompanying the software (collectively, the “Software”) is licensed to You by Stack Exchange or third party licensors for Your personal, noncommercial use, and no title to the Software shall be transferred to You. Stack Exchange or third party licensors retain full and complete title to the Software and all intellectual property rights therein.</p>\n \n <p><strong>3. Subscriber Content</strong></p>\n \n <p>You agree that <strong>all Subscriber Content that You contribute to the Network is perpetually and irrevocably licensed to Stack Exchange under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license</strong>. You grant Stack Exchange the perpetual and irrevocable right and license to use, copy, cache, publish, display, distribute, modify, create derivative works and store such Subscriber Content and to allow others to do so in any medium now known or hereinafter developed (“Content License”) in order to provide the Services, even if such Subscriber Content has been contributed and subsequently removed by You. ...</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<h2>Consequences</h2>\n\n<p>Under Clause 1 Subscribers to Stack Exchange must be individuals (natural persons in legalese). The proprietor of LearnHub.org are <em>unlikely</em> to be an individual and are therefore not a Subscriber under the terms of use. </p>\n\n<p>Under Clause 2, everything on Stack Exchange is copyright and some things are trade marked as well. The copyright for posts vests in the Subscriber and is licenced to SE (CC BY-SA 3.0) or vests in SE directly as the creator.</p>\n\n<p>Clause 8.1a. of CC BY-SA 3.0 <strong>requires</strong> SE to grant a licence to any recipient of a distribution (e.g. on a web site) on the same terms. For this reason the limitations on the copyright in Clause 2 can only apply to those items where copyright vests in SE directly; not to the content of the Subscriber posts.</p>\n\n<p>Assuming that it is only Subscriber posts that they are reproducing then they either need to:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Comply with CC BY-SA 3.0 and attribute the work as required by that licence; what they have put up does not on the face of it do that because:\n\n<ol>\n<li>They are referring to an earlier version of the licence</li>\n<li>Attribution under 3.0 is detailed in Clause 4.c. and this doesn't meet the criteria.</li>\n</ol></li>\n<li>Have been licenced by the original copyright holder; which seems unlikely.</li>\n<li>Meet the fair use criteria; attribution would not be required but would certainly be polite. Fair use turns on the specific facts of the case - on the face of it they could put forward a credible argument that their use is fair use.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<h2>Complications</h2>\n\n<p>Jurisdiction matters here; copyright laws are not uniform across the world. For example, Australian copyright has a much more limited \"fair use\" concept than the US and also creates a \"moral copyright\" of the <em>author</em> that exists independently of the copyright of the <em>owner</em>.</p>\n\n<p>For signatories to the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention\" rel=\"nofollow\">Berne Convention</a>; the country of origin for simultaneously published works (which online posting is) and therefore the law applying is the country that gives the shortest term of protection. The convention is annoyingly silent of what that means if there is more than one qualifying \"Country of Origin\"; this leaves scope for litigants to try to apply the most favourable domestic law that could be applicable and the case could be brought in any of several jurisdictions. This is the stuff that makes lawyers rich!</p>\n", "score": 8 } ]

[ "copyright", "creative-commons" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1102, "body": "<p>I don't know of a specific legal term but such clauses are quite common in contracts which consist of more than one document. The English words \"priority\", \"prevail\" and \"precedence\" have the meaning you want, however, \"precedence\" runs the risk of being confused with \"precedent\" which <em>does</em> have a very specific legal meaning.</p>\n\n<p>A clause similar to:</p>\n\n<p>If there is any inconsistency or ambiguity between the English and Japanese language versions of the contract, the English version shall prevail.</p>\n\n<p>You need to make very sure that this clause can be translated unambiguously into Japanese!</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "contract-law", "legal-terms" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1063, "body": "<p>Game of skill? Nonsense. There <em>are</em> skills that can help you out / prevent you from making bad decisions, but it's still gambling nonetheless.</p>\n\n<p>There is no gambling license you can obtain to operate an online poker site, or really any other online site that allows gambling, in the United States. <a href=\"https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2007/june/gambling_060607\" rel=\"noreferrer\">It is completely against the law.</a> In fact, the FBI shut down a few of these poker sites back in 2011 for fraud. Read up on <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Scheinberg\" rel=\"noreferrer\">United States v. Scheinberg</a>.</p>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 1097, "body": "<p>Poker has a gambling element. Although it is also a game of skill in which better players tend to win, they also do so \"randomly.\" Unlike a game of total skill such as chess, in which a better player can avoid losing, that's not true in poker; even the best players sometimes have \"bad luck.\" For this reason, poker is regulated as a \"gambling\" game, that's legal mainly in licensed casinos.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "gambling" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1095, "body": "<p>\"Transition bonds\" are debt for which the collateral is \"transition property.\"</p>\n\n<p>Periodically U.S. states authorize utilities to levy a charge on individual consumer bills. The reasons they may do so are varied (<em>e.g.</em> to compensate a former monopolist during the transition to a competitive utilities market).</p>\n\n<p>The right to levy this charge now and in the future is a type of (transition) property. Since this right has value in the form of a future stream of revenue, it can serve as collateral when debt it taken on (here in the form of bonds).</p>\n\n<p>The utility with the property rights can form a subsidiary called a \"transition bond company\" that handles the bond issuance.</p>\n\n<p>Here are a few examples of state laws to the above effect.</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXXII/Chapter164/Section1H/Print\" rel=\"nofollow\">Massachusetts</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0201.htm\" rel=\"nofollow\">Connecticut</a></p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "corporate-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1083, "body": "<h2>TL;DR</h2>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Yes</li>\n<li>One that covers the essentials and leaves out the crap</li>\n<li>Carol would sue the company, not Alice. She could seek an order for specific performance and/or damages.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<h2>General Corporations Background Stuff</h2>\n\n<p>I speak from an Australian jurisdiction but the general principles will be applicable to the US; the particulars may vary.</p>\n\n<p>There will be overarching legislation that governs the operation of companies. In Australia this law is national, from my limited understanding incorporation of companies in the US is a state matter. This legislation will dictate what companies can and can't do.</p>\n\n<p>Typically, such laws require a company to have a constitution which is essentially a contract between all the shareholders with each other and with the company. The law will say what must, may and must not be addressed in the constitution. It is here that such things as issuing new shares and options and transferring existing shares will be addressed.</p>\n\n<p>You say \"It has not issued any shares or stock options yet.\" This cannot be true; in order for there to <em>be</em> a company there <em>must be</em> at least one shareholder.</p>\n\n<h2>Specifics</h2>\n\n<p>Issuing stock options or shares <em>may</em> be a power granted by the constitution to the CEO but is <em>usually</em> reserved to the board or <em>more rarely</em> to the members (shareholders). So Alison must determine if she, in fact, has the power to bind the company to such an agreement with Carol or if she needs board (or membership) authorisation.</p>\n\n<p>As an aside, if Alison <em>does not</em> have the power and signs the agreement anyway, then Carol would probably have the legal right to force the Company to honour it; this is because third-parties are entitled to the presumption that an officer of the company does have the power. The company would have to issue the shares to Carol and seek redress from Alison for breaching her duty to the company.</p>\n\n<p>Such an agreement would generally be considered a contract binding the company (not Alice) and Carol providing that it met the threshold requirements:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Intention to create legal relations (on the face of it - yes)</li>\n<li>Agreement </li>\n<li>Consideration (the company is giving shares to Alice - what is Alice giving the company? A \"free\" promise is only enforceable if executed as a deed.)</li>\n<li>Legal Capacity (e.g. Is Alice drunk? Is the company insolvent?)</li>\n<li>Genuine Consent (Is there a mistake, undue influence, duress, unconscionable conduct etc.?)</li>\n<li>Legality of Objects (a contract cannot be formed to cover illegal activities)</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><strong>If the agreement constitutes a contract then it is legally enforceable.</strong></p>\n\n<p>A good formulation for <em>any</em> contract is one that, in line with the complexity and value of the contract, covers:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>the obligations of each party (who will do what and when)</li>\n<li>is clear about when the contract has reached completion</li>\n<li>covers reasonable contingencies (\"if this happens then this person will do that\")</li>\n<li>provides a reasonable dispute resolution mechanism (negotiation -> intense negotiation -> mediation -> arbitration -> litigation)</li>\n<li>a severance provision which states that if any part of the contract is illegal or unenforceable then that provision shall be excised (in the absence of this if any part of the contract is null then legally the whole contract is) </li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><strong>For your contract it should cover:</strong></p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>What Carol does and when</li>\n<li>What the company does and when</li>\n<li>Considers reasonable contingencies and their consequences (e.g. failure of a party to perform, extraneous events like insolvency etc.)</li>\n<li>Has a way of resolving disputes</li>\n<li>a severance provision </li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><strong>The consequences of not fulfilling the terms of a contract can include:</strong></p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Affirm that the contract continues</li>\n<li>Terminating the contract</li>\n<li>Repudiating the contract (i.e. there never was a contract)</li>\n<li>Seeking an order for Specific Performance</li>\n<li>Seeking an injunction</li>\n<li>Seeking damages</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "shareholders" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1047, "body": "<p>In the US, it is not illegal to lie in general. This includes lying about someone: it's not illegal <em>per se</em> to lie about them. What <em>is</em> illegal is slander and libel: lying about someone in a way that hurts their reputation. The defamation doctrine in the US is generally a common-law doctrine (i.e. the rules and limits are based on court decisions, rather than on laws passed by legislatures), although it may differ state-by-state. Depending on the state, some defamation may be criminal; there is no federal criminal defamation.</p>\n\n<p>US defamation law is largely defined through its interaction with the First Amendment. While libel is not constitutionally protected, <em>punishment</em> for libel is seriously limited by the need to avoid either punishing protected speech, or chilling potential protected speech (i.e. discouraging people from saying something that would in fact be protected, because they aren't sure whether or not it's protected).</p>\n\n<p>Libel in the US only applies to a false statement of <em>fact</em>, or an opinion which implies some false fact. If it can't actually be proven incorrect, it can't be libelous in the US. The question of whether it's a statement of fact doesn't just depend on the literal speech; it includes things like the context, and is a question about what a <em>reasonable person</em> would think. If I were to claim that someone was \"literally Hitler,\" for instance, no reasonable person would think I was seriously claiming that the person was the former leader of Nazi Germany.</p>\n\n<p>Now, no reasonable person who is familiar with Twitter would ever assume that the tweet meant Obama literally stood up in front of the UN and said \"Please accept this nothingburger in place of a respectable climate plan.\" So, it only counts as libel if a reasonable person would think it implies some fact. But a reasonable person familiar with Twitter would most likely think Miesel is saying \"The president's pollution plan is a pointless piece of political puffery planned to placate principalities and potentates.\" This is basically a matter of opinion.</p>\n\n<p>Even to the extent that it's <em>not</em> a matter of opinion, public figures in the US cannot win a defamation suit unless they show \"actual malice:\" the speaker must <em>actually know</em> or <em>actually strongly suspect</em> that their statement is false in some material way. It's not enough that a reasonable person would think \"this might not be true;\" the speaker themselves must doubt the truth of it (they must be reckless, not just negligent). Courts are also extremely deferential to defendants in these cases. While it is <em>technically</em> possible for a public figure to prove defamation, it is exceptionally difficult. If the person didn't know they were falsely attributing the quote, and honesty thought it was correct, they're in the clear. If the quote isn't supposed to be a statement of fact, but it implies false facts, but the speaker honestly thinks those facts are true, they're in the clear.</p>\n\n<p>Private figures don't have to meet the actual malice standard to prove defamation. They still need to show that the statement is a statement of fact or something implying false facts; if it's obviously a summary of something they really said, possibly with added editorial comment, they can't prove defamation.</p>\n", "score": 6 } ]

[ "united-states" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1066, "body": "<p>Placing assets (real or otherwise) in a holding company separate from the operating company serves a number of purposes.</p>\n\n<p>It is a form of insolvency insurance; creditors of the operating company have no recourse on the assets of the holding company.</p>\n\n<p>It can be a tax minimization mechanism: The holding company charges a licence fee to the operating company, either splitting profits for a jurisdiction with a progressive tax rate or transferring profits to a tax haven.</p>\n\n<p>It can offer different investment profiles: some people want to own IP and collect rent, others want to operate businesses - splitting the functions allows shareholders to take different stakes in each company. This works for both private and public companies.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 1076, "body": "<p>For these examples, the principle motivation is probably to separate the different brands into different companies for accounting and for potential future sale. </p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "intellectual-property", "corporate-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1033, "body": "<p>Your question slightly misrepresents what the article says: Yes, the judge denied the motion which led to the collapse of the case, he did not make a ruling on the substance of the case.</p>\n\n<p>The distinction is significant to my mind as the judge was using non-evidentiary knowledge (i.e. what he read in the paper) to make a decision on <strong>process</strong>; in this case a process that would have put a lot of people to a lot of inconvenience. It would not be proper for the judge to have used such knowledge to inform a <strong>judgement</strong>.</p>\n\n<p>It is also not clear from the article if the academic paper in question was actually introduced by the defendant as evidence. If that was the case then it is only right and proper for the judge to consider it.</p>\n\n<p>As to why a judge is allowed to read the news and a jury is not, I can offer several ideas:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>A judge must document their reasoning process in a judgement which is subject to review - if they were to make a decision based on matters not supported by the evidence then an appeals court could correct it. Alternatively, juries are specifically prohibited from revealing their reasoning process to <em>anyone</em>.</li>\n<li>Judges do their jobs for years, perhaps a whole career - to prohibit them from consuming media is a) unworkable and b) a serious impediment on their lifestyle. Juries are empaneled for weeks or months - such sacrifices are more reasonable.</li>\n<li>Judges are (supposedly) trained and impartial professionals who are more readily able to make the distinction between evidence and news.</li>\n<li>Newsworthy cases are relatively rare</li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 9 } ]

[ "united-states", "judging", "judge" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1071, "body": "<p><a href=\"http://law.onecle.com/california/government/12927.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">The Code defines \"Source of income\" as</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>lawful, verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or paid to a representative of a tenant.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>There's nothing to suggest that the occupation is a relevant consideration otherwise. What it would mean is that if the occupation of a person is relevant to their source of income, it would be illegal to discriminate on that basis.</p>\n\n<p>I would consider occupation distinct from source of income - I could (but don't) have a family trust that is my source of income, and my occupation is volunteer work. My occupation is very clearly <strong>not</strong> my source of income.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "california", "residential-lease", "fair-housing-acts" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1070, "body": "<p>This will depend in part on the industry you are in, the terms of the position that and the employment contract you have signed. You may have covenant or some other confidentiality clauses in your contract of employment, so I will not ask you to provide specifics. However, if you do, please be wary of any such obligations.</p>\n\n<p>I'm not a lawyer, but I have not been able to locate case law that would support an action for you. However, here are some points I might raise.</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>I would want to know why you believe you would be starting in a month. If this is what was advertised, then it is possible you may have some valid claim.</p></li>\n<li><p>It is almost certainly the case that, if you haven't signed a new contract, they are not obliged to give you your new responsibilities and salary.<br>\nThere could be just reasons for this - if a company advertises a position on the basis that a position will be vacated, and then it isn't, for example.</p></li>\n<li><p>If you are, in fact, continuing to fulfil your current duties, then I wouldn't see any reason why they would be obliged to pay you the new salary.</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><strong>Can they keep paying you at your current rate for fulfilling your current duties?</strong><br>\nYes.</p>\n\n<p><strong>What can you do about it?</strong><br>\nLegally? There's not enough information here to find out. You can retain a solicitor to review any paperwork if you feel like you have a case.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 868, "body": "<p>I am not familiar with the jurisdiction, I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer.</p>\n\n<p>The \"notice period\" as I understand it is the notice that you have to give before you quit and that they have to give before they make you redundant; that is, it is related to termination of employment. It does not apply here.</p>\n\n<p>Your employment is not being terminated; you are being promoted. The promotion would take effect from (and the higher salary be payable from) the day you assume the duties of the position. This could be tomorrow, next month, 3 years from last Saturday - whatever the company requires.</p>\n\n<p>It <em>may</em> be illegal for them to <em>de jure</em> give the promotion and then delay so long that you have that they have <em>de facto</em> denied that promotion. \"3 years from last Saturday\" probably falls into that category; \"3 months\" probably doesn't</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "contract-law", "employment", "salary" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1069, "body": "<p>This is likely to depend on whether Person B is aware of what Person A is doing, regardless of any imputations Person A makes as to the nature of their business.</p>\n\n<p>If Person B is aware, or it is found that Person B ought to have been aware, that Person A is doing something illegal, then they may be held contributorily liable for damages suffered.</p>\n\n<p>For instance, in (what is still) a landmark case for copyright infringement, A&amp;M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001), Napster was found to be contributorily guilty of copyright infringement. </p>\n\n<p>A defense that they attempted is they weren't aware of it - which was thrown out on the basis that they should have, and could have, known that it was happening.</p>\n\n<p>I'm not a lawyer, but you'll need to give a lot more information about the situation for liability to be determined. Oh, and also &mdash; both of them could be held liable. It's not necessarily a case of one or the other.</p>\n", "score": 7 } ]

[ "liability" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1065, "body": "<p>Contractual terms must always be read in context. Given the context, it is unlikely that the term could support the definition that you are worried about. It is clear that the purpose of you appointing the company as your attorney is to allow them to perfect the IP rights you have given them by the other parts of the clause; not to allow them to sell your house or make end-of-life decisions.</p>\n\n<p>If you are worried about it, ask them what they mean and ask for the clause to be clarified to your satisfaction. </p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "australia", "employment" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1059, "body": "<p>The situation in Texas <a href=\"http://www.americanbar.org/publications/communications_lawyer/2013/february/can_states_use_copyright_restrict_use_public_records.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">is unclear</a>.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>It is worth mentioning Texas as a state where the law may require statutory authorization in order to copyright state documents. Although the statute does not explicitly state such as a requirement, it can be inferred from an attorney general opinion.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>At a bare minimum, the Department of Health, the State Preservation Board, the Water Development Board, the Department of Motor Vehicles, and county governments all have statutory authority to hold copyrights.</p>\n\n<p>In your specific case, there's an additional complication. Something is only a work of the State of Texas if one of the following is true: 1) it was created by a government employee as part of their job duties, or 2) it was a <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire\" rel=\"nofollow\">work for hire</a>. It's quite likely that neither of the above is true for a student newspaper, rendering the question of Texas-owned copyrights irrelevant.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 1058, "body": "<p>State government works in the US are not uncopyrightable in the US in general; the copyright law just doesn't protect <em>federal</em> works. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "copyright", "texas", "public-domain" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1046, "body": "<p>The answer is a clear <strong>maybe</strong>.</p>\n\n<p>See <a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/types-of-discrimination\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/types-of-discrimination</a></p>\n\n<p>Discriminating on the basis of sex is illegal, however, applying different rules on uniforms is probably not discrimination under the law.</p>\n\n<p>To be discriminatory it must put the class of person at an unfair disadvantage, be harassment or victimisation. You would have to demonstrate that refusing to allow females to wear trousers puts them at an unfair disadvantage (and vice versa because these are separate discriminations) - victimisation is not an issue here, harassment might be but it would have to be actually happening. You should look at things like comfort, practicality, sports, play etc.; the problem is that the better your argument for girls the worse it is for boys.&#128531;</p>\n\n<p>The steps you can take are spelled out in the link, starting with communicating with the organisation. So marshal your arguments and write them a letter and then move on to mediation.</p>\n\n<p>At the very least you should get an insight into <em>why</em> they oppose your position. If you deal constructively with their concerns you may get what you want.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "discrimination" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1038, "body": "<p>Private carriers typically (and UPS in particular) only have a contractual obligation to the person who pays to send the package. Unless you're the one directly paying UPS to deliver the package <em>you have no legal recourse</em> because you're not a party to the \"contract of carriage.\"</p>\n\n<p>It does seem like you're suffering due to contractual and operational failures of UPS, but your recourse is against the merchant you paid for the goods, because you also paid them for delivery. The merchant has recourse against UPS under their contract if they want to pursue it.</p>\n\n<p><em>Legally</em>: UPS does not have a monopoly on shipping, and their contractual duty is only to <em>their</em> customer. The best you can do is encourage those from whom you purchase to aggressively claim against UPS for delays, and to use other carriers when possible.</p>\n", "score": 6 } ]

[ "united-states", "texas", "competition", "shipping" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1034, "body": "<p>Although your question didn't ask about the criminal side of this, it's important to consider the offence of driving without insurance in the UK. <a href=\"http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/143\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Section 143 Road Traffic Act 1998</a> provides that—</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act—</p>\n<p>(a) a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road or other public\nplace unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle\nby that person such a policy of insurance or such a security in\nrespect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this\nPart of this Act ...</p>\n<p>(2) If a person acts in contravention of subsection (1) above he is\nguilty of an offence.</p>\n<p>(3) A person charged with using a motor vehicle in contravention of\nthis section shall not be convicted if he proves—</p>\n<p>...</p>\n<p>(c) that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not\nin force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or\nsecurity as is mentioned in subsection (1) above.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>If it's not too late, it may be worth challenging the matter in court on the basis of a s143(1)(c) defence (i.e. you didn't have reason to believe that your policy was not in force). You should speak to a solicitor <em>immediately</em> if you want to consider this.</p>\n<p>As mentioned in the previous answer, you <em>may</em> have a claim against the insurer if you can provide that you were misled into believing that your policy had been renewed automatically. You should read the terms and conditions carefully to discover whether they were entitled to communicate on matters of renewal solely by email. Again, you should speak to a solicitor to establish whether you have a realistic prospect of success.</p>\n<p>(in case you're curious, the 'security' mentioned in s143 refers to <a href=\"http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/144\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">a sum of £500,000</a> which, if deposited with the Courts Funds Office, exempts an individual or corporation from the insurance requirement)</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 1032, "body": "<p><em>I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer</em></p>\n\n<p>Jurisdiction specific legislation regarding consumer protection, misrepresentation and insurance is all going to be applicable here and I don't know it so I can't address it. I also assume from you question that this insurance is required by law and that you commit an offence if you don't hold it. That said, here is some general common law background.</p>\n\n<p><strong>First you need to determine if you are insured or not.</strong></p>\n\n<p>A general insurance policy (like car insurance) is an enduring contract i.e. you have the one contract from when you sign up to when you leave (other types e.g. professional indemnity are a new contract every year). Within the terms of the policy will be details of how the contract is terminated - read them. Since the contract was drafted by the insurance company I would bet good money that they have placed the onus for renewal firmly on your shoulders.</p>\n\n<p>I would also be willing to bet that even if they have not insisted on your compliance in the past, there is a term in the contract that a specific waiver of a term on their part does not create a precedent.</p>\n\n<p>It is here that you need to do some research about if by their actions and the impact of the local law you are, in fact, insured even if they say you aren't</p>\n\n<p><strong>Second, did you commit an offence</strong></p>\n\n<p>What is the law here? Is having a \"reasonable belief\" that you are insured a defence?</p>\n\n<p><strong>Third, what is their liability</strong></p>\n\n<p>So, if you are not insured and did commit an offence then it is arguable that the insurance company, by their negligence, caused you to unknowingly commit that offence.</p>\n\n<p>In order to establish negligence as a Cause of Action under the law of torts, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>had a duty to the plaintiff,</li>\n<li>breached that duty by failing to conform to the required standard of conduct (generally the standard of a reasonable person),</li>\n<li>the negligent conduct was the cause of the harm to the plaintiff, and</li>\n<li>the plaintiff was, in fact, harmed or damaged</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>If I were running their defence I would:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Concede that a duty was owed</li>\n<li>Argue that it was fulfilled by putting the relevant information in the contract and the indemnity I sent you lest year with its prominent expiry date - you would have to show that I needed to do more (and you would certainly point to the fact that my website said all was A-OK)</li>\n<li>Argue that I did not cause you to drive without valid insurance - you, knowing you did not have an indemnity, nevertheless wantonly drove in violation of the law. I reckon I've got a shot here.</li>\n<li>You would have had to have suffered real loss. A fine may not be recoverable - there are good public policy reasons why you shouldn't be reimbursed for government sanctions.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation</strong></p>\n\n<p>Don't fight a legal battle over this. Point out to the insurance company that you have been a loyal customer and if they do right by you then you will continue to be loyal and tell all your friends and relations on Facebook and Twitter how great you are. If they do wrong by you then ...</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "insurance" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1024, "body": "<p>If this is a typical private sector tenancy, then it would initially be a fixed-term one year'assured shorthold tenancy' a type of assured tenancy. The <a href=\"http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/section/5\" rel=\"nofollow\">Housing Act 1988 says</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>If an assured tenancy which is a fixed term tenancy comes to an end\n otherwise than by virtue of—</p>\n \n <p>(a) an order of the court of the kind mentioned in subsection\n (1)(a)\n or (b) or any other order of the court, or</p>\n \n <p>(b) a surrender or other action on the part of the tenant,</p>\n \n <p>then, subject to section 7 and Chapter II below, the tenant shall be\n entitled to remain in possession of the dwelling-house let under that\n tenancy and, subject to subsection (4) below, his right to possession\n shall depend upon a periodic tenancy arising by virtue of this\n section.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>So if the tenancy was not renewed then it would be replaced with a periodic tenancy. This has different rules to the fixed-term tenancy. Whether renewing the tenancy is necessary or not depends on whether either party strongly prefers the fixed-term tenancy to the periodic.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-kingdom" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1021, "body": "<p>I'll quote from <a href=\"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/q/207941/51295\">my answer on a similar question from Programmers.SE</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>...[T]he <a href=\"https://help.github.com/articles/github-terms-of-service/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Github TOS</a> have this to say about material hosted on their site:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><em>By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and fork your repositories.</em></p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Hosting on Github means that the author grants others the right to &quot;view&quot; and to &quot;fork&quot; the repository. Here, &quot;fork&quot; probably just means &quot;use Github's fork feature&quot;, which creates a repository clone, hosted on Github.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>GitHub's use of &quot;fork&quot; here probably refers to the <em>software feature</em> of the website github.com called &quot;Fork,&quot; which allows users to create a verbatim copy of a repository on github.com.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/lr4ml.png\" alt=\"github Fork button\" />\n</p>\n<p>The TOS do not require the author to grant any other specific rights, like the right to prepare derivative works or to redistribute copies of the work, so &quot;fork&quot; here probably is <em>not</em> used the general sense of &quot;produce a derivative work.&quot; Thus, the code's presence on GitHub does not grant you rights to reuse the work in ways protected by copyright (commercial or otherwise) without a explicit license from the author.</p>\n", "score": 6 } ]

[ "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1020, "body": "<p>Although the term <em>acquis</em> is very commonly (almost always?) used to refer to EU precedent, the word roughly translates as \"that which has been agreed\" and there's no reason that other legal communities can't use it to refer to their own body of previous decisions. Perhaps <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/acquis\" rel=\"nofollow\">Wikipedia</a> and <a href=\"https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/acquis\" rel=\"nofollow\">Wiktionary</a> are both misleading in their handling and redirection of this term.</p>\n\n<p>The intended meaning of this term within the Tripartite negotiation is explained by the Trade Law Centre in <a href=\"http://www.tralac.org/files/2013/06/S13TB022013-Erasmus-Redirecting-the-Tripartite-FTA-negotiations-20130626-fin.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\"><em>Redirecting the Tripartite Free Trade Agreement negotiations?</em></a></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p><strong>v) Building on the acquis of the existing REC FTAs in terms of\n consolidating tariff liberalisation in each REC FTA</strong></p>\n \n <p>Acquis is a French\n term meaning ‘that which has been agreed’. In the context of the\n Tripartite Free Trade Agreement it means that the negotiations should\n start from the point at which of the COMESA, EAC and SADC trade\n negotiations have reached.</p>\n \n <p>Tariff negotiations and the exchange of\n tariff concessions would be among Member/Partner States of the\n Tripartite FTA that have no preferential arrangements in place between\n them. This will both preserve the acquis and build on it.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "international" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1000, "body": "<p>Federally, in places of public accommodation, discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin is prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.</p>\n\n<p>This was upheld in <em><a href=\"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/379/241/case.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States</a></em> 379 U.S. 241. As summarized in that case, \"Public Accommodations\" cover:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence</p></li>\n<li><p>any restaurant, cafeteria . . .</p></li>\n<li><p>any motion picture house . . .</p></li>\n<li><p>any establishment . . . which is physically located within the premises of any establishment otherwise covered by this subsection, or . . . within the premises of which is physically located any such covered establishment . . .</p></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>In Oregon, there are additional restrictions imposed by the <a href=\"http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.403\" rel=\"nofollow\">Equality Act of 2007</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is 18 years of age or older.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>In Oregon, a \"place of public accommodation\" includes:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Any place or service offering to the public accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges whether in the nature of goods, services, lodgings, amusements, transportation or otherwise.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Other states may not have these extra prohibitions or different prohibitions. They may also have statutory exceptions for peoples' sincerely held religious beliefs.</p>\n\n<p><em>Why</em> the legislature chose to specifically protect these classes is a policy question better asked on Politics.SE.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "discrimination" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1001, "body": "<p><strong>I am not a lawyer; I am not <em>your</em> lawyer.</strong></p>\n\n<p>From the Sale of Goods Act 1979:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>(2)Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.<br>\n (2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, <strong>taking account of any description of the goods</strong>, the price (if relevant) and <strong>all the other relevant circumstances</strong>.<br>\n (2B)For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—<br>\n (a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,<br>\n (b)appearance and finish,<br>\n (c)freedom from minor defects,<br>\n (d)safety, and<br>\n (e)durability.<br>\n (2C)The term implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter making the quality of goods unsatisfactory—<br>\n (a)which is specifically drawn to the buyer’s attention before the contract is made,<br>\n (b)where the buyer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or<br>\n (c)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, which would have been apparent on a reasonable examination of the sample.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Based on my interpretation of this, it would depend on the information about the car you were provided at the time you bought it. </p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>If the information you were given was such that a reasonable person would expect the catalytic converter to be faulty, then the Sale of Goods Act is unlikely to serve your interests, in this case.</li>\n<li>If the representations were that the car was fit for purpose, however, and a reasonable person would have expected it to run without fault for some reasonable amount of time, then you may be able to bring an action against the dealership.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Note: The fact that a reasonable person would come to the conclusion that the fault was pre-existing is irrelevant <em>if</em> it was disclosed ahead of time. Additionally, the fact that it was a used car may change what would be considered <em>reasonable</em> in this case.</p>\n\n<p>In either case, I suggest you seek legal advice and/or a second opinion from another mechanic on your car. You may be able to find out more about whether this is, in fact, something that would be expected.</p>\n\n<p>Also, keep all documentation you have, including any advertisements for the sale of the car.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "vehicle", "commerce" ]

[ { "answer_id": 998, "body": "<p>Simply viewing must be logged.</p>\n\n<p>45 CFR 170.210(b) <em>Record actions related to electronic health information. The date, time, patient identification, and user identification must be recorded when electronic health information is created, modified, <strong>accessed</strong>, or deleted; and an indication of which action(s) occurred and by whom must also be recorded.</em></p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "health" ]

[ { "answer_id": 997, "body": "<p>The standard legal term you are probably looking for to describe Company B is \"<a href=\"http://thelawdictionary.org/attorney-in-fact/\" rel=\"nofollow\">attorney-in-fact</a>.\"</p>\n\n<p>For contract purposes you can call the parties whatever you want. These are \"defined terms,\" and what matters are the rights and responsibilities as enumerated in any contract. E.g., you could define Company B as \"The Big Kahuna\" and as long as that term is used consistently in the contract it's legally as good as any other.</p>\n\n<p>Other common terms could certainly include \"Agent,\" \"Negotiator,\" or \"Intermediary.\"</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "contract-law", "legal-terms" ]

[ { "answer_id": 975, "body": "<p>Underscores are often used to indicate that the particular case has not yet been assigned to a specific <strong>volume</strong> (preceding the reporter abbreviation) or <strong>page</strong> (following the reporter abbreviation).</p>\n\n<p>In your example, the case will appear in volume 576, but the exact page has not yet been determined.</p>\n", "score": 15 }, { "answer_id": 981, "body": "<p>This is a citation of a slip opinion, an opinion that has not yet been bound into a volume. A permanent reference is not yet possible, so the blank lines serve as placeholders for the information that will be added when it becomes available.</p>\n\n<p>For this reason, the page number of the slip opinion is provided, when it is required, in parentheses after the placeholder citation. For example:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>See <em>United States v. \n Windsor,</em> 570 U. S. <strong>_, _</strong> (2013) (ALITO, J., dissenting)\n (slip op., at 7).</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-states", "legal-terms" ]

[ { "answer_id": 987, "body": "<p><em>I am not a lawyer; I am not your lawyer.</em></p>\n\n<p>You do not cite a jurisdiction so this makes it very difficult to get a definitive answer. What follows is for Australia but the general principles are common law and would be applicable to other common law jurisdictions except where statues apply or case law has diverged.</p>\n\n<p>In the first instance, it seems that you were not party to any arrangement to pay for the electricity. So on the face of it you are not party to any contract requiring you to pay.</p>\n\n<p>Even if there was such an agreement: family, domestic, social and voluntary agreements (which this would be) are presumed not to be intended to legally bind the participants. Whether this presumption would be overturned would depend on the specific facts.</p>\n\n<p>On the face of it, there is no legal obligation to pay.</p>\n\n<p>Your options are:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Do nothing; this puts the ball in their court, they can:\n\n<ol>\n<li>Forget about it (it would then be over)</li>\n<li>Attempt to sue you with little prospect of success (which would cost them and you a lot more than $50 irrespective of who won)</li>\n<li>Do something illegal like beating you up (you really need to assess this risk)</li>\n<li>Tell everyone they know (in person and on social media) what a skiving prick you are (you could probably sue them for damages but that's not really going to happen, is it?)</li>\n</ol></li>\n<li>Pay them what they are asking</li>\n<li>Offer to pay them something less.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>Option 1 is likely to break any relationship you have with the person, Option 2 is likely to preserve it and Option 3 could go either way.</p>\n\n<p>Ultimately, like most legal questions, this is not about the law; it's about relationships ... broken ones mostly.</p>\n", "score": 7 }, { "answer_id": 988, "body": "<p>In general in the absence of a contract one has no clear legal obligation to pay for a shared service.</p>\n\n<p>Note, however, that the absence of a <em>written</em> contract does not mean that no contract is in force: Courts have often held that oral and even implied contracts hold the same force of law as a written contract.</p>\n\n<p>If you want legal advice you need to talk to a lawyer.</p>\n\n<p>But if I paid someone $110 for rent who was not authorized to rent a living space, was evicted for that fraud, and hadn't explicitly agreed to pay the unauthorized renter a share of the electric bill, I would just ignore it.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "liability", "australia", "common-law", "contract-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 983, "body": "<p><strong>Yes</strong>. Your work is a derivative from the Eiffel lightning so you <em>could</em> be sued (the Société d’Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel may not be too interested in prosecuting you at a foreign country, and thus you might get away with it, but they certainly can).</p>\n\n<p>You can license your copyright in the photo, but their copyright still remain, so the full photo cannot be used as CC-BY-SA unless they also licensed their piece or until it expires.</p>\n\n<p>Depending of the contents of the photo you could claim that it is <em>Fair Use</em> (applicable to using the photo on your website, not to your claim that the photo is CC-BY-SA) or <em>de minimis</em> (if the eiffel tower was not the main focus, you should take into account the how it is interpretated in US and France).</p>\n\n<p>You seem to think that by publishing from US you don't need to care about French copyright but that's not the case, since both are signers of the Berne Convention.</p>\n\n<p>However, a possible outcome of being sued in the US <em>and winning</em> might be that court ruled that the Eiffel lightining is not really copyrightable.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 984, "body": "<p>If it is subject to US law (and my understanding of the Berne convention Article 5(4)a is that it is) then <strong>no</strong>.</p>\n\n<p>As detailed here <a href=\"http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/copyright-architectural-photos.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/copyright-architectural-photos.html</a>; architectural copyright came into force on 1 December 1990 and any buildings constructed before then (e.g. the Eifel Tower) are not protected. </p>\n\n<p>I do not know when the current lighting installation was made but I think you would be safe even if this happened latter because:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>It is debatable if the illumination of a piece of architecture is itself covered by copyright. The plans that document the design of the lighting clearly are as is the tower itself but I don't think that the term \"architecture\" can be extended to cover just the illumination; but I may be wrong about that.</li>\n<li>Except for buildings that can’t be viewed from a public space, the copyright owner of a post-1990 building (the architect, developer or building owner) can’t prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the building. (17 U.S.C. 120).</li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "france" ]

[ { "answer_id": 965, "body": "<p>They don't have to inform you that they are a debt collector. Because that can be a violation of <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b\" rel=\"nofollow\">15 U.S.C. Section 1692b(2)</a> by exposing that the person they are attempting to collect from has a debt. They are required to:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer\n -- <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b\" rel=\"nofollow\">15 U.S.C. Section 1692b(1)</a></p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>They also may not use any language indicates that the debt collector is in the debt collection business or that the communication relates to the collection of a debt <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b\" rel=\"nofollow\">15 U.S.C. Section 1692b(5)</a></p>\n\n<p>What they do not have the right to do is harass you. They can not attempt to contact you again <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b\" rel=\"nofollow\">15 U.S.C. Section 1692b(3)</a> unless they have reason to believe you lied. I would contact the company back and inform them that you wish to have your number removed from their calling list, and that future calls may be a violation of <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b\" rel=\"nofollow\">15 U.S.C. Section 1692b(3)</a>. Also, send them a notice in the mail. If they continue to attempt to contact you, report them to the FTC. You <strong>may</strong> also be entitled to monetary damages as well. See <a href=\"http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0149-debt-collection\" rel=\"nofollow\">FTC</a></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>The judge can require the debt collector to pay you up to $1,000, even if you can’t prove that you suffered actual damages. You also can be reimbursed for your attorney’s fees and court costs. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>To file a claim with the FTC, go <a href=\"https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/GettingStarted?NextQID=24&amp;Url=%23%26panel1-8#crnt\" rel=\"nofollow\">to there online claim for debt collectors</a></p>\n\n<p>Its worth it to show that you won't joke with them. I had a \"debt\" with T-Mobile (really, I had a billing error in their favor, and they admitted to it, but would not stop the debt collectors) and they violated the rules. I tried to work with them, 6 months later, they damaged my credit. I contacted FTC about it and T-Mobile with in 3 days had the debt cleared and reversed on my credit. They also paid for my damages. All I wanted was the debt cleared. </p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Note:</strong> for calls being recorded, always make sure you follow local laws and inform the other party that the call is recorded. If they have a right to record you, you have a right to record them. You must always infrom them as well.</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 967, "body": "<h3>If...</h3>\n\n<p>The person calling you is included in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (\"FDCPA\") definition of <em>debt collector</em>¹: </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>(6) The term “debt collector” means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another. Notwithstanding the exclusion provided by clause (F) of the last sentence of this paragraph, the term includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses any name other than his own which would indicate that a third person is collecting or attempting to collect such debts. For the purpose of section 1692f (6) of this title, such term also includes any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the enforcement of security interests. The term does not include—<br>\n <strong>(A)</strong> any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor;<br>\n <strong>(B)</strong> any person while acting as a debt collector for another person, both of whom are related by common ownership or affiliated by corporate control, if the person acting as a debt collector does so only for persons to whom it is so related or affiliated and if the principal business of such person is not the collection of debts;<br>\n <strong>(C)</strong> any officer or employee of the United States or any State to the extent that collecting or attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties;<br>\n <strong>(D)</strong> any person while serving or attempting to serve legal process on any other person in connection with the judicial enforcement of any debt;<br>\n <strong>(E)</strong> any nonprofit organization which, at the request of consumers, performs bona fide consumer credit counseling and assists consumers in the liquidation of their debts by receiving payments from such consumers and distributing such amounts to creditors; and<br>\n <strong>(F)</strong> any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another to the extent such activity<br>\n <strong>(i)</strong> is incidental to a bona fide fiduciary obligation or a bona fide escrow arrangement;<br>\n <strong>(ii)</strong> concerns a debt which was originated by such person;<br>\n <strong>(iii)</strong> concerns a debt which was not in default at the time it was obtained by such person; or<br>\n <strong>(iv)</strong> concerns a debt obtained by such person as a secured party in a commercial credit transaction involving the creditor. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<h3>And...</h3>\n\n<p>They do not fall under the exclusions provided for in § 1692p of the Act,²:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Subject to paragraph (2), a private entity shall be excluded from the definition of a debt collector, pursuant to the exception provided in section 1692a (6) of this title, with respect to the operation by the entity of a program described in paragraph (2)(A) under a contract described in paragraph (2)(B). </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<h3>Then...</h3>\n\n<p>They are required to identify themselves as a debt collector by the FDCPA (15 U.S. Code § 1692e(11)³, my emphasis):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>... <em>disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose</em>, and ... <em>disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector</em>, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Or, in plain English:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>If you are the person for whom they are calling/to whom they are writing, they must disclose that they are a debt collection agency in all communications. If the initial communication is oral, they must also disclose that they will collect information for this purpose.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<h3>However</h3>\n\n<p>If you are not the person the debt collector is calling for, § 1692b (2)-(3) applies ⁴:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall—<br>\n <strong>(2)</strong> not state that such consumer owes any debt;<br>\n <strong>(3)</strong> not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person or unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and that such person now has correct or complete location information; </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<h3>If they contravene the FDCPA...</h3>\n\n<ul>\n<li>You may report them to the Fair Trade Commission (FTC), which is empowered to enforce the FDCPA administratively.</li>\n<li>You can also file a private lawsuit against the company. Violation of the FDCPA is actionable <em>per se</em>, without you needing to prove actual damages. You may be awarded statutory damages up to $1,000 plus legal fees, <em>unless</em> the debt collector can prove that this occurred despite procedures designed to prevent it.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>^{\n1. <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692a\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692a</a><br>\n2. <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692p\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692p</a>, text truncated<br>\n3. <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692e\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692e</a><br>\n4. <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692b</a>, text truncated\n}</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-states" ]

[ { "answer_id": 980, "body": "<p>In general, court hearings are held in public; and anyone is free to make a fair and balanced report of the proceedings. It is important that justice is seen to be done.</p>\n\n<p>However, in some circumstances that is not true—the obvious example is if a child is involved. It is not sufficient though merely that \"[the claimant] wants to keep his/her identity confidential\".</p>\n\n<p>Have a look at the Civil Procedure Rules (part 39):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <h2> 39.2 General rule – hearing to be in public</h2>\n \n <ol>\n <li><p>The general rule is that a hearing [including a trial] is to be in public.</p></li>\n <li><p>...</p></li>\n <li><p>A hearing, or any part of it, may be in private if –</p>\n \n <p>(a) publicity would defeat the object of the hearing;</p>\n \n <p>(b) it involves matters relating to national security;</p>\n \n <p>(c) it involves confidential information (including information relating to personal financial matters) and publicity would damage that confidentiality;</p>\n \n <p>(d) a private hearing is necessary to protect the interests of any child or protected party;</p>\n \n <p>(e) it is a hearing of an application made without notice and it would be unjust to any respondent for there to be a public hearing;</p>\n \n <p>(f) it involves uncontentious matters arising in the administration of trusts or in the administration of a deceased person’s estate; or</p>\n \n <p>(g) the court considers this to be necessary, in the interests of justice.</p></li>\n <li><p>The court may order that the identity of any party or witness must not be disclosed if it considers non-disclosure necessary in order to protect the interests of that party or witness.</p></li>\n </ol>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part39#39.2\" rel=\"noreferrer\">https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part39#39.2</a></p>\n\n<p>If you can satisfy the court that one of (a) to (g) apply, the court may make an order anonymizing proceedings (for instance, you would only be referred to as \"AB\" in reports and judgements) or it might hold the hearing <em>in camera</em> (in private).</p>\n\n<p>However the other party may well wish to oppose your application. Indeed, even a newspaper hearing of your case but unable to report it is entitled to object: <a href=\"http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2010/1.html\" rel=\"noreferrer\">http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2010/1.html</a> (In re Guardian News)</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Conclusion</p>\n \n <p>In these circumstances, when carrying out the ultimate test of balancing all the factors relating to both M's article 8 rights and the article 10 rights of the press, we have come to the conclusion that <strong>there is indeed a powerful general, public interest in identifying M in any report of these important proceedings</strong> which justifies curtailment, to that extent, of his, and his family's, article 8 Convention rights to respect for their private and family life.</p>\n \n <p>For all these reasons, we would set aside the anonymity order in respect of M. ... Therefore, A, K, M and HAY will be named here and in the judgments on the substantive appeals, as Mr Mohammed Jabar Ahmed, Mr Mohammed Azmir Khan, Mr Michael Marteen (formerly known as Mohammed Tunveer Ahmed) and Mr Hani El Sayed Sabaei Youssef (or Hani al-Seba'i), respectively.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "england-and-wales", "privacy" ]

[ { "answer_id": 976, "body": "<p>This answer applies only to England and Wales.</p>\n\n<p>Unpaid County Court Judgments, and those that remained unpaid for thirty days after being handed down, are a matter of public record. They are held on the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines by virtue of <a href=\"http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/3595/contents/made\" rel=\"nofollow\">The Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines Regulations 2005</a>. Judgments against individuals and corporations are both held.</p>\n\n<p>The register contains&mdash;</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>the full name and address of the debtor in respect of whom the entry in the Register is to be made;</p></li>\n<li><p>if the entry is to be in respect of an individual, that individual’s date of birth (where known);</p></li>\n<li><p>the amount of the debt;</p></li>\n<li><p>the case number; </p></li>\n<li><p>the name of the court which made the judgment; and</p></li>\n<li><p>the date of the judgment. (abstracted from <a href=\"http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/3595/regulation/10/made\" rel=\"nofollow\">r10 of the Regulations</a>).</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>The registrar is currently <a href=\"http://www.trustonline.org.uk/\" rel=\"nofollow\">Trust Online</a>. The CCJ register can be searched for a fee of £4 per search. Registers for other parts of the UK are also held.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "small-claims-court" ]

[ { "answer_id": 964, "body": "<p>Your assumption is incorrect -- the Bill of Rights proper does <em>not</em> apply to the states, and pre-14th Amendment only bound the federal government. See <em>Barron v. Baltimore</em>, <a href=\"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/32/243/case.html\">32 US 243</a>. States could do whatever they wanted, subject to federal legislation on the matters given to the federal government and subject to their own constitutions.</p>\n\n<p>After the Civil War, the federal government was much less OK with so-called \"black codes,\" restricting the rights of freedmen based on explicitly racial distinctions, with not even a fig leaf of justification that it applied to all citizens. The federal government could prevent <em>federal</em> discrimination, but no tools existed to prevent state discrimination. Hence, the 14th Amendment, which bound the states to adopt certain standards in their lawmaking and let Congress take action against those that didn't.</p>\n", "score": 10 } ]

[ "united-states", "us-constitution", "fifth-amendment", "fourteenth-amendment" ]

[ { "answer_id": 960, "body": "<p>If you have already paid out the lease, there is nothing for the landlord to mitigate. Under abandonment, the rent is not paid for the term of the lease.</p>\n<p>The mitigation statute is to dampen excessive, unnecessary damages. If you pay your rent, there are no damages. (If you do not pay, the landlord would have some responsibility to entertain new lessors, thus mitigating damages - the amount the initial lessor would have to pay for the term of the lease + in some jurisdictions the lessor would have to pay any additional costs the lessor incurs while mitigating such as advertising costs.)</p>\n<p>You might be able to sue to recover if you paid out your lease, moved out and the landlord obtained a new tenant before your lease would have expired since you would have a right to the property for the term of the lease. This would be a case when accelerated rent would be an issue. If you paid out your lease, you have a right to that property. In the case of accelerated rent, you have paid out your lease.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"http://www.housing-rights.org/lien.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Since the Texas Property Code does not define abandonment</a>, it is up to either the individual lease or a judge to define it. It is important for a landlord to act carefully when declaring abandonment, especially if the lease does not define it. If nothing exists in the lease about abandonment and the landlord removes all of the tenant’s property, a court could consider it to be an illegal eviction in violation of the tenant’s rights. This, of course, would be judged on a case-by-case basis.</p>\n<p>Abandonment is defined under the TAA lease as when:</p>\n<p>Everybody appears to have moved out in the landlord’s reasonable judgment;\nClothes, furniture, and personal belongings have been substantially removed from the dwelling; and\nNo one has been in the dwelling for five consecutive days while the rent is due and unpaid.\nor\nA dwelling is abandoned 10 days after the death of a sole resident.\nThe TAA lease continues: abandonment ends the tenant’s right of possession for all purposes and gives the landlord the immediate right to clean up; make repairs; relet the dwelling; determine any security deposit deductions; and remove property left in the dwelling. See also ATC’s Security Deposit Law brochure.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "residential-lease", "damage-mitigation", "texas", "real-estate", "sublease" ]

[ { "answer_id": 944, "body": "<p>According to Dorf in \"<a href=\"https://books.google.com/books?id=qOSzUg6soG4C&amp;pg=PA82&amp;lpg=PA82&amp;dq=Texas%20v.%20White%20and%20%22revolution%22&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=hyJ4PJMMgQ&amp;sig=VyOKjMiuW7vVm8NJtSLTBgP8tzk&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=8I2aVaD5MY7boASBrYj4CA&amp;ved=0CEEQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&amp;q=Texas%20v.%20White%20and%20%22revolution%22&amp;f=false\" rel=\"nofollow\">No Litmus Test: Law Versus Politics in the Twenty-first Century</a>\" revolution \"is the repudiation of the existing legal regime.\" He goes on to state that \"any change at all could be authorized by a successful revolution &ndash; in the sense that after the revolution the legal rules that existed under the prior constitution would have no further independent force.\" </p>\n\n<p>This essentially means that revolution is the complete dissolution of the then current government. Without a government, there can be no upholding of laws. Revolution is different from secession and civil war in that secession and civil war leave the existing government intact but repudiate that government's control over the seceding parties. </p>\n\n<p>A secession can occur without a revolution (though not in the US, as that case states). Likewise, a revolution can occur without a war. Secession can occur with or without a war. And a revolution can occur with a war and without secession.</p>\n\n<p>Succinctly: civilians revolt, factions war. </p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "constitutional-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 955, "body": "<p>Federal courts <em>can</em> issue opinions on any issue for which an appellant has standing. They tend to rule only as broadly as necessary to decide the particular <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_or_Controversy_Clause\" rel=\"nofollow\">case or controversy</a> in front of them. Federal courts can also deny appeals. For both of those reasons, they cannot be <em>forced</em> or <em>made</em> to define the limits of reasonable search.</p>\n\n<p>However, the US Supreme Court has clarified many times whether a particular behaviour constituted a search, and if so, whether it constituted a reasonable search.</p>\n\n<p>In <em>Katz v. United States</em> 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the court held that attaching a listening device to the exterior of a telephone booth constituted a search, and that it was an unreasonable search.</p>\n\n<p>In <em>Smith v. Maryland</em> 442 U.S. 735 (1979), the court held that using a pen register to obtain the records of phone numbers that were dialed by an individual was not a search.</p>\n\n<p>In <em>United States v. Jones</em> 565 U.S. ___ (2012), the court held that installing a GPS on Jones's car was a trespass and <em>per se</em> an unreasonable search.</p>\n\n<p>In <em>Heien v. North Carolina</em> 574 U.S. ___ (2014), the court held that a seizure and subsequent search is reasonable if based on an officer's reasonable mistake of law.</p>\n\n<p>There are many more.</p>\n\n<p>As an example of the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly avoiding a broader ruling than necessary to decide the case before them, see <em>United States v. Jones</em>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>It may be that achieving the same result through electronic means, without an accompanying trespass, is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy, but the present case does not require us to answer that question.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It was possible to decide the case based solely on the trespassory test, so the majority didn't go further.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 956, "body": "<p>Federal courts are not permitted to issue abstract opinions divorced from an actual legal dispute between two parties; the Constitution restricts federal judicial power to actual cases and controversies. Courts can decide broad questions <em>when it is necessary or useful to decide an actual case</em>, but only when it's necessary (anything not necessary for the holding <em>in that case</em> is not binding precedent). It is not possible to force a federal court to issue a broader opinion than needed to resolve the actual issue before the court; you can ask them to clarify the law for the sake of precedent, but can't make them do it. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "common-law", "privacy", "constitutional-law", "us-constitution" ]

[ { "answer_id": 958, "body": "<p>In order to answer your question we have to parse out an exact meaning for the individual fragments of the question: \"Teach someone to play a copyrighted song\"</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>What do we mean by \"teach someone\" here? </li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>YouTube is a public medium unless you're using some unlisted videos or have some kind of external website where you are using YouTube strictly as a video hosting service. There is no one-on-one teacher-to-student interaction here outside of the possibility of some post-facto comments about the video.</p>\n\n<p>Is it more apt to say \"publish an educational demonstration for ad revenue\" for this part of your question?</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Now we can evaluate the second part of your question, \"[Teach someone] to play a copyrighted song on guitar?\"</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Are you teaching guitarists what the notes of the song (the score) are or are you teaching them specific guitar techniques?</p>\n\n<p>In complaints responsible for taking guitar tablature sites offline NMPA President David Israelite asserted that \"[u]nauthorised use of lyrics and tablature deprives the songwriter of the ability to make a living and is no different than stealing.\" <a href=\"http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4508158.stm\" rel=\"nofollow\">(Song sites face legal crackdown, BBC News)</a></p>\n\n<p>While you are adding your own educational value by demonstrating specific instructional techniques you are also putting the songwriter's score out in a published and public format outside of their control and earning ad revenue in the process.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>The 2011 NMPA royalty sharing agreement you linked to was just one settlement as part of ongoing litigation between the groups—with the most recent being a large settlement related to revenues related to \"cover songs\". In no way does the existence of such a settlement mean that you aren't still expected to obtain permission or seek agreeable revenue sharing terms for use of any material.</p>\n\n<p>Guitar instructors have been getting paid to teach their students to play copyrighted songs on guitar for decades but the difference here is that you are seeking to publish videos of yourself playing the artists' content and getting paid for people to watch them.</p>\n\n<p><em>Opinion:</em> While I've learned a lot from these types of instructional videos myself and would love to make a \"fair use\" argument for you here I think it would still require you to make an effort in good faith to seek permission to use an artist's content. For artists within the mainstream music industry this may be practically impossible for you as an individual to negotiate but you could have luck with more progressive artists who are working on the digital frontiers outside of the industry.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 957, "body": "<p>First off, a court in the United States does not care if the federal law was good policy or bad policy. Courts do not make those decisions. A court cannot strike down a law for being a stupid idea; it can only strike down the law for violating a more fundamental law (i.e. state and federal constitutions, including striking down state laws for going against federal laws). Courts are not in the business of evaluating whether marijuana is dangerous, because that determination was made by Congress. As long as the law itself does not violate the Constitution (and being stupid doesn't make it violate the Constitution), a court cannot strike it down.</p>\n\n<p>If a law is validly passed under the Constitution, a court likewise cannot decline to strike down a state law that contradicts it. Valid federal laws preempt state law. This is not seriously disputed by courts.</p>\n\n<p>The question before the court is whether or not the CSA forbids Colorado from involving itself in the marijuana business. This is a question about federal law. While the Supreme Court will make the ultimate decision themselves, the US government generally submits an <em>amicus</em> brief on just about every Supreme Court case involving federal laws, outlining its position. The purpose of the brief is to get more arguments, in order to provide more for the court to think about. It is not even a tiny bit unusual for non-parties to submit briefs, and it would be incredibly unusual for the US to <em>not</em> submit one here.</p>\n\n<p>The Supreme Court cannot do something like jury nullification^*. That's not their role in the world. No Supreme Court decision can say \"well, this is the law, and it's clear, but we don't like it and are doing it another way.\" Their duty is to apply the actual law, not what they want the law to be. What they <em>can</em> do, though, is stretch words and make arguments to fit what they think it should be. Often, in cases they don't want to handle, they end up finding some technical point to avoid setting broad precedent. But they don't get to simply not apply the law because they disagree. </p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>^* Technically, if they do that, they can't be overturned; however, it's just something that is not done.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 951, "body": "<p>Requesting an amicus brief from the Attorney General effectively allows the court to determine the length and strength of arguments the Federal Government might bring. Additionally, the law is never clear enough as it is. That is why courts exist, to apply current law to the facts as it determines them, in the case before it.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Can Colorado use the well-known evidence that the federal law is simply outdated and was never really correct to start with, contradicting medical advice since the start?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>No. Putting the implicit bias in the question aside, no matter how \"outdated\" or not \"really correct\" a law is, a court cannot strike the law down. A law can only be struck down if it is unconstitutional. (e.g. in the recent ACA case, Roberts railed against the ACA but stated that it is constitutional).</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Likewise, if some states do feel that prosecuting their own citizens who visit Colorado is a worthy pastime for their border cities, why don't they simply put their money where their mouth is, by raising the taxes on their own residents, to make sure their border cities have adequate lock-up facilities?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Firstly, they wouldn't need to raise taxes, just increase fines on those coming across the boarder. I am sure there have been similar issues with Blue Laws, though I cannot find any examples at the moment. However, this may have implications on free travel between the states. Since that is not questioned here, I will not get into that. </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Is the Supreme Court at all allowed to do something like the Jury Nullification here, to declare that the justice would not be served if the outdated federal law was to preempt the realities of the many states?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>No. As I stated earlier, no matter how much the court disagrees with a law, if the law is not unconstitutional, it will not be overturned. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "us-supreme-court", "preemption", "colorado" ]

[ { "answer_id": 948, "body": "<p>Generally, contract terms and conditions must be legible, especially when one is trying to enforce the contract. If the court cannot read the contract as written, it can create its own reasonable terms. </p>\n\n<p>According to <a href=\"http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/can-formatting-and-font-size-in-your-con-16212/\" rel=\"nofollow\">JD Supra</a>(this is not for a rental lease, but a business opportunity contract):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>In one instance, a Texas business opportunity contract must have certain information in ten point type, including: the terms of payment; a detailed description of the acts or services that the seller will perform for the purchaser; the seller’s principal business address; the name and address of the seller’s registered agent in Texas; the delivery date; and a description of the nature of the buy-back or security agreement, if there has been one represented by the seller. <a href=\"http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/BC/4%20(2)/51/E/51.201\" rel=\"nofollow\">TEX. BUS. &amp; COM. CODE § 51.201</a>.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "united-states", "residential-lease", "texas", "real-estate" ]

[ { "answer_id": 954, "body": "<p>That is <em>quid pro quo</em> corruption and/or bribery, and is a felony.</p>\n\n<p>See (<em>inter alia</em>) <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201\" rel=\"nofollow\">18 U.S.C. §201</a>, specifically (c)(1)(A), which imposes a fine or jail to anyone who:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states" ]

[ { "answer_id": 942, "body": "<p>See <em><a href=\"http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-545.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Golan v. Holder</a></em> 565 U. S. ____ (2012).</p>\n<p>The question was whether Congress could pass a law that caused works in the public domain to regain copyright.</p>\n<p>The Supreme Court held that:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The text of the Copyright Clause does not exclude application of copyright protection to works in the public domain.</p>\n<p>...</p>\n<p>Historical practice corroborates the Court’s reading of the Copyright Clause to permit the protection of previously unprotected works.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So, yes, works can come out of public domain and into Copyright protection.</p>\n<p>What about people who had been relying on the works not having copyright (i.e. people who had created derivative works, etc.)? That depends on how Congress intends the hypothetical law to apply to them. In the law in question in <em>Golan v. Holder</em>, Congress planned ahead for this, and included provisions for it in the law (quoting from <em>Golan v. Holder</em>):</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Reliance parties may continue to exploit a restored work until the owner of the restored copyright gives notice of intent to enforce—either by filing with the U. S. Copyright Office within two years of restoration, or by actually notifying the reliance party. After that, reliance parties may continue to exploit existing copies for a grace period of one year. Finally, anyone who, before the URAA’s enactment, created a “derivative work” based on a restored work may indefinitely exploit the derivation upon payment to the copyright holder of “reasonable compensation,” to be set by a district judge if the parties cannot agree.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Last, could Congress extend copyright for 10,000 years? In principle, the Supreme Court has not said anything against this, but they have indicated that there is some line beyond which a copyright term would no longer be considered a &quot;limited time&quot; as required by the Constitution.</p>\n<p>In <em>Golan v. Holder</em> they mention in passing hypothetical successive re-applications of Copyright to a work after it expires, calling it &quot;legislative misbehavior&quot;:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>the hypothetical legislative misbehavior petitioners posit is far afield from the case before us.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And in <em>Eldred v. Ashcroft</em>, they mention in passing hypothetical unlimited successive extensions of copyright, each of limited time, again calling that &quot;legislative misbehavior&quot;:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Concerning petitioners' assertion that Congress could evade the limitation on its authority by stringing together an unlimited number of &quot;limited Times,&quot; the court stated that such legislative misbehavior clearly was not before it.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>I could imagine a court holding that the &quot;limited times&quot; clause in the Constitution does not permit Congress to extend copyright for 10,000 years, which is longer than the existence of the U.S. or any countries or even civilizations that the founders were aware of at the time of the Constitution's writing.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 941, "body": "<p>First, this is a pretty broad question, but I will try to answer. </p>\n\n<p>Briefly (<a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Duration_of_copyright\" rel=\"nofollow\">from the wiki page</a>): </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>All copyrightable works published in the United States before 1923 are in the public domain;[18] works created before 1978 but not published until recently may be protected until 2047.[19] For works that received their copyright before 1978, a renewal had to be filed in the work's 28th year with the Copyright Office for its term of protection to be extended. The need for renewal was eliminated by the Copyright Renewal Act of 1992, but works that had already entered the public domain by non-renewal did not regain copyright protection. Therefore, works published before 1964 that were not renewed are in the public domain.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Under very rare circumstances, one may <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/104A\" rel=\"nofollow\">regain copyright protection</a>. However, </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>a reliance party may continue to exploit that derivative work for the duration of the restored copyright if the reliance party pays to the owner of the restored copyright reasonable compensation for conduct which would be subject to a remedy for infringement but for the provisions of this paragraph. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>... as determined by a US District Court.</p>\n\n<p>With all that being said, there would be no change in the status of Shakespeare's works. (This would be more subject to the TRIPS than US law since Shakespeare is not from the US.)</p>\n\n<p>Would works that lost copyright protection regain it? \"Probably\" Not. Your question asks for speculation about how the legislatures would change copyright law. If all that was changed was the length of the copyright, then no, they would not gain protection. However, if you can get congress to extend the copyright for 10k years, you can probably get them to allow owners to regain a lost copyright. </p>\n\n<p>Derivative works have their own copyright on materials not subject to the copyright of the main material.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 950, "body": "<p>According to <a href=\"http://tenanthub.com/infestations/\" rel=\"nofollow\">Tenant Hub</a>, pest control is the landlord's responsibility. <a href=\"http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-required-landlord-disclosures.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">NOLO</a> states that:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>When the rental agreement is signed, landlord must provide tenant with any pest control company disclosure landlord has received, which describes the pest to be controlled, pesticides used and their active ingredients, a warning that pesticides are toxic, and the frequency of treatment under any contract for periodic service. (Cal. Civ. Code § 1940.8, Cal. Bus. &amp; Prof. Code § 8538)</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It therefore seems that landlords would indirectly indicate there was a past infestation by the disclosure of pest control measures currently in place. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "california", "rent" ]

[ { "answer_id": 439, "body": "<p>Algorithms are not subject to copyright. A particular implementation can be copyrighted, but an algorithm itself can't be copyrighted. Someone re-implementing the algorithm with their own code has done nothing to give you copyright claims against their work, and is not bound by any software license you use. That's what patents are for. </p>\n", "score": 13 } ]

[ "licensing", "software", "patents", "gpl" ]

[ { "answer_id": 934, "body": "<p>It is mandatory for the employer to provide sufficient restrooms (“<em>cabinets d'aisance</em>”), as per <a href=\"http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do?idSectionTA=LEGISCTA000018531984&amp;cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006072050&amp;dateTexte=20130918\" rel=\"nofollow\">article R4228-10</a>. Other provisions regulate evacuation, ventilation, heating, disabled access, etc.</p>\n\n<p>There is no provision regarding when employees are permitted to use the restrooms. There can't be a single rule that works for every profession: some jobs don't let you leave your post whenever you like (e.g. machine operator, driver, guard, teacher, etc.).</p>\n\n<p>The most common dispute regarding restroom use is whether employees should be paid during that time. Some employers want to count restroom use as unpaid pause time. Strictly speaking, that's legal: an employee who is in a restroom is not at the employer's disposal, therefore this doesn't count as work time. However enforcing this is often logistically difficult and wildly unpopular, so in practice it's only done in places where employees must clock out to reach a restroom.</p>\n\n<p>I could only find one case with actual jurisprudence. In 1995, an industrial butchering company (Bigard) decided to <a href=\"http://www.liberation.fr/economie/1995/08/09/greve-contre-le-pipi-a-heures-fixespause-pipi-a-8h05-11h20-et-14h05-c-est-le-reglement-chez-bigard_141877\" rel=\"nofollow\">limit restroom breaks to three fixed times a day</a>. This was, as you might expect, unpopular; the employees went on strike, and <a href=\"http://www.liberation.fr/economie/1996/03/19/les-pauses-pipi-ne-se-decretent-pas-les-prud-hommes-de-quimper-ont-donne-tort-aux-abattoirs-bigard_165541\" rel=\"nofollow\">eventually the labor court struck down this measure</a>.</p>\n\n<p>That's a precedent, but it doesn't seem to have made its way to the appellate court. Your case is also slightly different in that the restrooms would only be inaccessible for an hour, which is shorter than in the Bigard case. So legally speaking, it isn't clear who will win. You'll have a better chance of success by banking on the unpopularity of the measure. Talk with your colleagues and your representatives and shop stewards. Point out that employees who are trying to hold it in are unlikely to be at the top of their productivity.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 896, "body": "<p>Not sure about France, but I would assume that it is legal if they have alternative restrooms for use that meet the laws in the area.</p>\n\n<p>They will still have to allow you to use the nearest restroom in the area ( and pay you while you walk there). </p>\n\n<p>The reason is because the bathroom in theory could may not be accessible for normal reasons such as maintenance, normal cleaning, busted pipes, ect. They would still have to provide reasonable accommodations for your needs to use a restroom. This may include having the other sex bathroom be joint use with some sort of office policy on how to enter, an alternate bathroom, so on. Cleaning of a restroom is normal and will shut it down from operations, that does not remove their obligation to provide adequate restroom services.</p>\n\n<p>Him saying you could hold it until work ends could be a violation of your ADA (Not sure what the equivalent in France is) and Labor rights. I would have him put the statement in writing and then talk to the labor department. If he is doing things like that, they most likely are violating other rights.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "france", "labor-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 931, "body": "<p>Template leases and other such forms fall under the moniker of association member services. I don't have a copy of the association's bylaws but can't imagine how membership in the association would imply forfeiting the right to enter into a valid contract of one's own choosing (<em>i.e.</em> one that satisfies mutual assent, offer &amp; acceptance, consideration, capacity, and legal purpose).</p>\n\n<p><strong>Edit:</strong> In <em>Texas Apartment Association v. U.S.</em>, 869 F.2d. 884 (5th Cir. 1989), para. 6 states \"TAA's bylaws prohibit local affiliates from marketing competing forms or manuals, although some members prepare documents for their own use.\"</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "residential-lease", "texas", "taa" ]

[ { "answer_id": 929, "body": "<p>This is not a good question for two reasons:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Criminal sentencing guidelines vary by jurisdiction and can be readily found by searching for <code>sentencing guidelines</code> and the jurisdiction in question.</li>\n<li>Sentencing \"typically\" depends on factors beyond the crime committed. These <a href=\"http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/factors-considered-in-determining-sentences.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">commonly include</a>:\n\n<ul>\n<li>whether the offender is a \"first-time\" or repeat offender</li>\n<li>whether the offender was an accessory (helping the main offender) or the main offender</li>\n<li>whether the offender committed the crime under great personal stress or duress</li>\n<li>whether anyone was hurt, and whether the crime was committed in a manner that was unlikely to result in anyone being hurt</li>\n<li>whether the offender was particularly cruel to a victim, or particularly destructive, etc.</li>\n<li>whether the offender is genuinely contrite or remorseful</li>\n</ul></li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 933, "body": "<p>According to the <a href=\"http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&amp;Search_String=&amp;URL=0800-0899/0810/Sections/0810.02.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">Florida Statutes, section 810.02</a>, this is probably a felony in the second degree, although there are circumstances you have not covered (using a vehicle to make entry, or causing sufficient damage, or assaulting an occupant of the structure, or during a state of emergency) that could make it a felony in the first degree. The relevant sentence is covered by either section 775.082 or section 775.084.</p>\n\n<p>According to <a href=\"http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&amp;Search_String=&amp;URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.082.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">section 775.082</a>, a felony in the first degree carries a sentence of up to 30 years in prison unless otherwise provided by statute; section 810.02 provides otherwise and first-degree burglary carries a sentence of up to life imprisonment. A felony in the second degree carries a sentence of up to 15 years in prison.</p>\n\n<p>If this is the third felony the offender is convicted of, <a href=\"http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&amp;Search_String=&amp;URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.084.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">section 75.084 (habitual felony offenders)</a> applies and the potential sentence is life imprisonment for first-degree felony burglary, or up to 30 years for second-degree.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "florida", "sentencing" ]

[ { "answer_id": 903, "body": "<p>If you want to protect yourself or any property interests you may have in this circumstance you have to talk to a lawyer. You cannot get (or trust) legal advice from the internet.</p>\n\n<p>I will, however, make the following personal observations:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>I only provide a W-9 to people who are paying me money, and who request it as a condition of paying me. I don't know of a <em>legal requirement</em> to supply it after the fact. However, not providing it to someone who did pay you more than $600 in a tax year could certainly make it difficult for them to comply with <em>their</em> tax filing obligations.</li>\n<li>I do not sign any agreements, assignments, or contracts, without what I consider to be fair consideration. E.g., if on leaving a job (as has happened) I am asked by a former employer to sign something that I am not already obligated to sign due to some prior contract, then I negotiate what is commonly called a \"severance package.\" They pay me and/or extend benefits, and I sign something that limits their liability.</li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 10 }, { "answer_id": 928, "body": "<p>Is it normal? Some of the forms can be normal to have requested before leaving.\nWill they impact your current stock options? They should not. Your vesting is a separate contract. I would review it to make sure.</p>\n\n<p>1) Terms of Resignation\nThis could be normal. You are not required to sign this form. This may be a severance package of some type, which may be in your benefit. I would have a lawyer review this document first.</p>\n\n<p>2) Employee Invention Assignment and Confidentiality Agreement\nThis should have been signed when you were hired on. not when you are leaving. Unless it is apart of something larger, I would be cautious of this document.</p>\n\n<p>3) 2014 W9 form</p>\n\n<p>W9 forms are TIN verification. It sounds like there accounting is missing some documents. No this is very odd to have to fill out unless you are changing your tax status. </p>\n\n<p>You should bring all of the documents to a lawyer and have him/her review them with you.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "california", "contract-law", "employment" ]

[ { "answer_id": 925, "body": "<p>The Declaration of Independence is often cited (along with the Federalist Papers) when the court is attempting to justify a particular interpretation of The Constitution by looking at the intent of the drafters.</p>\n\n<p>For example, in <em>Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission</em> 576 U.S. ____ (2015), in establishing that the people have ultimate sovereignty quoted the Declaration of Independence:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Following that (after also quoting some text from the Constitution), Justice Ginsberg concludes:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>In this light, it would be perverse to interpret the term “Legislature” in the Elections Clause so as to exclude lawmaking by the people, particularly where such lawmaking is intended to check legislators’ ability to choose the district lines they run in...</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>As a second example, Justice Scalia, in his dissent in <em>Obergefell v. Hodges</em> 576 U.S. ___ (2015), refers to the Declaration of Independence:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-states" ]

[ { "answer_id": 922, "body": "<p>According to the FCC Encyclopedia, <a href=\"https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/types-broadband-connections\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Types of Broadband Connections</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The term broadband commonly refers to high-speed Internet access that is always on and faster than the traditional dial-up access. Broadband includes several high-speed transmission technologies such as:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Digital Subscriber Line (DSL)</li>\n<li>Cable Modem</li>\n<li>Fiber</li>\n<li>Wireless</li>\n<li>Satellite</li>\n<li>Broadband over Powerlines (BPL)</li>\n</ul>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So yes, it is. High-speed is essentially synonymous to broadband under this definition. Companies likely use high-speed in advertising more often because most non-tech people out there buying Internet services won't know what broadband means. But whatever high-speed Internet technology the company is using, it all falls under the broadband regulations.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "internet", "fcc" ]

[ { "answer_id": 915, "body": "<p>There should be no more lawyers in an event such as that described by the OP. The Legal Profession, by its own constitution, exists to ensure that everybody can access our adversarial justice system through a diligent and competent advocate.</p>\n\n<p>For example, among the <a href=\"http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_preamble_scope.html\">responsibilities stipulated by the American Bar Association</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>[A]ll lawyers should devote professional time and resources and use\n civic influence to ensure equal access to our system of justice for\n all those who because of economic or social barriers cannot afford or\n secure adequate legal counsel.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>There are famous examples of lawyers, perhaps reluctantly and even at their personal peril, honoring their professional obligation to advocate in court on behalf of unpopular people and causes. One that comes to mind is John Adams defending the British soldiers who perpetrated the Boston Massacre.</p>\n\n<p>Of course, lawyers are people too so I wouldn't be surprised if there are counterexamples. But there <em>shouldn't</em> be any counterexamples unless every last lawyer in a jurisdiction resigned his professional membership and hung his head in shame.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "lawyer", "right-to-counsel" ]

[ { "answer_id": 902, "body": "<p>I am not a Lawyer, I am not your Lawyer.</p>\n\n<p>This really depends on the country in which the company owning the website is domiciled and where it operates.\nFor example, if the company is based in the U.S. and only markets in the U.S., only U.S. laws apply. If the company is based in the U.S. and markets in the U.K., they may be subject to U.K. laws. Assuming that the company is based in the U.S.:</p>\n\n<p>If the website does not market itself as a trading platform nor gives any reasonable expectation that it is a trading platform (e.g., by adding \"contact to buy buttons\"), then the company would have no reasonable liability for any transactions. They may still be involved with any legal case that deals with the transaction (emails and such). If Member Y made such claim, they would have to take it up with the Member X in court. </p>\n\n<p>Think about it this way: You see an item on Pinterest you like, you then contact the use to buy it, that user sells the item to you, you don't like it. Pinterest would not be liable for the damages done. </p>\n\n<p>Even if the site was a trading platform, they don't have any reasonable liability for goods sold on there site. Only direct sellers have liability. </p>\n\n<p>As an added protection, your TOS should include something like:</p>\n\n<p><code>site</code> is not a venue for commerce.</p>\n\n<p><code>site</code> is not responsible for communication. <code>site</code> does not pre-screen users (except for services that require an application) or the content or information provided by users. If users wish to conduct transaction on the site, <code>site</code> does not transfer legal ownership of items from the seller to the buyer. You may also wish to consider using a third-party escrow service or services that provide additional user verification.</p>\n\n<p>You agree that <code>site</code> is NOT a venue for commerce and as such is not responsible or liable for any content, for example, data, text, information, usernames, graphics, images, photographs, profiles, audio, video, items, and links posted by you, other users, or outside parties on <code>site</code>. You use the <code>site</code> service at your own risk.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 921, "body": "<p>There's a different way of approaching questions like this that could obviate what may be an expensive and unsettled legal question:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>Try to buy liability insurance. Let the insurance company underwrite, price, and assume the legal risk.</p></li>\n<li><p>Take advantage of the corporate shield. Maintain a minimum of assets in the company so that it is not an attractive target for litigation. Because being legally right is not an airtight defense against being attacked in civil litigation.</p></li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "internet", "liability", "international" ]

[ { "answer_id": 920, "body": "<p>What you are talking about is <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights\" rel=\"nofollow\">personality rights</a>, not copyright. Personality rights laws cover the usage of someone's name, image, or likeness; the actual laws vary greatly from country to country, so your best bet is to consult a lawyer in the countries you're interested in.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright", "intellectual-property" ]

[ { "answer_id": 910, "body": "<p>Is there any legal remedy? Yes. What you describe is an open-and-shut case of <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement\" rel=\"nofollow\">copyright infringement</a>.</p>\n\n<p>The question is how much effort and expense is involved in dealing with this. At the simple end of things, if the webpage host is in the United States, you can send a <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act#Take_down_and_put_back_provisions\" rel=\"nofollow\">DMCA takedown notice</a> to get the page removed; at the complex end, if the host is in a country with a lax copyright regime that isn't on good terms with your country (say, you're in the US and the host is in Russia), you may be looking at a decades-long international copyright infringement lawsuit to get the page taken down.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 884, "body": "<p><a href=\"http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1403161/000119312507212797/dex31.htm\">Visa is incorporated in Delaware.</a> <a href=\"http://investor.mastercard.com/files/doc_downloads/organizational_documents/Certificate-of-Incorporation-of-MasterCard-Incorporated.pdf\">So is MasterCard.</a> In addition, both are headquartered in the US, have huge quantities of assets in the US, do lots and lots of business in the US in a highly regulated sector, and their very <em>existence</em> depends on their ability to interact with the US banking system.</p>\n\n<p>The US has the authority to regulate all of these things, under literally any definition of sovereignty. Therefore, they must comply with sanctions.</p>\n", "score": 8 }, { "answer_id": 894, "body": "<p>The U.S. can't make a company \"give away\" market share.</p>\n\n<p>The U.S. does have the right to prevent a company from doing business in countries X and Y, in line with its foreign policy or other legal (e.g human rights) mandates.</p>\n\n<p>It is then up to the company to design its business plan so that it is not dependent on revenues from countries X and y.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "international", "finance", "sanctions" ]

[ { "answer_id": 889, "body": "<p><strong>I'm not a lawyer; I'm not <em>your</em> lawyer.</strong></p>\n<p>It's difficult proving a negative. I can think of at least one case (in Australian real property law) where the formatting in contracts is prescribed, and deviation could render the contract void.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-316\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">UCC § 2-316</a> (&quot;the code&quot;) states that (emphasis mine):</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(2)Subject to subsection (3), to exclude or modify the implied warranty of merchantability or any part of it the language must mention merchantability and <strong>in case of a writing must be conspicuous</strong>, and to exclude or modify any implied warranty of fitness the exclusion <strong>must be by a writing and conspicuous</strong>. Language to exclude all implied warranties of fitness is sufficient if it states, for example, that &quot;There are no warranties which extend beyond the description on the face hereof.&quot;</p>\n<p>(3)Notwithstanding subsection (2)<br />\n(a) unless the circumstances indicate otherwise, all implied warranties are excluded by expressions like &quot;as is&quot;, &quot;with all faults&quot; or other language which in common understanding calls the buyer'sattention to the exclusion of warranties and makes plain that there is no implied warranty; and ...</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The code simply states that it must be conspicuous. Putting all in bold or all caps would certainly do that if it distinguished it from the rest of the text. I'm sure you can think of other ways to make text conspicuous.</p>\n<p>If you remove this formatting from the exclusion and it is not otherwise conspicuous, the end user may be entitled to remedies.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "warranties", "ucc", "contract-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 872, "body": "<p>A bankrupt company's assets are transferred to its creditors. This includes intangible assets such as trademarks, copyrights, and other intellectual property.</p>\n\n<p>Whoever ends up with the rights to the game can continue to market and distribute it, or use legal means to prevent others from doing so.</p>\n", "score": 24 }, { "answer_id": 882, "body": "<p>My understanding (IANAL, but was told some of this by a lawyer) is that (at least in England) unclaimed assets after a liquidation vest in the state as <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_vacantia\" rel=\"nofollow\">bona vacantia</a> and intellectual property that the liquidator can't sell (not unusual) is included in this. </p>\n\n<p>I see the UK government now has a department that deals with this and will consider offers for such property: <a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/buy-intellectual-property-bvc8\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.gov.uk/buy-intellectual-property-bvc8</a></p>\n\n<p>No idea if France takes a similar approach.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "intellectual-property", "bankruptcy", "france" ]

[ { "answer_id": 881, "body": "<p>According to the document <a href=\"http://www.tout-paris.org/nouvelles-regles-terrasses-cafe-12922\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Reglement des etalages et terrasses</a>, page 15, such installations may not exceed 50% of the usable area of the sidewalk, and must leave a contiguous area of at least 1.6 meters in width for pedestrian traffic:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Les installations peuvent être autorisées, soit d’un seul tenant, soit scindées, sans pouvoir excéder 50% de la largeur utile du trottoir. Une zone contiguë d’au moins 1,60 mètre de largeur doit être réservée à la circulation des piétons.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>If you are interested in looking directly at the laws concerned, these can be found at the beginning of the same document:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Les dispositions du présent règlement sont établies en application\n des articles L.2122-1 à L.2122-3 du code général de la Propriété des personnes publiques, L.2512-13, L.2512-14 et L.2213-6 du code général des Collectivités territoriales et de l’article L.113-2 du code de la Voirie routière.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Roughly translated, that means that the rules described in the present document are established by application of the articles L.2122-1 through L.2122-3 of the \"general code of property of public persons\", L.2512-13, L.2512-14 and L.2213-6 of the \"general code of territorial collectivities\" and of article L.113-2 of the highway code.</p>\n\n<p>More links:</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070299&amp;idArticle=LEGIARTI000006361200\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.2122-1</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000006361201&amp;cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070299\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.2122-2</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000006361202&amp;cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070299\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.2122-3</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070633&amp;idArticle=LEGIARTI000020629800\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.2512-13</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000028538329&amp;cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070633\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.2512-14</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000006390184&amp;cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070633\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.2213-6</a></p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070667&amp;idArticle=LEGIARTI000017924078\" rel=\"noreferrer\">L.113-2</a></p>\n", "score": 6 } ]

[ "france", "restaurants" ]

[ { "answer_id": 874, "body": "<p>Go to know that you live in Washington.</p>\n\n<p>Per <a href=\"http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=49.48.210\">RCW 49.48.210</a>, They must give you written notice with their evidence. </p>\n\n<p>Per RCW 49.48.210, section 3, you can (and should) request a review of the employer findings. </p>\n\n<p>Since the employer gave you the money, and you nor they saw any error until now, you may be protected under estoppel (<a href=\"http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=388-02-0495\">WAC 388-02-0495</a>).</p>\n\n<p>In the response letter, I would write something along the lines of</p>\n\n<p>\" [Company Name] has paid IAW my expected rate and acted correctly when I received my money. I have also spent the money in good faith. Indeed, I still cannot see that any overpayment has actually happened. Please send me exact details why you believe that I have been overpaid, and why you believe that estoppel does not apply. Until this manner has been resolved per RCW 49.48.210, section 3, I request that you continue to pay my wages at normal rate for my time. I do not accept liability for the actions or inactions of [company name] and the claimed overpayment.\"</p>\n\n<p>Get receipt that the employer received the notice. </p>\n\n<p>Because it is in review, they don't have the right to garnish your wages.</p>\n\n<p>Challenge everything at the review. If something was changed or edited, challenge that. </p>\n\n<p>I would open up a new thread if they did that much.</p>\n\n<p>Best of luck</p>\n", "score": 11 }, { "answer_id": 19, "body": "<p>From <a href=\"https://money.stackexchange.com/a/48226/11540\">mhoran_psprep’s answer</a> on Personal Finance &amp; Money:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Ask for documentation proving the amount they say you were overpaid, and ask for time to review their claim.</p>\n<p>If it is a large amount that they can prove you owe, and if you were staying, then you could ask for the repayment to be spread over multiple pay checks. This would avoid the situation where you could get a very small check or even a check for zero. Because you are leaving, you could ask for time to reimburse them, but don't count on them agreeing to that deal.</p>\n<p>The lesson is to save all time cards, especially ones in which your hours are not consistent. Also save all pay stubs for the year.</p>\n<p>What you should do now is download all the time card and pay info on the website, before you lose access to it. These should be saved on your home machine, or printed and kept at home. Check to see if they made any time card adjustments. Many systems keep track of all changes made by the employee and by management; both before and after the employee signs the time card. If there are change you should be able to ask them to explain the changes.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Addendum: if the company can prove that they did overpay you, then generally, <strong>yes</strong>, you do need to pay them back. You should likely retain a lawyer immediately to protect as many rights as possible.</p>\n", "score": 8 } ]

[ "united-states", "labor-law", "salary" ]

[ { "answer_id": 859, "body": "<p>For interstate and federal highways at least, there are regulations. For example, <a href=\"http://www.metro.us/new-york/times-square-without-billboards/zsJoed---rP5clYN58layE/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the billboards in Times Square are illegal</a>.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>But it turns out this billboard, and others plastering Times Square, may actually be illegal. Under a federal highway beautification law, the billboards are too big – the law states that [billboards] should not be larger than 1200 square feet.</p>\n<p>Last week, the city’s transportation commissioner said the billboards may have to be taken down, or New York could risk losing ten percent of its federal highway funds.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/23/131\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Highway Beautification Act</a> and various amendments can be referenced <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Beautification_Act\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">here</a>.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-states" ]

[ { "answer_id": 863, "body": "<p>While <a href=\"http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2010/8/23/trade-dress-its-all-about-looks/\">a gun's appearance can have protection under \"Trade Dress,\"</a> in addition to having design patent protection, <a href=\"http://www.arentfox.com/newsroom/alerts/video-game-developer%E2%80%99s-unauthorized-use-trade-dress-protected-first-amendment\">at least one video game has been found in court to have \"fair use\" protection for trade dress</a>: See <a href=\"http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1485435.html\"><em>E.S.S. Entertainment 2000, Inc. v. Rock Star Videos, Inc., et al.</em></a>.</p>\n\n<p>However, to determine the legality of a specific use of intellectual property you would have to consult a competent lawyer.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "intellectual-property" ]

[ { "answer_id": 856, "body": "<p>The constitution \"does not confer the franchise [the right to vote for President] on \"U.S. citizens\" but on \"Electors\" who are to be \"appoint[ed]\" by each \"State\". (Rosa v. United States, 417 F.3d 145 (1st Cir. P.R. 2005))</p>\n\n<p>Thus, since <em>no</em> citizen has the right to vote for President, it isn't the case that Puerto Rico's citizens are being treated differently in this regard. It is just that Puerto Rico has no representatives in the Electoral College.</p>\n", "score": 9 } ]

[ "united-states", "us-supreme-court", "human-rights", "puerto-rico" ]

[ { "answer_id": 853, "body": "<h1>I'm not a lawyer; I'm <em>not your lawyer</em> ¹</h1>\n\n<p>For the avoidance of doubt, the thrust of this debate is:</p>\n\n<h3>By placing a logo associated with a certain political movement near my user profile, does StackExchange violate Section 4(c) of the <a href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode\" rel=\"nofollow\">CC BY-SA 3.0</a>?</h3>\n\n<p>Subscriber Content is Content that is contributed by StackExchange users. The relevant sections of CC BY-SA 3.0 (emphasis added) are: </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p><strong>c.</strong> ... The credit required by this Section 4(c) may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided, however, that in the case of a Adaptation or Collection, at a minimum such credit will appear, if a credit for all contributing authors of the Adaptation or Collection appears, then as part of these credits and in a manner at least as prominent as the credits for the other contributing authors. For the avoidance of doubt, You may only use the credit required by this Section for the purpose of attribution in the manner set out above and, <strong>by exercising Your rights under this License, You may not implicitly or explicitly assert or imply any connection with, sponsorship or endorsement by the Original Author, Licensor and/or Attribution Parties, as appropriate, of You or Your use of the Work, without the separate, express prior written permission of the Original Author, Licensor and/or Attribution Parties.</strong><br>\n <strong>d.</strong> Except as otherwise agreed in writing by the Licensor or as may be otherwise permitted by applicable law, if You Reproduce, Distribute or Publicly Perform the Work either by itself or as part of any Adaptations or Collections, <strong>You must not distort, mutilate, modify or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation</strong>...</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<h3>Does changing the logo on all pages imply an endorsement of the site/organisation by the user?</h3>\n\n<p>It is likely, though not definite, that this positioning of the logo will imply that the user endorses the website. However, actions taken by the user - such as creating an account, accepting the Terms, contributing content - are likely to affirm this view.</p>\n\n<h3>Does changing the logo imply that the site/organisation supports a particular political view?</h3>\n\n<p>Again, it is likely, not definite, that changing the logo will imply that the site/organisation supports a particular political view.</p>\n\n<h2>Does changing the logo impute support of a political view to the user?</h2>\n\n<p>In this case, however, it is <strong><em>highly unlikely</em></strong> that the change of logo would impute to the user support of the political view.</p>\n\n<p>In a case such as this, onus of proof is on the plaintiff - were this claim brought in court, it would need to be proven on the balance of probability (or, less likely, on the preponderance of evidence) that a reasonable person would impute support of the marriage equality (and perhaps some other) agenda to the user. <em>Reasonable</em> person does not mean any <em>particular</em> person, nor does it mean, <em>all</em> people.</p>\n\n<p>Part of the imputation must come from the purpose that the user subscribes to the site. Perhaps if StackOverflow were a site that promoted marriage equality or judicial activism, this could support an opinion that the user supports this view. However, StackOverflow is about programming, and programming doesn't imply that kind of agenda. Perhaps if the icon had been changed to something that suggested support for object-oriented programming, the icon <em>could</em> be taken to suggest that the user supports this agenda. Neither does the user's content suggest support for this cause - if they constantly made off-hand remarks about it in their posts, then perhaps, again, a reasonable person may make that imputation.</p>\n\n<p>In any case, the damages awarded to the user would likely be compensatory rather than punitive - the user would need to therefore demonstrate actual suffering or loss as a result of the change of icon. If there were actual damages or loss, the way in which the user contributed to them - perhaps by posting a thread that would be likely to be inflammatory and attract attention to the user - may reduce an award of damages. In the case of no actual suffering or loss, the user could be awarded nominal damages.</p>\n\n<p>Injunctions that could be awarded would need to be proportionate to the breach of license - the court could require references to this user to be anonymised. This is easily done. It is unlikely that the court would require all contribution by the user to be removed - this is unlikely to pass a public interest test.</p>\n\n<p>In relation to placing a disclaimer in the footer, US courts have generally accepted disclaimers if they are positioned such that a reasonable user is likely to see it... In the footer? It's not a great place, and easily missed. It could be better than nothing, though, and may help with the likelihood of someone imputing such opinions to a user. </p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>Essentially - it's extremely unlikely that a reasonable person would impute support of the marriage equality agenda on a user based on a logo change, because the support is not sufficiently connected to the primary purpose of the site, or the user's activities on the site.</p>\n\n<p>Even <strong><em>if</em></strong> the user were successful in showing that this is the likely conclusion of a reasonable person, the remedies available to them would be limited to damages (which limited to actual losses, including suffering), and an injunction (which is likely to be anonymisation).</p>\n\n<p>A disclaimer may not, on its own, actually preserve the validity of the license, but it may be useful on determining the likelihood of a reasonable person imputing opinions to a user. </p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>^{1. This is larger than normal, because I think it is more important than normal.}</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "internet", "creative-commons", "terms-of-service" ]

[ { "answer_id": 849, "body": "<p>For question 2, there is a firm requirement on barristers to inform the client if different counsel would be called for. To quote the Bar Standards Board handbook:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p><strong>rC17</strong>\n Your duty to act in the best interests of each \n client (CD2) includes a duty to consider whether the \n client’s\n best interests are served by different legal representation, and if so, to advise the \n client\n to that \n effect.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The guidance specifically mentions that if something should be handled by more (or less) experienced counsel, there is an ethical duty to tell their client.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 845, "body": "<p>Generally, the client will be hiring the barrister based on the advice of their solicitor; who is definitely not a lay person. That said:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>How do you, as a lay person, decide if your medical condition is serious enough to require a professor or an intern? Similarly, how experienced does your engineer or architect need to be? The answer is the same in all situations - you balance the extra expense with your assessment of the expected outcome.</p></li>\n<li><p>Most professionals genuinely have the best interests of their client in mind because:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Most are genuinely ethical - consultants like barristers more than most because they are not beholden to an employer.</li>\n<li>Its bad for business if it is not. Reputation is <em>everything</em>; consistently take on cases that you can't win or over-service your clients and word gets around.</li>\n<li>Barristers are officers of the court - they need to work with the judges on a regular basis and nothing pisses off a judge more than a barrister who doesn't know the relevant law.</li>\n<li>What makes you think <em>any</em> barrister is short of work? Most will happily pass over a client they can't service properly because there are a dozen more lining up.</li>\n</ol></li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "england-and-wales", "silks", "barristers" ]

[ { "answer_id": 848, "body": "<p>Tenants, where there are more than one, are jointly and severally liable for the payment of the rent and are similarly jointly and severally liable for any laws that \"the property\" breaks.</p>\n\n<p>Joint and several liability means that they are each individually responsible, and the landlord or anyone suing for damages may pursue any or all for satisfaction of the debt (they may go after one if, for example, the others cannot be found). How the tenants settle this between themselves is independent of the lease.</p>\n\n<p>If the tenants have an agreement to split the rent in any proportion (including equal shares) then this <strong>may</strong> amount to a contract. However, family, domestic, social and voluntary agreements are presumed <strong>not</strong> to be intended to legally bind the participants. Whether this presumption would be overturned would depend on the specific facts - the existence of a written contract being a good one.</p>\n\n<p>Notwithstanding, it is difficult to see how paying more rent on a property would entitle you to a greater share of another, different piece of joint property.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "rental-property", "australia" ]

[ { "answer_id": 847, "body": "<p>I see by your comment to @dw1 that you questioning what your insurance company says.</p>\n\n<p>Let's be clear - what your insurance company says is not necessarily the law! @dw1's answer is the correct legal position.</p>\n\n<p>\"Knock for knock\" is a <em>commercial</em> position adopted by Australian insurance companies in order to avoid expensive litigation when, in the scheme of things, who really cares. Now it may be (almost certainly <em>is</em>) a term of your contract with your insurance company that you accept their ruling on this if you want to make a claim on your policy. That would mean you would pay the excess and the accident would be on your record.</p>\n\n<p>You do not have to do this.</p>\n\n<p>If you can <strong>prove</strong> your version of events then you personally can sue the other driver for their negligence. What will almost invariably happen is that they will make a claim on their insurance who will either a) settle or b) defend your claim and launch a counter claim against you (which your insurer will have nothing to do with because you chose to go outside the policy). You then go to court and the magistrate will want to know a) why you are wasting their time with this trivial case and b) what the evidence says. They will either rule or, more likely, refer you to compulsory mediation. At this point you have to ask yourself, do I really have time for this?</p>\n\n<p>I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 485, "body": "<p>All other things equal, the vehicle that enters and occupies the roadway first has the right of way. Absent any negligence or other violation on the red car's part the blue car should be found 100% responsible.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "liability", "australia", "vehicle" ]

[ { "answer_id": 846, "body": "<p>Let's put to bed the myth of privacy that is at the heart of your question: in R v Sotheren (2001) NSWSC 204 Justice Dowd said <strong>“A person, in our society, does not have a right not to be photographed\"</strong></p>\n\n<p>So they can ask you to stop; its bad manners if you don't but it is <strong>not</strong> illegal.</p>\n\n<p>If they are the controller of the property then they can stop you filming from their property but they cannot stop you filming <strong>into</strong> their property from outside (either public land or land where you do have permission).</p>\n\n<p>See <a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/659/how-do-laws-affect-photography-of-non-humans-in-public-when-people-may-be-in-the\">How do laws affect photography of non-humans in public when people may be in the frame?</a> </p>\n", "score": 9 } ]

[ "australia", "privacy" ]

[ { "answer_id": 843, "body": "<p>I speak from the perspective of Australian law - the general thrust should be the same but the nuances will be different.</p>\n\n<p>There are several different ways that intellectual property (IP) is protected, I quote from <em>Australian Business Law, CCH Australia Ltd</em> (my emphasis):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Sales literature, software and promotional film about the product may be protected using <strong>copyright</strong>; its shape or pattern may be registered using a <strong>design</strong>; its invention may be <strong>patented</strong>; its name may be registered as a <strong>trade mark</strong>; and confidential information about it may be protected by action for <strong>breach of confidential information.</strong></p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Copyright exists in \"works\" (ie original literary, dramatic , musical or artistic works) and \"other than works\" (ie sound recordings, cinematograph films, television and sound broadcasts and published editions of works). As you say, a single word or even a short phrase cannot be protected by copyright but an artistic work like a logo incorporating words can, however, in that case it is only the logo that is protected, not the words within it.</p>\n\n<p><strong>They have no copyright in their name</strong></p>\n\n<p>Single words and other things (eg Cadbury's trademark of a specific shade or purple) <em>can</em> be protected by a trade mark. However, unlike copyright which automatically springs into existence upon creation, a trade mark must be registered in the relevant jurisdiction (the UK in your case); a US or Australian trade mark, for example does not prevent anyone dealing with it in the UK. In addition, trade marks are limited to a particular field - if Microsoft is a registered trademark limited to the field of computing (and I'm not saying it is or isn't); if you were to apply the word to your range of feather beds there would be no trade mark protection.</p>\n\n<p>Trade marks are publicly registered; look it up. </p>\n\n<p><strong>If they do not have a trade mark then they cannot take action against you.</strong></p>\n\n<p>Registering a trade mark is complex and can fall over for a number of reasons. First, it has to be capable of \"distinguishing the product\" - if the word(s) you are using are not made up and given that there are at least 2 products in the market similarly described (yours and theirs) then it is probably not trade markable.</p>\n\n<p>My advice - <strong>do nothing</strong> unless and until you get something more serious than a letter. If you have breached their rights then <strong>they</strong> need to prove it; which means issuing you with a summons. If and when you get that (and you probably won't) you can a) roll-over or b) fight.</p>\n\n<p>Worst case scenario is they can seek an injunction on you to stop - if they head this way you can just ... agree to stop before going to court. Theoretically they could also sue you for the damage you have caused their brand which is ... two-tenths of bugger-all.</p>\n\n<p>That said, I am not a lawyer, not familiar with the jurisdiction and not appraised of your specific details; pay some real money to a real solicitor.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "copyright", "england-and-wales", "trademark", "name" ]

[ { "answer_id": 838, "body": "<p>Most pro se litigants fail in the court procedure area. There are many intricacies about what must be completed by when. </p>\n\n<p>Determining jurisdiction can take a very long time, especially personal jurisdiction. These things set back cases repeatedly.</p>\n\n<p>Additionally, many pro se litigants fail a 12(b)(6) motion. This means the other side files a motion saying that the opposing party failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Typically, a pro se litigant fails to state with specificity each element of a claim and how the parties met each element.</p>\n\n<p>If the litigant does not know how to remedy the situation, it will not succeed. Most judges in small claims overlook procedural deficiencies so long as they are not too burdensome on the opposing party. </p>\n\n<p>If one is unsure how to proceed, contact an attorney.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "litigation", "pro-se" ]

[ { "answer_id": 825, "body": "<p>It would be an overgeneralization to conclude that movie posters are \"fair use for commerical use\".</p>\n\n<p>The uses you see imply that low resolution reproductions of movie posters have been judged by IMDB, Wikipedia, and others to be fair use for the purpose of identification alongside commentary (or in a transformative function like browsing).</p>\n\n<p>As an example case, see <em>Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd</em>., 448 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 2006), which held that it was fair use to reproduce thumbnail sized Grateful Dead concert posters in a book alongside a timeline.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 828, "body": "<p><strong>For wikipedia:</strong> They will generally use a scaled down version under fair use as nomen agentis explained. If you look at the meta data for the images, it states how it is fair use (<a href=\"http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?photoslicense&amp;ref_=hlp_brws\" rel=\"nofollow\" title=\"See inside out\">See Inside Out Poster</a>). If it is found that the uploader did violate copyright by using a copyrighted version of the image that is not covered under fair use, then a DMCA notice is issued and the image is removed or replaced.</p>\n\n<p><strong>For IMDB:</strong> IMDB actually pays for the licence to show the photos. Per <a href=\"http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?usephotos&amp;ref_=hlp_brws\" rel=\"nofollow\">their FAQ about using images from their site</a>, they state that the images are licensed to them only.</p>\n\n<p>IMDB also <a href=\"http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?photoshowwork&amp;ref_=hlp_brws\" rel=\"nofollow\">charges a fee </a> for high-resolution photos of the posters. This is an advertising fee more than anything else. </p>\n\n<p>For other sites: they may do the same as IMDB unless it's a community site</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 815, "body": "<p><em>Super-legislative</em> refers to Alito's contention that the court is effectively legislating, i.e. creating new laws; and doing so by overriding the formal legislative bodies. It is implied by a belief that no existing laws or precedents recognize a right to marry.</p>\n\n<p>One common criticism of courts exercising <em>legislative</em> powers is that they are not constrained in the same way that formal legislatures are, such as through elections.</p>\n\n<p>One criticism of <em>super</em>-legislative powers is that they prevent future legislatures from any variation. As a (contrived) example, because of the specific ruling you mention, no future U.S. legislature can uphold a law prohibiting <em>some</em> same-sex couples from marrying, say those that don't plan on raising children together.</p>\n\n<p>The source of the United States Supreme Court's 'super' powers is based in the longstanding idea that it possesses the power of <a href=\"https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Judicial_review\">judicial review</a>, by which the court can invalidate the laws of legislatures (or the actions of the executive branch).</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=super-legislative&amp;year_start=1800&amp;year_end=2000&amp;corpus=15&amp;smoothing=3&amp;share=&amp;direct_url=t1%3B%2Csuper%20-%20legislative%3B%2Cc0\">Interestingly, \"super-legislative\" as a phrase seems to have peaked in popularity, according to Google Ngram Viewer, in the 1930s and 1970s.</a></p>\n\n<p>An example from the Ocala Star-Banner article \"'Super' Legislative Body\", published on June 18th 1964:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>The Warren Court has gone off making its own laws again, usurping the legislative processes of this country.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 10 } ]

[ "legal-terms" ]

[ { "answer_id": 808, "body": "<p>I don't know what, if any, safe harbors are provided under state laws for this, but I have seen apparent Catch-22s like this resolved in the following practical manner: If your car is overdue for inspection, and you are cited for it, and you subsequently offer the officer or the court evidence that you got it inspected as soon as reasonably practical, they will withdraw the charge. (Of course, absent a legal safe harbor, YMMV at the whim of the officers.)</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 813, "body": "<p>If your vehicle is outside New York State, you can apply for an inspection extension sticker. This gives you until 10 days after the vehicle returns to New York State to have it reinspected. This would be the case if you were traveling with your vehicle or if you parked it out of state while you were traveling (perhaps at Newark airport, for example). </p>\n\n<p>Source: <a href=\"http://dmv.ny.gov/inspection/inspection-requirements\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://dmv.ny.gov/inspection/inspection-requirements</a></p>\n\n<p>If your car is in New York State, however, it appears that you have to find another solution. You can presumably have the car towed to an inspection station, or you can risk the fine, which seems lower than the likely cost of towing ($25 to $50 if the registration is less than 60 days expired, $50 to $100 otherwise). Plus of course there's the likelihood that you won't have to pay the fine. You could also arrange to have someone take the car for inspection in your absence. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "new-york-state", "traffic" ]

[ { "answer_id": 759, "body": "<p>The following is for UK law - no idea what happens in Spain.</p>\n\n<p>The will is a set of instructions that the executor of the will is required to carry out. It is the executor that decides how to give effect to the deceased's wishes.</p>\n\n<p>If the will is as simple as \"I give 20% to X and 80% to Y\" then this is an unusually simple will (no make, I mean, its a right pain to give effect to). Then to give effect to this the executor must divide the estate by value.</p>\n\n<p>In general, you do not choose what you get, the executor does. However, if you, the other beneficiaries and the executor can reach agreement on distribution then the executor can give effect to that.</p>\n\n<p>Let's say, you can <strong>all agree</strong> that the value of the estate is (say):</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Cash and other negotiable instruments - $20,000</li>\n<li>Personal effects \n\n<ol>\n<li>Motor home $15,000</li>\n<li>Motor bike $5,000</li>\n<li>Other $20,000</li>\n</ol></li>\n<li>Land in Spain $140,000</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>Then 20% is $40,000.</p>\n\n<p>If you <strong>all agree</strong> that you will take the Cash, the Motor home and the Motor bike then the executor can give effect to that. If you can't agree then the executor will be required to liquidate the assets and split the cash and/or put the assets in joint names; which makes you \"partners\" in the asset which you may not want to be.</p>\n\n<p>You can certainly gift anything you own to your brother after you get it but it would probably have to pass through your hands first for tax reasons</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "wills", "spain" ]

[ { "answer_id": 760, "body": "<p>Do they have to use all caps? Well, no. It's just that companies feel that's the easiest way to make the text \"conspicuous\" which is required by the <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc\">Uniform Commercial Code</a> explicitly in <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-316\">§ 2-316. Exclusion or Modification of Warranties.</a></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>(2)Subject to subsection (3), to exclude or modify the implied warranty of merchantability or any part of it the language must mention merchantability and in case of a writing must be conspicuous, and to exclude or modify any implied warranty of fitness the exclusion must be by a writing and conspicuous. Language to exclude all implied warranties of fitness is sufficient if it states, for example, that \"There are no warranties which extend beyond the description on the face hereof.\"</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The term \"conspicuous\" is defined in <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-201\">§ 1-201. General Definitions.</a></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>\"<strong>Conspicuous</strong>\", with reference to a term, means so written, displayed, or presented that a reasonable person against which it is to operate ought to have noticed it. Whether a term is \"conspicuous\" or not is a decision for the court. Conspicuous terms include the following: (A) a heading in capitals equal to or greater in size than the surrounding text, or in contrasting type, font, or color to the surrounding text of the same or lesser size; and (B) language in the body of a record or display in larger type than the surrounding text, or in contrasting type, font, or color to the surrounding text of the same size, or set off from surrounding text of the same size by symbols or other marks that call attention to the language.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>So you could make the text all bold and italic. You could make the font color purple. It's just that most companies use the caps lock key, whatever their individual reasons may be.</p>\n\n<p>I'll also note that this is a <em>commercial</em> code and these rules are found under <em>Article 2 - Sales</em>. So you'll only see this requirement taking effect in terms/disclaimers for companies which actually let end-users engage in commercial activity (they're actually selling something). Any site which doesn't facilitate commercial activity will likely be using a warranty disclaimer as a note of \"hey, this is a free site, so no you don't get a warranty or legal expectation of service of any sort.\"</p>\n", "score": 28 }, { "answer_id": 763, "body": "<p>Students of the English legal system will all have heard of Alfred Denning (later Lord Denning), a prominent English judge in the twentieth century who really took issue with contract terms that purported to exclude liability under every circumstance.</p>\n\n<p>In a famous case in 1956, (J Spurling Ltd <em>v.</em> Bradshaw), Lord Denning came up with his famous \"red hand rule\",</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I quite agree that the more unreasonable a clause is, the greater the notice which must be given of it. Some clauses which I have seen would need to be printed in red ink on the face of the document with a red hand pointing to it before the notice could be held to be sufficient.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>This did not follow from any English statute, but Denning found this to be part of the common law; therefore other jurisdictions using the common law might be persuaded of similar logic. So if someone is drafting a clause that excludes their liability in very general terms, it is wise to ensure it is brought prominently to the notice of the other party. An easy way to do that is to print it all in capitals.</p>\n", "score": 10 }, { "answer_id": 764, "body": "<p>There is a history of some organizational and US government publications mandating all capital letters for certain terms in the publication.</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>Here is a section of <a href=\"http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/departments/scr/billsumm/summary_display_from_db.php?ls=89&amp;id=3185\" rel=\"nofollow\">the Minnesota elections process</a></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Section 43 remove the requirements that voter instructions on a primary ballot be in all capital letters</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n<li><p>The <a href=\"http://www.journalofdairyscience.org/pb/assets/raw/Health%20Advance/journals/jods/JDS_Instruct_for_Contributors_2014.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">Journal of Dairy Science</a> requires it for sectional information.</p></li>\n<li><p><a href=\"http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-12-18/html/2014-29615.htm\" rel=\"nofollow\">Section 5.47(3)(i)</a> of the Dept. of the Treasury's rules on <em>Subordinated debt issued by a national bank</em> specifies:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>(3) Disclosure requirements. (i) A national bank must disclose \n clearly on the face of any subordinated debt note the following \n language in all capital letters</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n<li><p>I can personally relate that I have seen promotional and content rules that exhibit all-capital-letters printing in a telling pattern: the contest rules will have a block that prints the state-by-state exemptions and local laws. This block almost always has some of the state's information printed in all-capitals, whereas others are mixed or regular use of capitals. </p></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>I think #3 is really exemplifying of the trend, since it is both federal, and well-aged. We can see that Minnesota used a similar font for much of their history, until recently.</p>\n\n<p>#4 is also very telling of how certain states have created local laws around it. </p>\n\n<hr>\n\nSo I would say that the legality of capitalizing disclaimer / disclosure information is relative to the body that has jurisdiction of the related field of work.\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "licensing", "disclaimers" ]

[ { "answer_id": 795, "body": "<p>The officers could incur liability under <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2680#FN-1REF\" rel=\"noreferrer\">28 U.S.C. 2680 (h)</a> with jurisdiction under <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1346#b\" rel=\"noreferrer\">28 U.S.C. 1346 (b)</a>. This would probably be considered \"loss of property\" or a \"wrongful act\".</p>\n\n<p>It is very rare for cases to go forward for this because of the costs of litigation against an officer. </p>\n\n<p>\"[I]t is well recognized that ‘officers executing search warrants on occasion must damage property in order to perform their duty.’\" Cody v. Mello, <a href=\"https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13114588689827699214&amp;q=59%20F.3d%2013&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=6,37\" rel=\"noreferrer\">59 F.3d 13</a>, 16 (2d Cir. 1995) (quoting Dalia v. United States, 441 U.S. 238, 258 (1979)). “Before any due process liability can be imposed for property damage occurring in a lawful search, it must be established that the police acted unreasonably or maliciously in bringing about the damage.” Cody, 59 F.3d at 16. </p>\n\n<p>That actually means that the burden of proof is on the victim to show unreasonableness / maliciousness.</p>\n\n<p>It would probably be easier if the thing destroyed could not possibly have contained the item looked for. For instance, if they are looking for a 65\" LED TV, they can't even look in a 64\" dresser (or something smaller than the object that could not physically hold the object). This issue becomes moot when dealing with drugs.</p>\n", "score": 6 } ]

[ "united-states", "search-and-seizure", "fourth-amendment", "remedies" ]

[ { "answer_id": 788, "body": "<p>From what I can see in the <a href=\"https://www.google.com/intl/en-AU/policies/terms/\" rel=\"nofollow\">Terms</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Using our Services does not give you ownership of any intellectual property rights in our Services or the content you access. You may not use content from our Services unless you obtain permission from its owner or are otherwise permitted by law.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The short answer to your question is likely <strong>no</strong>. It is <em>possible</em> that you may have fair use rights to it, though this is unlikely if you are using it for commercial purposes.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 792, "body": "<p>From their <a href=\"https://www.google.com/intl/en-US/policies/terms/\" rel=\"nofollow\">Terms titled: About Software in our Services</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Google gives you a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non-exclusive license to use the software provided to you by Google as part of the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling you to use and enjoy the benefit of the Services as provided by Google, in the manner permitted by these terms. You may not copy, modify, distribute, <strong>sell, or lease any part of our Services or included software</strong>, nor may you reverse engineer or attempt to extract the source code of that software, unless laws prohibit those restrictions or you have our written permission.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Do not sell or lease a product using Trends information (you could possibly sell a program that connects to the 'API' though).</p>\n\n<p>If I were in your position, I would contact and IP Attorney or email google.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 791, "body": "<p>Copyright Law:</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=1&amp;cad=rja&amp;uact=8&amp;ved=0CB8QFjAA&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fir.lawnet.fordham.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1442%26context%3Diplj&amp;ei=SBmOVdXjKoLjoASBy62wDA&amp;usg=AFQjCNGCCELntR3FMouvNSSKt5EKkmqcDQ&amp;bvm=bv.96783405,d.cGU\" rel=\"nofollow\">Probably Not</a> so long as you are not hosting anything other than a link. (This is a secondary source) </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Even if academics and technology enthusiasts prefer an absolute right to link on the Internet, the business world has an interest in regulating what information is shared.66 Businesses will protest free linking to their materials if it interferes with their sales or marketing messages.67 If a website operator *1090 desires to restrict certain content from being linked to or integrated in another site, the operator can require a password to view the site or can technically disable outside sites from in-line linking to images or media hosted by the site.68</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Youtube ToS:\nYou may have an issue with ToS 4. D. if you have ads on your webpage. Service here is defined as \"by using or visiting the YouTube website or any YouTube products, software, data feeds, and services provided to you on, from, or through the YouTube website \"</p>\n\n<p>But it does seem to allow you to use an embedded player in your site if you wanted. ToS 4. F.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 789, "body": "<p>Generally, providing links to websites will not violate copyright law. This would include YouTube videos.</p>\n\n<p>It is possible that if the sole or primary purpose of your app is to facilitate copyright infringement - for instance, by linking to copyright-infringing material - you may be liable under local laws. This would depend on your jurisdiction, and the amount of copyright infringement required to be facilitated will vary.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "copyright", "terms-of-service" ]

[ { "answer_id": 770, "body": "<p>Chief Justice Roberts, dissenting, says (<a href=\"http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">at p. 24</a>):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>The equal protection analysis might be different, in my view, if we were confronted with a more focused challenge to the denial of certain tangible benefits.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>That indicates to me that there is probably a majority on the court that thinks same-sex couples should have the same adoption rights and other tangible benefits as opposite-sex couples, but that would have to be tested in court.</p>\n\n<p>Regarding level-of-scrutiny, this opinion says nothing on the issue. But, given that Justice Kennedy follows a fundamental rights analysis, it could be argued that it is likely strict scrutiny, or at least a level of scrutiny higher than rational basis.</p>\n\n<p><em>Vacco v. Quill</em>, 521 U.S. 793 (1997), citing <em>Romer v. Evans</em>, 517 U. S. 620, 631 (1996) (emphasis added, internal punctuation removed):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>If a legislative classification or distinction <strong>neither burdens a fundamental right</strong> nor targets a suspect class, we will uphold it so long as it bears a rational relation to some legitimate end.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "united-states", "us-supreme-court", "marriage", "first-impression" ]

[ { "answer_id": 766, "body": "<p><strong>Please Note: This was written before the title change of this question and may no longer be applicable</strong></p>\n\n<p>According to the <a href=\"http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property00/alternatives/non-copyrightable.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">Harvard website</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>In Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. 499 US 340 (1991) the United States Supreme Court held that copyright does not extend to a mere compilation of facts. In this case, it was a telephone directory much the same as the one in ProCD v. Zeidenberg 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996). Furthermore, the Court also ruled that something more than simple \"sweat of the brow\" labor was required before copyright protection would ensue, with some modicum of authorial originality necessary. Accordingly, it was held in Feist that copyright did not extend to a telephone directory, no matter how laborious a task its compilation was. The decision in ProCD v. Zeidenberg 86 F. 3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996) is highly significant, therefore, in that it permits copyright or quasi-copyright protection to be extended to non-copyrightable material through the use of contract. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>One would have to consider each meta tag independently. For example, the \"description\" tag could by copyrightable since it is written for more than just the 'facts', such as a subtle advert for the site that is more than an objective description. However the 'og:type' would not be copyrightable since it would just be considered a fact. </p>\n\n<p>Now, if you are using it on another website and sourcing it properly, you could probably use it under \"<a href=\"http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-rule-copyright-material-30100.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">Fair Use</a>\"</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Uses That Are Generally Fair Uses\n Subject to some general limitations discussed later in this article, the following types of uses are usually deemed fair uses:</p>\n \n <ul>\n <li>Criticism and comment -- for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment.</li>\n <li>News reporting -- for example, summarizing an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report.</li>\n <li>Research and scholarship -- for example, quoting a short passage in a scholarly, scientific, or technical work for illustration or clarification of the author's observations.</li>\n <li>Nonprofit educational uses -- for example, photocopying of limited portions of written works by teachers for classroom use.</li>\n <li>Parody -- that is, a work that ridicules another, usually well-known, work by imitating it in a comic way.</li>\n </ul>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>A copyright would exist on the image. One would have to know what license currently applies to the image to know for sure, however, the \"Fair Use\" to copyright would still apply.</p>\n\n<p>With Fair Use, the entity type that uses the image is important. There is much more leniency when a non-profit uses copyrighted information than when the information is used in commercial activity. (With, of course, more exceptions.)</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "copyright", "internet" ]

[ { "answer_id": 775, "body": "<p>No, they are not. The airport is supposedly under federal jurisdiction (according to a DEN employee), and the federal government does not allow such sales to take place. Thus, all smoking lounges in DEN are cannabis-free.</p>\n\n<p>Apparently, according to an employee within DEN, some people do manage to get past the security and into those lounges with their own pot, but, they're not allowed to keep at it, either.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "colorado" ]

[ { "answer_id": 757, "body": "<p>Well they are two distinct people, as you reveal by using plural verbs throughout your question. I don't think anyone would endeavour to argue that two conjoined twins, each possessing his own head, mind and personality, are in fact one person (is that your question?).</p>\n\n<p>The difficulty is criminal prosecution. Of course the guilty twin can be proceeded against and tried, but he cannot be incarcerated without unlawfully abridging the freedom of his (innocent) twin. In many jurisdictions this is simply unacceptable.</p>\n\n<p>The only example I was able to track down was this headline: </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Judge Releases Siamese Twin To Avoid Jailing His Brother</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9503EFDC1630E03ABC4A52DFB6678382639EDE\" rel=\"noreferrer\">http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9503EFDC1630E03ABC4A52DFB6678382639EDE</a></p>\n\n<p>Unfortunately, it is behind a paywall.</p>\n\n<p>If it is somehow unclear which twin is responsible for a crime committed by one of them, then in any common law jurisdiction—absence proof that they acted together—they must be both be acquitted.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "natural-person", "citizenship", "juridical-person" ]

[ { "answer_id": 754, "body": "<p>What does it accomplish? It guarantees that all corporations doing business in New York can be served.</p>\n\n<p>(A company's having an agent for the service of process does not prohibit people from serving the corporation directly. The secretary may be \"the agent upon which process may be served\" but is not \"the sole agent upon which process must be served.\" And besides, process need not be served on an agent; it can be served on the company itself, at its office or on one of its officers.)</p>\n\n<p>With this requirement, New York makes it impossible for a company to avoid service of process by closing or moving its offices, by sending its officers and employees out of state, or by making itself unavailable by any means. No matter what steps a company might take to avoid service of process, the process server can always resort to serving the company's agent: the Secretary of State.</p>\n", "score": 6 }, { "answer_id": 751, "body": "<p>In a state, the secretary of \"state\" (interior, actually), is a registrar with which all corporations in the state must register. As a result, the secretary of state is the person/entity that has access to all corporations, and with whom all corporations must interact in order to derive their status as corporations in that state. That would be why serving the secretary of state \"qualifies\" for service. Allowing the secretary of state to be served (on behalf of the corporation) means that a corporation doing business in New York can always be served.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "united-states", "civil-procedure" ]

[ { "answer_id": 731, "body": "<p>Call, write, or visit the office of your legislative representative. <a href=\"http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/Home.aspx\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">This page</a> can help you figure out who that is. They have the ability to introduce a bill into the legislature that would change the law, and that's the best way to change a law like what you're trying to do here. </p>\n\n<p>Be sure to tell the legislator exactly what you think should be changed (e.g. \"We should change section ABC of the Texas Property Code, &lt; citation>, to say that 'no landlord can charge a fee of more than X for Y in Z conditions,' or something similar.\") Then concisely summarize your reasons why. Consider consulting <a href=\"https://politics.stackexchange.com/\">politics</a> for more strategy on who and how to ask to increase the probability of success.</p>\n\n<p>Be sure to give some consideration to the reason <em>why</em> the landlords charge such fees and the costs they have to incur associated with lease assignments/changes. Try to craft a proposal that addresses those concerns, perhaps in some alternative way, and communicate the degree to which you think you understand and have addressed those opposing views. Also try to think about what new challenges or issues would arise if your proposal went into the law.</p>\n\n<p>The job of your representative and/or their staff includes listening to (a concise presentation of) your concerns and how you think the law should be changed, and representing those views in the legislature. S/he also has other constituents, including landlords, to answer to as well, and has to balance those potentially opposing interests before deciding what (if anything) to do. The degree to which you think the representative listens and represents your interests may determine whose campaign you support (including who you vote for and what you say to your friends/neighbors/family) in the next election. </p>\n\n<p><strong>Another strategy</strong> is to negotiate with your next landlord to take those fees out of your lease agreement, and then the contract which governs your specific agreement might be changed to address this concern. </p>\n\n<p>If you want to change the law for everybody, you might have to convince a lot of people that it's a good idea. If you want to change the \"law\" for what affects you personally, you might only have to convince one person (your own landlord) that such a change is a good idea, at least in your case. </p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "texas", "sublease", "legislature" ]

[ { "answer_id": 733, "body": "<p><strong>Check the website's terms of service.</strong> Check to see if you're violating these terms, and check to see if the script you are making enables other people to violate them. Courts don't often look kindly on actions whose sole purpose is enabling someone else to do something that is prohibited. If you're making a script that helps people do something they're allowed to do, in a way that's better for at least somebody and makes nobody worse off, that's often a different story.</p>\n\n<p>Major websites will generally indicate whether or not you're allowed to do this. </p>\n\n<p>Some sites are fairly strict about prohibiting scraping (e.g. Craigslist, which <a href=\"http://blog.padmapper.com/2012/06/22/bye-bye-craigslist/\" rel=\"nofollow\">at one point shut down Padmapper</a>'s alternative more-useful presentation of their content). </p>\n\n<p>Others, like Wikipedia, much more actively encourage reusing content from their sites as long as you meet <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License\" rel=\"nofollow\">certain conditions such as a link back to the original source</a>.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 671, "body": "<p>Without too much detail knowledge of both US and Indian law, I can't really think that this wouldn't be allowed. In some jurisdictions, distribution of software programs may be restricted or prohibited if any use of such programs would very likely, or automatically, lead to copyright violations (e.g. \"hacker tools\"). However, this is a very exceptional scenario and doesn't apply here for various reasons. </p>\n\n<p>The owner of a website publishes content on the Internet with the intention that users can access it (either all users or only those who have subscribed to the content etc.). The website owner then cannot prescribe how exactly users access the content. For example, each different browser may display a website differently, with some browsers like Safari already now providing text-only views, and in the end your script is not very different from a browser.</p>\n\n<p>The only critical situation I can imagine is when somebody uses your script to scrape content from a website and then republishes it. Even then this \"somebody\" would be responsible and liable, not your script. Think again of the browser analogy: If I download a copyright-protected movie from a website via Mozilla Firefox and then put it on my website, I can't imagine a legal principle that Mozilla should be liable. Neither are you.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 706, "body": "<p>Such scripts are all over github, so even if it were illegal, it is de facto legal.</p>\n\n<p>However, there's a more obvious proof of its legality; every web browser on earth does exactly what you're describing. As does every RSS reader. Every network / traffic analysis tool. Every screen reader. Every network proxy, cache, and (depending on your perspective) router and switch.</p>\n\n<p>I'll admit that I'm unfamiliar with the legal precedent, but I do know the precedent in reality, and reality is overwhelmingly in your favor.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "united-states", "internet", "india" ]

[ { "answer_id": 732, "body": "<p>EZ-Pass is an interstate consortium, so unless your \"violation\" was a summons citing a state Statute I would assume the \"violations\" were sent to you pursuant to the consortium's Terms and Conditions, making this a contract question (and something you would address accordingly, by either attempting to negotiate an agreement with the counterparty or waiting to see if they will sue you at which point you can defend yourself in court).</p>\n\n<p>If your violation is a demand under state law, and you can show that you did not violate that law, then it should be straightforward to have the demand dismissed by a letter or appearance to the summoning authority where you show your exculpatory evidence.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "traffic", "fees" ]

[ { "answer_id": 728, "body": "<p><strong>I am not a lawyer. I am not <em>your</em> lawyer.</strong></p>\n\n<p>The Labour Program has issued <a href=\"http://www.labour.gc.ca/eng/resources/ipg/012.shtml\" rel=\"nofollow\">an interpretation</a> on the definition of \"wages\", and <strong>specifically includes</strong> commission.</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/L-2/page-80.html#h-74\" rel=\"nofollow\">In section 166</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>“wages”<br>\n <em>« salaire »</em><br>\n “wages” includes every form of remuneration for work performed but does not include tips and other gratuities;</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/L-2/page-87.html#h-79\" rel=\"nofollow\">and in Section 183</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>“vacation pay”<br>\n <em>« indemnité de congé annuel »</em><br>\n “vacation pay” means four per cent or, after six consecutive years of employment by one employer, six per cent of the wages of an employee during the year of employment in respect of which the employee is entitled to the vacation;</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>And assuming that the employer and employee are, in fact, in an <em>employee-employer</em> relationship, it is likely that he/she will be entitled to 4% of the wages during the year of employment, including commission.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "canada", "labor-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 716, "body": "<p>The <a href=\"https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Resources/LawYouCanUse/Pages/LawYouCanUse-622.aspx\" rel=\"nofollow\">Ohio State Bar</a> agrees with the state employee that you can go to court. The statute in question seems to be <a href=\"http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3119.79\" rel=\"nofollow\">3119.79</a>; that statute provides that a court recalculates upon request (there are other sections for other kinds of review, but 3119.79 is the \"any time, for significant changes\" one). The actual <em>order</em> doesn't need to be changed unless the recalculated amount is at least 10% greater or less than before, or if there has been a significant change in circumstances not forseen when the order was last reviewed. Unfortunately, the statute itself doesn't give much more procedural details; the Ohio courts have a website with <a href=\"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/JCS/CFC/DRForms/childSupportChange.asp\" rel=\"nofollow\">some of the forms</a>, but they have no instructions for use. It seems like the forms there are acceptable everywhere (Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 84), but some courts have their own forms (e.g. <a href=\"http://domestic.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_domestic/en-US/Support/Motion%20to%20Modify%20Child%20Support.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">Cuyahoga County</a>), which may have more details or instructions. Check with your local clerk of court for more details.</p>\n\n<p>Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, let alone an Ohio lawyer. This is just \"here are some forms and the relevant law;\" it does not substitute for proper legal advice.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "ohio" ]

[ { "answer_id": 713, "body": "<p>There are several options that the Home country has. </p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>It can choose to waive diplomatic immunity and allow the Host nation (Saudi Arabia in this case) to pursue legal charges in their own system.</p></li>\n<li><p>The Home nation can choose to pursue charges as though the crime were committed on national soil. Typically once charges are brought the statute of limitations is suspended but this may vary by nation.</p></li>\n<li><p>The Home nation can choose not to pursue charges. In this case once the statute of limitations expires then the former diplomat would be free at home. And would enjoy the immunity from prosecution for the incident in the Host country as well.</p></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>However since the diplomat appears to have fled before charges could be brought, if Saudi Arabia were to gain possession of the former diplomat it could pursue legal action against the diplomat as an international fugitive. The former diplomat could attempt to invoke diplomatic immunity and it would be up to the Home country to either back their former diplomat, or they could choose to deny the claim since the former diplomat fled and they could interpret that as surrendering his diplomatic post and in effect renouncing his diplomatic status. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "criminal-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 617, "body": "<p>This is a hard question, but a good question. The following relates to the issue from the perspective of the USA.</p>\n\n<p>You ask \"...if the US wants to invade France, <strong>can</strong> they officially declare war by...\", You have to make clear what you mean by \"can\". If you mean whether or not the US has the physical ability to do this, then of course they do. If you mean whether they are allowed, then this is another question. When you ask whether something is allowed, then you have to make reference to a moral code or a law that determines what is and what isn't allowed (legal). Normally each country will have laws that govern what is and what isn't legal for it's citizens to do. That hard part is how this applies to nations. There are two sides to the question. (1) What are the leaders allowed to do under their own laws, (the domestic laws) (2) what are countries as entities allowed to do? (the international laws) It sounds a bit like you are asking about the second thing. Here treaties govern what is and what isn't \"legal\". However, usually when someone breaks a law, other entities have the power to enforce that law and decide (judge) whether the person has broken the law. The question is: who decides whether a country has broken a treaty or an international law? And if a law is broken, what exactly can be done about it? This is hard to answer. </p>\n\n<p>Consider for example the conflict in Ukraine. Here many will argue that Russia has piratically invaded Ukraine. There should be war between the nations. But Russia denies this and other world powers have done little beyond imposing sanctions. This illustrates how hard it is to deal with this question.</p>\n\n<p>One question that comes up is what the purpose of international treaties are if a country can just violate them without much consequence. Pointing out two points about this. (1) If, for example, a president wants to convince his/her own congress that the country <em>should</em> engage in war, then it makes a stronger point if you can show how the country you want to engage has violated international trities. (2) After you have won a war, you might want to prosecute the leaders of the loosing power. Here you will stand stronger if you can make references to some international law that existed before the conflict started. This second point is illustrated in the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_principles\">Nuremberg principles</a>. Here it was exactly stated that \"<em>Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.</em>\"</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States\">According to the US constitution</a> \"Congress shall have power to ... declare War\". That means that historically Congress has the power to decide where to wage war. The <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution\">War Powers Resolution</a> says, for example, that \"<a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1542\">The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities ...</a>\".</p>\n\n<p>Note that this doesn't mean that the US has do formally declare war before going to war. Example: <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States#Military_engagements_authorized_by_Congress\">The Iraq War was authorized by Congress, but there never was a formal declaration of war</a>. </p>\n\n<p>It is interesting that you ask about the timing for when the declaration should be given. The Japanese wanted to <a href=\"https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/world-war-ii/resources/japan-declares-war-1941\">deliver their declaration of war just before</a> the attack on Pearl Harbor. But because of issues with decrypting the message from Japan to the Japanese Embassy, the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_declaration_of_war_on_the_United_States_and_the_British_Empire\">declaration wasn't delivered until after the attack</a>. </p>\n\n<p>Remember also in all of this that the winning party to a conflict, usually decides what was and wasn't legal!</p>\n\n<p>One good reference for more on all of this is the report by the Congressional Research Service called \"<em><a href=\"https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31133.pdf\">Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications</em></a>\". Here you can see more on what I have tried (and failed?) to say above.</p>\n", "score": 10 }, { "answer_id": 623, "body": "<p>Depends a lot on who is invading and who is being invaded. In the case of USA invading France, NATO and the European Union would have something to say about it, and the USA would be in big trouble for violating several conventions. They'd likely be faced with a lot of sanctions as well as a coalition of militaries backing up France. But if Chad were to suddenly move troops into the CAR, you might be lucky if you caught someone mentioning something about it on the news. </p>\n\n<p>The only countries which are expected to adhere to international law are those countries which were present at the signing of the various treaties. </p>\n\n<p>Countries will often debate legalities. NATO insists Russia invaded Ukraine illegally when they took Crimea, but Russia insists their actions were legal because the ligitimate Ukrainian government was overthrown by an illegal coup, and it's elected president was seeking assylum in Russia, so their invasion was against an illigitimate government.</p>\n\n<p>It's hard to enforce international law without going to war. Sanctions are the best the other countries can do, but without effecttve coercion, laws pretty much rely on the honor system.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "international", "laws-of-war" ]

[ { "answer_id": 705, "body": "<p>Short answer, yes.</p>\n\n<p>Long answer, only a judge can order a person to act, and a judge would make efforts in accordance with the laws of the jurisdiction to satisfy the debt if such an avenue were feasible and would not unduly burden the debtor (something similar to cruel or unusual standards in criminal punishment).</p>\n\n<p>The judge would not likely order a mortgage, since the judge cannot issue a mortgage, nor can he or she necessarily compel a third party to involve themselves in the current hypothetical fiscal debacle, but they absolutely could order someone to pay from excess income to satisfy a standard judgment. They could even go so far as to prohibit certain expenditures prior to satisfying the existing obligation (so that if you refinanced, you would have to satisfy the outstanding obligation prior to adding a new pool).</p>\n\n<p>They could certainly also seize assets, though generally one's primary residence is exempt from seizure, excepting certain criminal circumstances, but failure to obey a court order could lead to seizure. In the case that the value sky-rocketed, they could force the sale because it would no longer fall under New York's exemption, and could be used to satisfy a debt, under the presumption that a new, suitable residence could be procured from the remainder of the proceeds of the sale.</p>\n\n<p>Of course, I'm not a lawyer, I just play one on the internet. For specific legal advice see a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction, and verify that these kinds of generalities apply to more than classroom case studies.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "new-york-state", "bankruptcy" ]

[ { "answer_id": 694, "body": "<p>Minimum parcel sizes after a split are viable targets for regulation. Counties or townships (typically, or similarly niche jurisdictional units) set the numbers for what size of parcel subdivision is allowed. </p>\n\n<p>Though not a California example, here you can see that <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewickley_Heights,_Pennsylvania#History\" rel=\"nofollow\">Sewickley Heights, PA</a> has created ordinance against smaller than 5 acre lots, which ultimately leads to a number of effects that the borough collectively desires. <a href=\"http://www.northsewickleytwp.org/pdfs/ordinancesandzoning/Chapter%2022%20Subdivision%20and%20Land%20Development.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">These ordinance are laid out here.</a></p>\n\n<p>Pardon that I cannot say examples in CA.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "california", "real-estate" ]

[ { "answer_id": 691, "body": "<p>Not in the state of California. California law prohibits discrimination based on source of income; only discrimination based on <em>amount</em> of income is allowed. See the <a href=\"http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&amp;group=12001-13000&amp;file=12955-12956.2\" rel=\"nofollow\">California Government Code, section 12955</a>. It is not even legal to indicate a <em>preferred</em> source of income in the advertisement; landlords may ask prospective tenants about the source of income, but may not discriminate or indicate preference for a particular source (provided it's a lawful source).</p>\n\n<p>Also, you can't really force a city to re-zone based on \"I'll make sure this bad thing doesn't happen.\" If the city doesn't want to re-zone, they won't re-zone. You have no right to force them to re-zone; this is especially true when the property was purchased under those zoning rules (if the buyer didn't like them, they didn't have to buy).</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "contract-law", "residential-lease", "fair-housing-acts" ]

[ { "answer_id": 553, "body": "<p>The following is not legal advice.</p>\n\n<p>In general, <a href=\"http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/460/491.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">Florida v. Royer</a> says that only if there is a reasonable reason for doing so, a person may not be detained. For example:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>The person approached, however, need not answer any question put to\n him; indeed, he may decline to listen to the questions at all and may\n go on his way. He may not be detained even momentarily without\n reasonable, objective grounds for doing so; and his refusal to listen\n or answer does not, without more, furnish those grounds. If there is\n no detention - no seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment -\n then no constitutional rights have been infringed.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The question came up how DUI checkpoints are related to this because here people (in vehicles) are briefly detained. </p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Department_of_State_Police_v._Sitz\" rel=\"nofollow\">Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz</a> (See also <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/496/444\" rel=\"nofollow\">here</a>) says that</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>\"Petitioner's highway sobriety checkpoint program is consistent with the Fourth Amendment.\" That is DUI check-points are legal. You are technically being detained for a short period of time. But, as you point out in your comment below, you don't have to submit to any test. The police at the stop will access you from the outside. </li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware_v._Prouse\" rel=\"nofollow\">Delaware v. Prouse</a> (see also <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/440/648\" rel=\"nofollow\">here</a>) was cited in Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz and says that </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Except where there is at least articulable and reasonable suspicion\n that a motorist is unlicensed or that an automobile is not registered,\n or that either the vehicle or an occupant is otherwise subject to\n seizure for violation of law, stopping an automobile and detaining the\n driver in order to check his driver's license and the registration of\n the automobile are unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Also, I find the following in Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz referring to the Delaware v. Prouse it is stated that the Supreme Court</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>...went on to state that our holding did not cast doubt on the\n permissibility of roadside truck weigh-stations and inspection\n checkpoints, at which some vehicles may be subject to further\n detention for safety and regulatory inspection than are others.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>So, if there might be some \"inspection points\" where you can be subjected to \"further detention\".</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "police", "driving", "ohio" ]

[ { "answer_id": 651, "body": "<p>The advertisement is simply an <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitation_to_treat\">invitation to treat</a>.</p>\n\n<p>The lease was <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offer_and_acceptance\">the contract offer, and your signature and payment were acceptance of that offer</a>.</p>\n\n<p>The advertisement doesn't bind either party (other than as prohibited by deceptive advertising statutes), and you are allowed to negotiate an offer that differs from the invitation to treat.</p>\n", "score": 14 }, { "answer_id": 677, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>We are sorry, but there was a typo in the contract, one zero is missing. The project fee\nshould be $100,000 instead of $10,000.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>What do you think?</p>\n<h2>Typo</h2>\n<p>This is <em><strong>not</strong></em> a typo. It is, clearly and unambiguously, stated in the contract.</p>\n<p>What may be counted as typos in a legal document? E.g.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Vehicels that are wider than 5 foot is prohibited on this road.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Although the spelling is wrong and grammar is incorrect, the original meaning is reasonable and obvious.</p>\n<p>IMHO, claiming that there is a typo on a legal document to avoid responsibility is a very irresponsible act.</p>\n<h2>Legally binding</h2>\n<p>An advertisement is not legally binding. As mentioned, it is an invitation to treat. It has, absolutely, zero legal effect.</p>\n<p>A contract is a mutual agreement between two parties that are meant to <em><strong>have a legal effect</strong></em>.</p>\n<p>Since the contract states that the landlord is responsible for paying utilities, you have several options here:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Ask the landlord to renegotiate a new contract, during which you can negotiate a new rent. In the new contract, include a clause which states that the old contract is voided. Note that before this new contract is signed, the old contract remain effective.</li>\n<li>Continue demand the landlord to supply utilities, which you are legally entitled. If they do not comply, you may sue them for breach of contract.</li>\n<li>Pay for utilities yourself, then sue the landlord for breach of contract, and ask for compensation of the cost of the utilities.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Note that these suggestions are based on the only information provided. You may have more options, such as terminate the contract since one party has breached. However, without seeing the actual contract and knowing the jurisdiction, it is impossible to determine the remedy here. You may consult a lawyer in your area for more details.)</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "residential-lease", "legal-writing" ]

[ { "answer_id": 667, "body": "<p>In most places I imagine the issue would go before a probate judge who would attempt to determine the validity of each presented will, and if both were valid, then they would attempt to reconcile the disparities to the best of their ability.</p>\n\n<p>Broadly speaking, the process would look like this (I'm using <a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/wills-probate-inheritance/overview\">UK law</a> as an example):</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>You die</li>\n<li>An individual is chosen to handle your affairs (executor or administrator [or possibly both depending on jurisdiction])</li>\n<li>They choose a will to go off of (these steps could be reversed if the wills named different administrators, in which case each administrator would file for the grant of representation and consequently involve the probate judge earlier)</li>\n<li>Someone challenges and suggests using the other will (probably because they feel they're not getting what's theirs)</li>\n<li>A probate judge is involved</li>\n<li>The probate judge decides</li>\n<li>Appeals would be made to Court of Appeals and then to the Supreme Court</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>That being said, every jurisdiction is different, and this is more of a template answer for English common law (and derivative courts), than an attempt to describe in detail any specific jurisdiction's procedures.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "australia", "wills" ]

[ { "answer_id": 653, "body": "<p>Thank you all for the help in answering my question.</p>\n\n<p>I've spoken with a lawyer through a friend of a friend and he explained that as long as I provide a way for people to make complaints about illegal or copyright infringing content and respond or make [and log] effort to investigate promptly, I'm pretty much in the clear.</p>\n\n<p>In the end no disclaimer is needed, the idea that you wouldn't upload such content is already implied due to the nature of the content.</p>\n\n<p>So I'm gonna add this bad-boy as the entire disclaimer and call it a day.</p>\n\n<p><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/8IHCP.jpg\" alt=\"You Wouldn&#39;t Download A Car\"></p>\n\n<p>Goodluck with the beta, I'm sure I'll be back here.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "copyright", "liability", "dmca", "ownership" ]

[ { "answer_id": 642, "body": "<p>To answer the question &quot;Is the use of a screencap from <em>The Matrix</em> in <a href=\"http://www.yegor256.com/2015/05/28/one-primary-constructor.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">this blog post</a> fair use?&quot;</p>\n<p>This is clear-cut: no.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">17 USC 107</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—</p>\n<ol>\n<li>the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;</li>\n<li>the nature of the copyrighted work;</li>\n<li>the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and</li>\n<li>the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.</li>\n</ol>\n</blockquote>\n<ol>\n<li><p>The purpose of the use: purely decorative. The text of the blog post makes no reference whatsoever to the image, and in fact, the meaning of the post would be unchanged if the image were removed. This is by far the biggest strike against it being fair use: &quot;decoration&quot; does not fall under any of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. The fact that the blog is (presumably) non-profit is irrelevant here.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>The nature of the work: <em>The Matrix</em> is purely a work of fiction, so you can't pull out a defense such as &quot;public interest&quot; for your claim of fair use. On the other hand, being a work of fiction makes a &quot;criticism&quot; or &quot;scholarship&quot; defense easier.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>The amount and substantiality of the portion used: the use of a single frame, and one that is not particularly plot-relevant works in favor of a claim of fair use, but also against it. Since the frame chosen doesn't reveal a plot point or anything, it doesn't reduce the value of the original work, but it also makes it harder to make a claim that the image illustrates a point of commentary or criticism.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>The effect of the use on the potential market or value of the original: None. Seeing this one random screenshot can't substitute for seeing the movie. This is the biggest point in favor of a claim of fair use, but &quot;it doesn't do any harm&quot; pales in comparison to the problems of point 1.</p>\n</li>\n</ol>\n<p>If I were a lawyer contacted by the Wachowski brothers about suing the author of the blog post, my response would be &quot;send a nastygram or a DMCA takedown, but don't waste your time with a lawsuit. The lack of damages (point 4) means you'll spend far more on lawyers than you can hope to get by winning in court.&quot;</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "copyright", "fair-use" ]

[ { "answer_id": 638, "body": "<p>Contracts that violate local law are void in just about every jurisdiction, as are contracts against clearly defined public policy. In many cases, laws are specifically <em>designed</em> to restrict otherwise valid contracts; for instance, in the US, an employment contract that pays less than $7.25 an hour will normally be invalid, even if the company and the employee both agree to the reduced wage. In employment law, where contracts are fairly common, the laws would be virtually meaningless if contracts took precedence.</p>\n\n<p>In the case of independent contractor status vs. employee status, California law does not consider someone to be an independent contractor just because their contract says so. \"Independent contractor\" is defined in California law to be </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>any person who renders service for a specified recompense for a specified result, under the control of his principal as to the result of his work only and not as to the means by which such result is accomplished. (<a href=\"http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB&amp;sectionNum=3353.\">California Labor Code, section 3353</a>)</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>If this definition isn't satisfied, it's irrelevant what the parties agree the status is; it's not an independent contractor status. According to the state department of labor, the test is that found in <a href=\"http://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/48/341.html\"><em>Borello v. Dept. of Industrial Relations</em></a> (a California Supreme Court case), which lays out a multifactor test for contractor status and says that</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>The label placed by the parties on their relationship is not dispositive, and subterfuges are not countenanced. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Likewise, with product liability, a country can generally have laws <em>mandating</em> liability for people providing a product or service; the extent to which this happens depends on the jurisdiction. For instance, India may not want a big company like Uber to be able to block liability claims by putting some legalese in front of average consumers who aren't able to make a detailed risk-benefit analysis. Alternatively, India could decide that Uber is better able to take the risk from bad drivers than average consumers are, so the right policy is to assign the risk to Uber. Whether Uber should be able to avoid liability is something that every country can decide for itself based on public policy considerations; the point is that if they <em>do</em> decide that Uber should be liable for damages, their law trumps Uber's contract.</p>\n\n<p>Uber actually <em>tries</em> to limit liability in their EULA, and to avoid an employer-employee relationship in their driver agreement. Their US EULA and driver agreement says they aren't a transportation provider and you aren't getting transportation from them, and even if you are they aren't liable for damages. However, if that provision violates the law in some state, the provision is invalid. Likewise, if they claim it's not an employment contract but it meets the \"employee\" definition in some state, it's an employment contract.</p>\n", "score": 9 } ]

[ "contract-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 635, "body": "<p>There is a relevant <a href=\"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/639/are-all-retroactive-laws-ex-post-facto-laws\">Q&amp;A here</a> about how <em>ex post facto</em> is defined in the United States.</p>\n\n<p>Not all law is about crime, and that includes NY rent control laws; violating them does not lead directly to a criminal prosecution, hence a sufficiently strict definition of <em>ex post facto</em> cannot apply to them. And such a sufficiently strict definition has been the explicit one since 1798, when the Supreme Court ruled in <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calder_v._Bull\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Calder vs. Bull</a> (\"law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, <strong>criminal</strong> [...] law that aggravates a <strong>crime,</strong> makes it greater than it was [...] law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the <strong>crime</strong>\", etc.).</p>\n\n<p>Notice that <a href=\"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Article 1 Section 9</a> prohibits Congress (i.e., the Federal Government) from doing exactly the same thing, so if <em>ex post facto</em> refers to any kind of law, then there could not be any retroactive laws passed in the United States, period. However, the Supreme Court has apparently already set <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-1941.ZS.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">further, more recent, precedents</a>, making it clear that this rule does not apply to tax law.</p>\n\n<p>I would assume in this case the intention is to retroactively extend the old law, i.e., if the old law expired on the 15th and the extension passes on the 20th, that extension will be retroactive to the 15th. If the extension then continues until a new law is in place, there will be no time period under which one or the other did not apply. Despite the wording in the news article, I do not think the intention is to make the new law retroactive, only the extension of the old one, for the simple reason that the legislature would never agree to pass such a brand new law later and no matter what it contains say it will be retroactive back to the original expiration date of a law it replaces even after they already extended that until there was a new law. That is borderline non-sensical. The Daily News blurb certainly makes it sound like it might be that way, but I think this is a bit of intentional obfuscation -- the way in which a <em>partial</em> quote is used in the first paragraph is indicative, and the Daily News is, well, the Daily News.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "new-york-state", "rent" ]

[ { "answer_id": 634, "body": "<p>There are 2 conditions for a work to be protected under copyright:</p>\n<ol>\n<li>originated from the author</li>\n<li>involves the author's skill and labor</li>\n</ol>\n<p>(Note that &quot;original&quot; does not necessarily mean &quot;creative&quot;. Also, the standard of &quot;original&quot; varies greatly between countries.)</p>\n<p>Under these conditions, it is fair to say that a legal document, such as a contract or license agreement, should be protected by copyright.</p>\n<p>Copyright, however, <em><strong>protects only the expression of the idea but not the idea itself</strong></em>. That is, while a document is protected under copyright, you can draft another document with different wordings which expresses the same idea.</p>\n<h2>Merger doctrine</h2>\n<p>Under the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_divide\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Merger doctrine</a>, if there are only very few ways to express an idea, then the expression enjoys no copyright. This is because if that expression is protected, the protection would naturally extend to the idea itself. Therefore, common clauses in a contract or agreement are unlikely to be protected by copyright.</p>\n<h2>Creative content</h2>\n<p>If a legal document is <em>sufficiently creative</em>, it may also be protected under copyright. In <a href=\"http://ipfrontline.com/2006/12/copyright-infringement-of-insurance-policies/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">American Family Life Insurance Co. of Columbus v. Assurant, Inc.</a>, American Family Life Insurance Co. of Columbus (AFLAC, plaintiff) has spent significant resources to draft an insurance policy which customers find easier to read. AFLAC sued the plaintiff (Assurant, Inc.) for copying statements in their policy.</p>\n<p>The court asserted that the narrative nature of AFLAC's policy was <strong>sufficiently different</strong> from &quot;<em>the words and expressions [that] are commonplace within the insurance field</em>&quot;, thus entitled to protection as copyrighted work.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Conclusion: contracts and agreements <em>can</em> be protected by copyright. However, it is unlikely that one which only contains common clauses is protected. Nevertheless, copying an entire document may not be a wise idea. If you have doubts in drafting one, you should consult a lawyer.</p>\n", "score": 7 } ]

[ "copyright", "licensing" ]

[ { "answer_id": 626, "body": "<p>The EULA is in most jurisdictions a legally binding contract; there is plenty of case law that supports this.</p>\n\n<p>You can only be liable under a contract for breaching its terms and only to the extent that the other party suffers harm from that breach.</p>\n\n<p>Clearly, if you haven't read the terms then you are greatly increasing the chance that you will inadvertently breach them but not reading them would not, of itself, be a breach and I can't see what harm could flow anyway.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-states", "contract-law", "liability", "eula" ]

[ { "answer_id": 616, "body": "<p>The legitimate interests are officer safety - seeing into the car - and general driver safety - it's more difficult for a driver to see out of the car especially at night.</p>\n\n<p>Yes, taking a car into a state where your tint is illegal can get you a ticket in the new state. In some (most?) states the statute applies to vehicles driven in the state; this applies to all vehicles. Anecdotally most cops won't write a ticket for an out of state car and driver but they could. </p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "california", "vehicle", "interstate-travel" ]

[ { "answer_id": 620, "body": "<p>Short answer: <strong>Yes, you can get out.</strong> However, this will be harder than you may want it to be.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>You will need to check your lease agreement for an arbitration clause. If the lease mentions disagreements will be handled by <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitration\" rel=\"noreferrer\">arbitration</a> (or an arbiter), you need to know that going into this. Arbitration clauses usually stipulate that the landlord picks the arbiter, who will almost always be predisposed to side with the landlord.</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://www.dca.ga.gov/housing/HousingDevelopment/programs/downloads/Georgia_Landlord_Tenant_Handbook.pdf\" rel=\"noreferrer\">This pamphlet</a> sheds insight into the situation. Skip down to PDF page 22, section header \"My neighbors are constantly playing loud music...\" Summarized, you can get out but if other tenants are not as affected, it will be hard to prove it affects you differently. You do, however, have the benefit of knowing the particular situation is illegal (as compared to the pamphlet's example of playing music, which is only <em>situationally</em> illegal).</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>First, get written, signed testimony from other tenants (your roommate, the one above the smoker, etc). Preferably, get these signatures <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary\" rel=\"noreferrer\">notarized</a>. The testimony should include an acknowledgement that the signer has smelled the marijuana and a statement about how often this occurs, along with the date of signature.</p>\n\n<p>Next, send a <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_mail\" rel=\"noreferrer\">certified letter</a> to your landlord. Keep a copy of this letter. In it, state your intention to move unless they fix the situation within thirty (30) days. Remind them you already have informed them of this situation. Inform them you have (hopefully notarized) testimony of the marijuana smoking from other tenants, remind them that this is illegal, and that this is affecting your health. You may also warn them that if they do not rectify the situation and you leave after thirty days, they cannot keep your deposit or charge you a termination fee- they have breached your lease contract through failure to maintain a safe and livable rental unit (a gentle reminder that you will seek legal action if they attempt to keep your deposit or charge you fees is appropriate). In the letter, request an immediate, written response with their intentions on the matter, and give a deadline (like 3 days from receipt). As a certified letter, you will know when they get it.</p>\n\n<p>The wording of this letter is important. You want to clearly state the facts without sounding self-righteous, angry, or vindictive. And proofread the heck out of it.</p>\n\n<p>If the landlord is faced with possible legal action for forcing an illegal tenant to follow the law, and certain legal action for trying to keep a legal tenant to remain in illegal, harmful circumstances, they may well decide to oust the smoker. If your scare tactic doesn't work, however, you should make good on the threat- really do leave after thirty days, and if they attempt to charge you for anything or withhold your deposit, you really should contact a lawyer.</p>\n\n<p>You should also, however, have the money saved to pay the termination fees, just in case. Because the smoke affects you differently, and there is no easy way to prove this, an unsympathetic court (or arbiter) may rule against you.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>(NOTE: I am not a lawyer, but I did have to break a lease and spent a good deal of time researching and discussing my situation with a lawyer. In the end I lost my deposit but did not have to pay any fees or missed rent.)</p>\n", "score": 7 } ]

[ "residential-lease", "landlord", "health", "georgia" ]

[ { "answer_id": 586, "body": "<p>The <a href=\"http://www.mva.maryland.gov\" rel=\"nofollow\">Maryland MVA</a>'s '<a href=\"http://www.mva.maryland.gov/drivers/apply/sources-of-proof.htm\" rel=\"nofollow\">sources of proof</a>' page lists these as proof of Maryland residency; at least two are required. </p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Maryland vehicle registration card or title;</li>\n<li>Utility, telephone or cable/satellite TV bill;</li>\n<li>Checking or savings account statement;</li>\n<li>Life insurance card or policy (over 3 years old);</li>\n<li>Property tax bill or receipt;</li>\n<li>Mortgage account or proof of home ownership (Deed, Title, Bill of Sale or Statement from Maryland Assessment and Taxation);</li>\n<li>Residential rental contract (apartment lease or other rental of real property)(current formal contract or agreement between landlord and tenant which includes all signatures);</li>\n<li>First class or priority mail from a federal, state or local government agency to include the contents and envelope, excluding mail from the Administration;</li>\n<li>Copy of federal or MD income tax return filing not more than 18 months old, with proof of filing;</li>\n<li>Installment contract from a bank or other financial institution;</li>\n<li>Sales tax or business license;</li>\n<li>Major credit card and Department/Retail store credit card bills (Wal-Mart, Sears, Lowe's, Exxon, etc);</li>\n<li>Residential service contract (refers to services performed at the address of residence; for example, cable or satellite television, TV repairs, lawn service or exterminator contract);</li>\n<li>Canceled check with imprinted name and address;</li>\n<li>Voter registration card;</li>\n<li>Selective Service Card.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>The documents you submit must also satisfy these requirements:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Must include the applicant's name and residence address.</li>\n<li>May not be from the same business, company or agency.</li>\n<li>Must reflect a current, recent or valid date. </li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>So while a lease is a valid source of proof, as long as you can provide two from the list above then you won't need a copy of your lease to get your license.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "residential-lease", "maryland" ]