Datasets:

ymoslem

/

Law-StackExchange

like 12

[ { "answer_id": 92025, "body": "<p>There is no pending appeal by the Crown Prosecution Service.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59608641\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">The CPS's appeal was successful, with judgment released on December 10, 2021</a>. The Supreme Court declined to hear Assange's further appeal of that. <a href=\"https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jun/17/julian-assange-extradition-to-us-approved-by-priti-patel\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">The home secretary then approved Assange's extradition</a>.</p>\n<p>While the question does not ask about this: Assange has now appealed that ultimate extradition approval, but these are new proceedings about a different decision point, not a continuation of the previous appeal, with the hearing expected to be in early 2023.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "england-and-wales", "extradition", "current-events" ]

[ { "answer_id": 92024, "body": "<h2>This is freedom of contract</h2>\n<p>The company sells one product to everyone, System A.</p>\n<p>The company also sells Tech B to only its pre-existing customers.</p>\n<p>That is not <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_(antitrust_law)\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">bundling</a> under the general ideas of antitrust law or <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_bundling\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Product Bundling</a> under competition laws, as you don't have any secondary items, and two wholly distinct sales.</p>\n<p>The company offers its products separately. The best equivalent would be a line in a restaurant menu that lists &quot;extra patty for your burger&quot; that is only sold as an option for your Hamburger <a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/q/85611/10334\">but not alone</a>. Just rephrase the offer to &quot;Tech B for our customers of System A&quot;.</p>\n<p>There might even be reasons why Tech B is not offered on its own and can't be bought by non-customers of System A. The most simple would be that Tech B is pre-installed with System A - but it is not bundling because you already need to <em>own</em> System A to buy Tech B and Tech B is not offered as <em>machine that can run system A</em> but <em>machine set up to run System A</em> - which is not a bundle but a different product, just like gluten-free cake is to normal cake.</p>\n<h2>Nothing forbids negotiating</h2>\n<p>That doesn't mean that legally you can't get the Tech B: you just would need to negotiate with them for it, outside of the normally offered items.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "commerce", "commerce-clause" ]

[ { "answer_id": 92020, "body": "<p>GDPR allows companies to process data for various reasons, including user consent or to fulfill contractual or legal obligations. Using an email or phone number as the unique user ID is legal, and so is retaining the unique user ID of a deleted account to prevent abuse or fraud (or for tax purposes, if it is a paid service).</p>\n<p>GDPR requires companies to publish contact details, but there is no requirement to have a chatbot to be this &quot;official contact point.&quot; Somewhere in their legal boilerplate you should find a physical address where you can send a printed and signed letter. In this letter, you can request either information on your account or the correction of factually wrong data, but then your phone number is not &quot;wrong&quot; in this sense ...</p>\n<p>PS -- I did not downvote, but it seems to me that your question seems to view GDPR as an universal &quot;magic wand&quot; when it is a quite specific set of regulations. About two minutes of googling got me the <a href=\"https://openai.com/policies/privacy-policy\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">contact details</a> in the EU/EEA and UK.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "gdpr", "privacy", "data-protection", "personal-information", "data-protection-act" ]

[ { "answer_id": 92014, "body": "<h2>A motion to dismiss sets no precedent</h2>\n<p>Whether it succeeds or not, it does not result in a judgement on the merits, it is simply an analysis on whether the case <em>as pleaded</em> shows the defendant has a case to answer.</p>\n<p>The case would have to go to trial, have a judgement issued (i.e. not settle), and await the result of final appeals (if any) before it would be considered precedent.</p>\n<h2>As to your final question</h2>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Is it considered intellectual property theft to capitalize on synthetic datasets produced by OpenAI's LLMs?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>No one knows. Hence the lawsuit.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "copyright", "intellectual-property", "data-ownership", "artificial-intelligence", "copyfraud" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91997, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/canada\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-canada-tooltip-container\">canada</a></p>\n<p>The Supreme Court of Canada has long been clear that &quot;plain meaning alone is not determinative and a statutory interpretation analysis is incomplete without considering the context, purpose and relevant legal norms&quot; (<em>R. v. Alex</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/h4mzd#par31\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2017 SCC 37 at para. 31</a>).</p>\n<p>Many factors would pull a court to interpret a statute more narrowly or broadly than an acontextual, isolated reading of the words would suggest. Generally, this includes the full text, context, and purpose of the statute. Courts will look to:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>the words of the provision</li>\n<li>the surrounding words and related provisions</li>\n<li>the words of the entire statute</li>\n<li>the entire statute book</li>\n<li>the legislative purpose as revealed through legislative history and the mischief the provision is meant to deal with</li>\n<li>the presumption of constitutionality</li>\n<li>etc.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Basically every doctrine of statutory interpretation will pull towards either a narrow or broad reading of a provision. I would hesitate though to call these &quot;corrections&quot; of &quot;legislative flaws&quot; but rather an attempt to give effect to the legislative intent. Even the doctrine of absurdity that you mention is based in an assumption that the legislature does not intend absurd results. Instead of correcting &quot;legislative flaws&quot; this doctrine/canon is a way to <em>avoid</em> judicial error.</p>\n<p>However, <em>after</em> a full interpretation of a statute reveals that it is unconstitutional because it is over or under-inclusive, then a court may use the <em>remedies</em> of reading down or reading in (these are constitutional remedies not part of the ordinary act of interpretation). In such a circumstance, where it is a &quot;safe assumption&quot; that the Legislature would have enacted the &quot;corrected&quot; version, the court may declare the correction. See <em>Schachter v. Canada</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/1fs9l\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">[1992] 2 SCR 679</a>.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 92012, "body": "<h2>Yes, it’s called <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">statutory interpretation</a></h2>\n<p>Courts recognise that words rarely if ever have a clear and unambiguous “plain meaning”. For example, the words “go” and “put” which are not uncommon in statutes each have several hundred dictionary meanings to choose from. While the correct meaning may be obvious for hundreds or even thousands of fact patterns, sooner or later a case will come along where even simple words and phrases are ambiguous.</p>\n<p>Former High Court justice Michael Kirby wrote an illustrative <a href=\"http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/2011/3.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">article</a> on the matter.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>During the past decade or so, the High Court of Australia has unanimously endorsed other principles as necessary to the accurate reading of legislation. Amongst the most important of these principles have been:</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p>that where the applicable law is expressed in legislation the correct starting point for analysis is the text of the legislation and not judicial statements of the common law or even judicial elaborations of the statute;</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>that the overall objective of statutory construction is to give effect to the purpose of Parliament as expressed in the text of the statutory provisions; and</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>that in deriving meaning from the text, so as to fulfil the purpose of Parliament, it is a mistake to consider statutory words in isolation. The proper approach demands the derivation of the meaning of words from the legislative context in which those words appear. Specifically, it requires the interpreter to examine at the very least the sentence, often the paragraph, and preferably the immediately surrounding provisions (if not a wider review of the entire statutory context) to identify the meaning of the words in the context in which they are used.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>These and other explanations of the contemporary understanding of statutory interpretation have increasingly taken courts in Australia away from the previous ‘literal’, or so-called ‘objective’ or ‘plain meaning’, approach to interpretation. The notion that a word of the English language has a single, objective and scientific meaning that has only to be discovered has gradually given way to a more candid recognition of the choices that face those who interpret the written law and the way in which values and policy considerations can influence the making of those choices. That realisation presents the third element in contemporary statutory interpretation in Australia. Today, that task requires a combined exercise involving analysis of the text, context and purpose (or policy) of the statute in question.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>He then goes on to illustrate the nuts and bolts by discussing <em>Carr v Western Australia</em> which split the High Court on the meaning of the word “interview”.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "interpretation" ]

[ { "answer_id": 14929, "body": "<p>Because in a civil case you have two equally involved sides. If I claim you damaged my car which cost $10,000 to repair, it's not only that <em>you</em> lose $10,000 if you lose the case, but <em>I</em> lose $10,000 if you win the case. Therefore the burden of proof should be equal in both directions. </p>\n\n<p>Assume a kid at an expensive boarding school is accused of causing $10,000 damage to the headmaster's car, and instead of suing for damages, the headmaster took the $10,000 out of the kid's school fees and tells the parents that the kid will be thrown out if they don't pay another $10,000. We have the exact same argument, but now the headmaster would be in court and accused. </p>\n\n<p>If the burden of proof was \"proven beyond reasonable doubt\", in the first case the parents would have to pay if it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the kid was responsible; in the second case they would only get their money back if it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the kid was <em>not</em> responsible. </p>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 14937, "body": "<p><a href=\"http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&amp;context=fss_papers\" rel=\"nofollow\">James Whitman</a> argues that they are the result of historical developments in the late 18th century which are now applied to a role for which they were not intended.</p>\n\n<p>His thesis is that the \"beyond reasonable doubt\" standard was originally constructed to protect <em>jurors</em>, not the accused. Specifically, it was protect Christian jurors from eternal damnation for falsely convicting an innocent person, particularly in capital cases. </p>\n\n<p>Theologically, if a juror had doubts, the only way to avoid sin was not to act i.e. to acquit. Indeed John Adams was explicit about this in his (successful) defence during the Boston Massacre trial. The rule was therefore introduced to make it <em>easier</em> for a jury to convict - exactly the opposite of the way it is used today.</p>\n\n<p>In civil cases, where the accused's life or liberty was not at stake, such a rule was not needed; a juror could have any number of doubts and still go with the more convincing argument without imperilling his (they were always men) immortal soul.</p>\n\n<p>As theological interpretation has changed and a more pragmatic and secular view of the law has arisen over the last 2 and a half centuries, the meaning has changed and is now seen as a way to protect the accused where their life and liberty are at stake in a criminal trial.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "civil-law", "burden-of-proof" ]

[ { "answer_id": 92002, "body": "<p>It is <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1708\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">a crime to remove</a> mail from an authorized mail depository, and an official mail box is (by definition) an authorized mail depository. Not every object used to hold mail is an authorized mail depository. It is also illegal for Amazon etc. to deliver to official mail boxes. Parcels can be delivered by USPS to official mailboxes, bringing such parcels under the purview of 18 USC 1708. Your front porch is not an official mail depository, and it is not a crime to remove a parcel dropped somewhere unofficial on your property. The pertinent distinction is not about &quot;letters vs. packages&quot;, it is &quot;Federal mail of any kind in an official depository&quot;.</p>\n<p>It can easily be the subject of a lawsuit to trespass on the property of another person, in every state of the US. If A trespasses on B's property, B can sue A and recover damages. B would have to prove that the item was their property (A could defend against the claim by proving that it was A's actual property or that it was joint property. The theory that spouses have equal rights to items acquired during a marriage is not completely wrong in certain states, for example Washington, but not Ohio). Of course if it is reasonable to believe that the package contains a dangerous substance then A's decision to inspect the contents could nullify B's claimed outrage over the trespass, and A might even countersue if A is right B attempted to harm A. There are practical legal solutions, rather than the risky enterprise of taking the law into your own hands: you could get a court order requiring B to receive their packages wherever they live.</p>\n<p>You might be able to get away with it if there is a credible threat and end up getting sued, but not if you just have in mind annoying your spouse.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "privacy", "private-property" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91902, "body": "<h2>They are the modern legacy of the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_prerogative_of_mercy\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Royal prerogative of mercy</a></h2>\n<p>Or in Commonwealth countries that still have a monarch, it <em>is</em> the Royal prerogative of mercy.</p>\n<p>Its modern functional purpose is to provide <a href=\"https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2012/September/Justice_beyond_law_clemency_and_the_Royal_Prerogative_of_Mercy\" rel=\"noreferrer\">justice beyond the law</a>. Its historical purpose was to allow the monarch to commute automatic death sentences in a legal system that did not, at that time, have an appeals process to correct miscarriages of justice, either through mistake or in a system that was not as flexible as it is today.</p>\n<p>It exists as the ultimate backstop against injustice. Ultimately, exercise of the power is a political rather than a judicial one and, as such, any limits on misuse come through the ballot box, not the court.</p>\n", "score": 35 }, { "answer_id": 91903, "body": "<p>The purpose was to place in an individual person, independent from the judiciary, the power and individual agency to provide mercy for outcomes that have resulted in &quot;unfortunate guilt.&quot; See generally, &quot;<a href=\"https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-2/ALDE_00013317/#ALDF_00022720\" rel=\"noreferrer\">The Constitution Annotated</a>&quot;, and <a href=\"https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-71-80#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493466\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Federalist 74</a>.</p>\n<p>The US framers did not place the power in an individual simply for the reason that the &quot;King is a single person.&quot; They did not inconsiderately replicate the U.K. approach. There was debate about whether the pardon power would be a step on path back to monarchy. There was debate about whether to include the legislature in the pardon power.</p>\n<p>For one rationale for placing the power in an individual, see Federalist 74:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>As the sense of responsibility is always strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 17 }, { "answer_id": 91913, "body": "<p>Under the rule of law, laws must not be retroactive and they should not be too specific. But sometimes, justice requires <em>not</em> applying the existing law in a specific case. By giving the power of pardon to the executive, and not the legislative or judiciary, there is no suggestion that a pardon creates a new law or judiciary precedent. It stands aside.</p>\n", "score": 8 } ]

[ "constitutional-law", "legal-history", "pardon" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91995, "body": "<p>There are no specific laws tailored to this scenario, but one might derive an answer from more general laws, in particular battery laws. In the US, <a href=\"https://jaapl.org/content/40/2/239\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">it is reported</a> that there are (as of 21012) no court ruling on the practice of covert medication, and no statutes. However, there are general medico-legal doctrines, informed consent\n(e.g. Salgo v. Leland Stanford University, Natanson v. Kline etc.) and the right to refuse medication (Superintendent of Belchertown State School v. Saikewicz, Sell v. US). However these doctrines are based on doctor-patient relations (would be applicable to medical staff sneaking drugs into a patient's food and drink), and have not been applied to family-member care-givers. There is legal risk when a person has not been adjudicated to be incompetent, since this is technically assault.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "criminal-law", "medical", "family-law", "new-jersey" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91994, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/canada\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-canada-tooltip-container\">canada</a></p>\n<p>Courts have recognized that it is an aggravating factor when a person's crime has affected a vulnerable population including people whose vulnerability stems from economic disadvantage or dependence.</p>\n<p>The <em>Criminal Code</em> <em>requires</em> judges to consider such circumstance. It says the sentencing judge must consider (s. 718.2(a)(1)(iii.1)):</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>evidence that the offence had a significant impact on the victim, considering their age and other personal circumstances, including their health <strong>and financial situation</strong></p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "india" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91980, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>would the state have any interest or legal right to assert that having\nonce met conditions that would allow them to be considered married,\nthat they are in fact still married despite their objections to that\nlegal status and to being characterized as such? Could both later\nlegally claim to be single and never married?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Yes. For example, the state could prosecute someone for bigamy if there was a common law marriage that was not dissolved and someone remarried. There are all sorts of other circumstances (e.g. paternity, government benefit eligibility, taxation) where the government might want to prove that you have a common law marriage as well.</p>\n<p>It is certainly possible to ignore the law and not get caught. But, generally, the agreement of the parties requirement for common law marriage means it doesn't happen very often. And, usually, at least one person in a married couple has an economic incentive to not ignore the existence of a marriage even if the couple had no children.</p>\n<p>Even if they don't have much in the way of assets at the time they separate, twenty years later there might be considerable assets acquired by the parties during marriage and a presumption of substantial alimony and inheritance rights. So someone who was O.K. with &quot;forgetting it&quot; when they were 23 might change their mind when they are 43 or when you are dead and a probate case is pending. There is no statute of limitations to establish the existence of a common law marriage.</p>\n<p>In short, ignoring the existence of a common law marriage is high risk and low reward.</p>\n<p>If there is ambiguity, one quick and dirty process as opposed to filing an action for annulment, is to file an action for divorce, apprise the court of the circumstances, and have it authoritatively dismiss the divorce case on the merits by ruling that the parties aren't married</p>\n<p>I've done that for a client once, in the face of fairly strong evidence that they were married, when the parties to the divorce case both told the court under oath that they never believed themselves to be married to each other at any time.</p>\n<p>One countervailing force is that issuance of a marriage license to someone creates a rebuttable presumption that they were not married at the time it was issued. This can be overcome with a showing of the existence of a common law marriage, but it makes the &quot;proving a negative&quot; of non-marriage easier, especially in cases when the parties are now dead and this is necessary to know for paternity or inheritance purposes.</p>\n<p>Finding proof of even a marriage license marriage (or a divorce) can be difficult as lots and lots of jurisdictions can get you married or divorced (not all in the U.S.A.), but there isn't a national comprehensive index of marriages in the United States.</p>\n<p>For what it is worth, France solves this problem by requiring copies of marriage certificates, divorce decrees, and death certificates to be filed where someone was born, but common law countries never had a comparable low tech system to solve the indexing problem.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Also bonus points for addressing how taking the 5th might assessed in\nanswering questions around status, particularly in the context of\napplying for a marriage license later to someone else.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>There is nothing special about it.</p>\n<p>You can refuse to testify about possible prior common law marriages if you subsequently have a marriage certificate issued. Keep in mind that you can only plead the 5th without consequences in a criminal case. In a civil matter, you can plead the 5th but this usually results in an adverse inference for purposes of the civil case that you committed the crime implicated by your refusal to testify on that ground.</p>\n", "score": 9 }, { "answer_id": 91984, "body": "<h2>There is no common-law marriage in <a href=\"/questions/tagged/australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-australia-tooltip-container\">australia</a></h2>\n<p>Marriage in Australia is a creature of statute and a Federal power (first exercised in 1961]. Marriage begins with the ceremony and ends with death or divorce.</p>\n<h2>De facto relationships are recognised in the Family Law Act</h2>\n<p>The criteria for being in a de facto relationship are spelled out in <a href=\"http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/fla1975114/s4aa.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s4AA</a>:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Not married</li>\n<li>Not related</li>\n<li>“having regard to all the circumstances of their relationship, they have a relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis”</li>\n</ul>\n<p>A de facto relationship does not have the same <a href=\"https://www.mondaq.com/australia/family-law/844274/is-a-de-facto-relationship-the-same-as-a-marriage\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">rights</a> as a marriage:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>When de facto couples decide to separate, an application can be made to the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, in the same way as married couples, to resolve any financial matters, property divisions and custody disputes.</p>\n<p>However, people in a de facto relationship must satisfy the court that the relationship was genuine, and then meet one of the following four criteria:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>the relationship must have lasted for at least two years</li>\n<li>there is a child in the relationship</li>\n<li>the relationship is registered under a prescribed law</li>\n<li>one party has contributed substantially to the relationship and, if an order was not made, there would be a grave injustice</li>\n</ul>\n<p>De facto couples must also apply for court orders within two years of the relationship ending. Outside this time, a person will need to prove hardship for the case to be heard. In contrast, married couples have no such time limit. While they must apply for a property settlement within 12 months of divorce, this can be extended with consent.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Whether you are in a de facto relationship or not is a matter of objective fact, not the subjective opinion of the people in it. However, the issue only comes up when at least one of the parties makes an application to the court.</p>\n<p>It is also worth noting that a person can only be in one marriage at a time but several de facto relationships.</p>\n<h2>Other laws may have different definitions</h2>\n<p>The way other laws treat marriages and de facto relationships is a matter for those laws. Some treat them the same, some treat them differently.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91985, "body": "<p>A common law marriage can exist in Montana, <a href=\"https://dphhs.mt.gov/assets/hcsd/fmamanual/FMA308-2July012016.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">given certain conditions</a>. A couple could jointly seek legal recognition of the marriage for some reason, and there is a court form to be signed and notarized which constitutes proof of the marriage. The courts can also recognize a common law marriage if only one of the parties petitions and prevails in court, provided they provide sufficient proof of such a marriage. <a href=\"https://cases.justia.com/montana/supreme-court/1988-05-24-56673B43-487B-4716-962A-FCB709482109.pdf?ts=1396129415\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Geertz v. Geertz</a> in an example where a spouse failed to prove the (disputed) existence of a common law marriage. In this hypothetical case, both parties appear to agree in not purporting a common law marriage (&quot;if <strong>they</strong> do not want it&quot;, rather than &quot;if one of them does not want it&quot;).</p>\n<p>The presumption of common law marriage is a disputable presumption under <a href=\"https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0260/chapter_0010/part_0060/section_0020/0260-0010-0060-0020.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">26-1-602(30) MCA</a>. Suppose a couple decided to split up without a formal divorce, one or both of them then married, and the county prosecutor wants to <a href=\"https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0450/chapter_0050/part_0060/section_0110/0450-0050-0060-0110.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">prosecute that person for bigamy</a>. The state must prove that the accused is married to another and that he/she does not reasonably believe themselves to be legally eligible to remarry, noting that <a href=\"https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0260/chapter_0010/part_0040/section_0030/0260-0010-0040-0030.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">under Montana law</a>, in criminal cases guilt must be established beyond reasonable doubt. The question asserts that</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>There is no paper trail. No proof that anything ever happened except\nperhaps jointly signed leases showing that at one point they lived\ntogether. No reason for either to assert a claim over the other for\nreasons of alimony, custody, or asset disputes.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>which means for example that they did <em>not</em> file the affidavit proving a common law marriage, they each filed taxes singly, they never filed paperwork purporting that the other was their spouse. However there were some instances where one or the other indicates in conversations that the other was &quot;their spouse&quot; – as in Geerts v. Geertz. In that case, there was a bit of evidence supporting the claim for marriage, but not enough even for a civil case. Under the assumptions of the question, there would not be sufficient proof that a common law marriage exists to obtain a criminal conviction. A debtor might have in mind going after one of the two for a debt, but &quot;A husband or wife, solely on the basis of being a spouse, is not answerable for the acts of the other spouse or liable for the debts contracted by the other spouse&quot; except for &quot;the expenses for necessities of the family&quot;. Supposing that there is a debt for family necessities, the debtor would have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that there exists a marriage. The court, as an arm of the state, could then possibly find that a marriage exists for the purpose of collecting on that debt.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91979, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/british-columbia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;british-columbia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;british-columbia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-british-columbia-tooltip-container\">british-columbia</a></p>\n<p>Child support by application of the child is a circumstance in which a person other than the couple would have a legal interest in having a spousal relationship recognized. The state would also have an interest via court order and the family maintenance enforcement program.</p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/00_11025_00_multi\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Family Law Act</a> establishes that &quot;Each parent and guardian of a child has a duty to provide support for the child&quot; (s. 147). An application for child support may be made by the child (s. 149(2)(b)).</p>\n<p>Whether a person is a &quot;spouse&quot; is relevant for the establishment of presumptions of parentage or status as stepparent (both relevant for establishing entitlement to child support). This is not the &quot;state&quot; (in the sense of executive government) imposing the recognition of the relationship, but the relationship would be recognized by the court order granting child support.</p>\n<p>No other obligations related to spousal status under the Family Law Act are forced upon parties when they are not in dispute. The default is that they will become spouses after having lived with each other in a marriage-like relationship continuously for at least two years, but if no dispute ever arises, and the parties are in agreement as to their assets etc., then the state and court will not be involved. Of course, one cannot predict whether there will be a dispute or not, so this paragraph should not be taken to suggest that a couple need not formalize any agreements they have regarding property division, spousal support, etc.</p>\n<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/canada\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-canada-tooltip-container\">canada</a></p>\n<p>For income tax purposes, parties become spouses when they have been living together in a conjugal relationship for twelve months (see the <a href=\"https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-3.3/FullText.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><em>Income Tax Act</em></a>, s. 248(1)). One cannot opt out of this status and one must declare it accurately to Revenue Canada. See e.g. <em>Molnar v. The Queen</em>, <a href=\"https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/tcc/doc/2006/2006tcc58/2006tcc58.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2006 TCC 58</a>.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "texas", "common-law", "marriage" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91947, "body": "<p>No, in <a href=\"/questions/tagged/germany\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-germany-tooltip-container\">germany</a> there is <strong>no universal requirement as to form</strong> (<em>Formfreiheit</em>).\nThis includes associating a signature with a name in block letters.\n<em>In principle</em> you can enforce a contract in court even if the written contract does not identify the contracting parties by spelled out name, but by signature only.\nIt stands to reason there is no benefit in omitting the full names.</p>\n<p>The legislature implemented elevated form requirements for <em>certain</em> legal transactions by mandating the use of a notary.\nHere, again, there is no requirement as to put a plain text name next to your signature.\nThe link between signature and person is established via <em>the notary’s</em> documentation.\nYou could put an alias “Donald Duck” next to your signature, the <em>notarial deed</em> will indicate that in fact Kalle Richter signed the document.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>As far as I am aware all <a href=\"/questions/tagged/european-union\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;european-union&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;european-union&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-european-union-tooltip-container\">european-union</a> legal transactions will need to go through their official channels.\nIt is simply not possible, for example, to establish a European Economic Interest Grouping on a scrap of paper.\nThus there is no issue and in turn no regulation.</p>\n<p>One thing is for sure, the <a href=\"/questions/tagged/european-union\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;european-union&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;european-union&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-european-union-tooltip-container\">european-union</a> does <em>not impose</em> a “minimum framework” on its member states.\nI recollect there are <em>some</em> directives regarding <em>electronic</em> signatures, but that is a different story now.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91981, "body": "<h3>Historical Use Of Seals And Personal Marks</h3>\n<p>Not precisely on point, but it is common in East Asia and Southeast Asia, and was historically common in common law and civil law countries, for legal entities, such as corporations to ratify contracts with an official seal sometimes called a &quot;chop.&quot;</p>\n<p>In those contexts, possession of the seal creates a strong presumption of authority to agree on behalf of the entity and it is not necessary to know who actually used the seal to affix the seal to prove the validity of an entity's assent to the contract. Basically, in the language of common law lawyers, possession of a corporate seal conveys apparent authority to use that seal in the absence of obvious circumstances to the contrary (e.g. the other party know the officers of the entity personally and knows that the person using the seal is an imposter).</p>\n<p>These days, in common law countries and non-Asian civil law countries, the more common practice is to have an entity assent to a contract with the name of the entity followed by the word &quot;by&quot; and then a signature of an individual corporate officer or agent whose identity and title is expressly stated in the signature block and who signs their own name as the authorizing agent rather than the name of the entity.</p>\n<p>In circumstances where a signatory to the contract is not sufficiently literate to sign their own name, the historical norm in common law countries was for that person to affix an &quot;X&quot; on a signature line where the person's name was printed.</p>\n<p>In East Asia and Southeast Asia, people who were illiterate in this way but not impoverished (and many literate middle class and upper middle class people as well) would have a signature seal similar to a corporate seal but to sign on behalf of an individual natural person.</p>\n<p>In both the &quot;X&quot; case and in the individual &quot;chop&quot; case, sometimes, if there was concern that there might be a dispute over the identity of the person who agreed to the contract, the person agreeing would sometimes also ink their finger or impress their finger in wax to leave a finger print as well on the document.</p>\n<p>For what it is worth, the institution of a name seal or corporate seal to agree to contracts and identify someone with a document precedes the idea of a signature by many centuries. Seals were used in the Neolithic (i.e. stone age farmer) Balkan Vinca culture, in the Indus Valley Civilization prior to ca. 2000 BCE, in East Asia and Southeast Asia, and in Sumerian, Hittite and Egyptian cultures in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East long before signatures or full purpose written languages were invented.</p>\n<p>Written languages emerged from the earlier practice of identifying things associated with a person with seals. Seals continued to be predominant in the time period when only a tiny percentage of the population, mostly literate clerks, priests, and nobles, were literate in the newly invented written languages, but the masses of ordinary and even reasonably well off people were illiterate and dictated correspondence to scribes. Signatures only really caught on in cultures where an ability to read and write was nearly universal.</p>\n<h3>Sometimes the identity of a signer doesn't matter</h3>\n<p>It is also worth noting that there are a fair number of circumstances in which the identity of the person signing isn't very important but a signature is.</p>\n<p>For example, in the case of a negotiable instrument like a check, one way to transfer ownership of the instrument is to sign the back. Knowing who signs the initial time is important as it should match the payee of the instrument. But if a check is negotiated to multiple people in sequence the identity of the intermediate and even the final endorser (i.e. person signing the back) of the negotiable instrument doesn't really matter much. Rights attach to the &quot;holder&quot; of the negotiable instrument (i.e., the person in possession of that physical piece of paper) and whether the holder did or did not endorse it (i.e. did or did not sign the back of it) often doesn't matter.</p>\n<p>Likewise, if someone is in charge of managing a storeroom, the fact that someone signed a receipt to pick up something that was kept in the storeroom matters more for most purposes than who actually signed it, and there is a rebuttable presumption that the person who signed for it had the authority to do so, even if the identity of that person can't be determined.</p>\n<p>A more modern example involves click based assent to the terms of service of a website or online service that authorizes the online service provider to do something that can only be done with consent or requires an acknowledgment from the user (e.g. authorization to shut down an account for non-payment that is payed with a gift card, or acknowledgement that a user is located in a country where certain regulations don't apply). In those circumstances, the online service provider is protected by the existence of a record of the checkoff agreeing to the terms or acknowledging something and the online service provides has no reason to have to actually identify the online user who agreed in the real world.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91965, "body": "<p>This answer is a logical analysis in the context of common-law jurisdictions where a signature is any mark that a person makes (a reminder of the time in which rates of illiteracy were high). I don't know to what extent this would be applicable in Germany (but the existence of common-law jurisdictions in the EU is one reason for the lack of union legislation on such matters).</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Can a signature be valid without a name datum associated with it?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Yes, but if it isn't possible to identify the signatory (by any means) then it doesn't matter. The point of a signature is to establish a connection between a person and a document. If the person can't be identified by any means then it is not possible to establish that connection. But if you can identify a person with a signature, even without knowing the person's name, then the signature is valid and the connection is established.</p>\n<p>Suppose the document is a contract signed illegibly by Alice, who is not identifiable by the signature nor by any other part of the document itself. If Bob, the other party to the contract, wishes to enforce the contract against Alice, then Alice is identifiable through Bob's knowledge that the signature is Alice's. (Alice can dispute Bob's claim to that effect, but in this hypothetical it is assumed that the signature is Alice's, so such a counterclaim would be fraudulent or, in some contexts, perjurious.)</p>\n<p>Suppose Alice wishes to enforce the contract against Bob. In that case, Alice claims the signature is hers, and Bob may accept or dispute this claim. If he disputes it, then the finder of fact will decide whether the signature is Alice's based on whatever evidence Alice and Bob present in support of their respective claims.</p>\n<p>Suppose Bob finds the contract in his files and cannot remember who signed it. In that case, it does not matter whether the signature is valid because Bob does not know who the other party to the contract is and therefore cannot enforce the contract.</p>\n<p>It's difficult to imagine plausible circumstances in which it would be possible to identify someone as the signatory of a document without knowing the person's name, but if it <em>is</em> possible then there's no reason for the failure to include the name on the document to invalidate the signature.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91973, "body": "<p><strong>Yes</strong> in <a href=\"/questions/tagged/france\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-france-tooltip-container\">france</a>.</p>\n<p>The case in point is <a href=\"https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000007030049/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Cass. 1e civ. 27-1-1993 n° 91-12.115</a>. A court of appeals reasoned that without the common phrasing &quot;lu et approuvé&quot; (&quot;read and approved&quot;), one party might not be engaged by the contract they signed. The higher court reversed:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Attendu qu'il résulte de [l'article 1322 du Code Civil] qu'en dehors des exceptions prévues par la loi, l'acte sous seing privé n'est soumis à aucune autre condition de forme que la signature de ceux qui s'obligent ;</p>\n<p>Attendu que pour &quot;mettre en doute&quot;, au vu de la lettre précitée, la réalité de l'engagement de la société Erisa, l'arrêt retient que seule l'inscription usuelle &quot; lu et approuvé &quot; peut signifier sans équivoque l'approbation du signataire ;</p>\n<p>Attendu qu'en se déterminant par un tel motif, alors que la mention &quot; lu et approuvé &quot; inscrite au bas d'un écrit sous seing privé constitue une formalité dépourvue de toute portée, la cour d'appel a violé le texte susvisé ;</p>\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<p>From [article 1322 du Code Civil], the only formal obligation for &quot;acts under private seal&quot; is the signature of the parties, save for statutory exceptions in some cases.</p>\n<p>Considering the abovementioned letter, the court of appeal’s verdict &quot;put into question&quot; [one of the parties’] commitment because only the usual wording &quot;read and approved&quot; would unequivocally signify that commitment.</p>\n<p>Such a mention is of pure form and has no legal effect, and as such the court of appeals violated the abovementioned statute.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>That reasoning can apply equally to a lack of name, date, or other formal elements. A signature is necessary, but it need not be legible.</p>\n<p>The relevant statutes are <a href=\"https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006070721/LEGISCTA000006165773/#LEGISCTA000006165773\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">articles 1322 through 1325 of the Code Civil</a>. They also give the one limitation for contracts to be valid: there must be one copy for each party.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>L'acte sous seing privé, reconnu par celui auquel on l'oppose, ou légalement tenu pour reconnu, a, entre ceux qui l'ont souscrit et entre leurs héritiers et ayants cause, la même foi que l'acte authentique.</p>\n<p>Celui auquel on oppose un acte sous seing privé est obligé d'avouer ou de désavouer formellement son écriture ou sa signature. Ses héritiers ou ayants cause peuvent se contenter de déclarer qu'ils ne connaissent point l'écriture ou la signature de leur auteur.</p>\n<p>Dans le cas où la partie désavoue son écriture ou sa signature, et dans le cas où ses héritiers ou ayants cause déclarent ne les point connaître, la vérification en est ordonnée en justice.</p>\n<p>Les actes sous seing privé qui contiennent des conventions synallagmatiques, ne sont valables qu'autant qu'ils ont été faits en autant d'originaux qu'il y a de parties ayant un intérêt distinct. (...) Chaque original doit contenir la mention du nombre des originaux qui en ont été faits. (...)</p>\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<p>An act under private seal <em>[= anything not notarized, i.e. 99.9% of contracts]</em>, recognized by the one against whom it is used, or held legally as valid, has between the signatories or between their heirs, the same validity as a notarized act.</p>\n<p>The one against whom an act under private seal is raised must formally accept or deny their signing of the act. Heirs may declare ignorance of who signed.</p>\n<p>If a party denies signing the act, or in case heirs declare ignorance, the court must determine the signature’s validity.</p>\n<p>Acts under private seal with reciprocal considerations are only valid if as many original copies are made as there are interested parties. (...) Each original copy must bear the mention of how many such copies were made. (...) <em>[In <a href=\"/questions/tagged/civil-legal-system\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;civil-legal-system&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;civil-legal-system&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-civil-legal-system-tooltip-container\">civil-legal-system</a>, a unilateral promise is enforceable - but then, only one copy is needed, the one for whoever receives the promise.]</em></p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "european-union", "germany", "signature" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91983, "body": "<h2>Not remembering something correctly is not lying</h2>\n<p>To lie, you have to know the statement is false at the time you make it.</p>\n<p>As a State’s Attorney she no doubt deals with multiple cases and a plethora of detectives. Not remembering in the moment what you said to one detective is not malfeasance, it’s just human. Telling the court you don’t know and will find out and then finding out is good practice. It’s possible that the attorney didn’t remember the conversation until she spoke to the detective again. It’s possible she still doesn’t remember the conversation and is just taking the detective at his word.</p>\n<p>It is often useful to remember <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Hanlon’s Razor</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "illinois" ]

[ { "answer_id": 89304, "body": "<p>Your first sentence already says that these databases don't consider their information &quot;open source&quot;. You may consider it open source, but that will only get you into court.</p>\n<p>Are you using the data for educational or for commercial use? Extracting bits that you are interested in from <em>all</em> database entries and using them to build an application points very strongly to commercial use. Again, you may disagree, but that will only get you into court.</p>\n<p>You can collect the information you want from the original sources. That's 1,000 times more work, but much more likely to be legal. On the other hand, that's what these people creating the databases have done, and that's how they make their living. So do you expect the law to help you destroying their livelihood?</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright", "health", "drugs" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91974, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>if I directly <strong>purchase</strong> this custom content...</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>As a general rule, &quot;intellectual property&quot; is very different from tangible property - arguably, &quot;intellectual property&quot; is a misnomer. Trying to apply concepts from property law (such as &quot;a thing has a single owner, who can do anything not illegal with it as they please&quot;) is fraught with danger.</p>\n<p>You would generally not &quot;purchase content&quot;, but rather purchase a <strong>license</strong> for the content, allowing you to do various things. One of those things might be to &quot;curate/edit this collection of recordings and present it publicly as an art project (probably just online)&quot;. Another might be to &quot;to sell or otherwise profit from this&quot;. All that depends on what your contract says.</p>\n<p>In an ideal world(?), contracts would all be detailed enough to leave no uncertainty about what is allowed and what is not. In the real world, a bunch of SMS can form a contract. For instance, the following is a contract:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A (version 1): Hey B, could you send me a clip of you waving at the camera? I will pay $10 for it.</p>\n<p>B: sure</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>...but it’s not clear what A and B agreed as to what the clip would be used for. Saving and viewing on A’s device, probably yes; putting it in fullscreen in the next blockbuster movie, probably no. Showing it to A’s friends, putting it in an art project? That’s getting dicey.</p>\n<p>You might have heard about &quot;work for hire&quot; granting full copyright control to whoever pays for the work to be created. In the <a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a>, the above exchange does <strong>not</strong> explicitly designate the content as work-for-hire, as would be required by <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">17 U.S.C. § 101</a> (&quot;...if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire&quot;).</p>\n<p>Here’s a better SMS contract:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A (version 2): Hey B, could you send me a clip of you waving at the camera? I will use it to make an art project, collating many such clips, and publishing that on the internet. I will pay $10 for it.</p>\n<p>B: sure</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Here there’s no question that B agreed with the proposed use. On the other hand, it’s likely than a <em>different</em> use would be deemed a copyright violation - the contract was proposed by A and should be understood as limiting A’s right to use the clip to exactly what they said they would do. If they wanted it to say something else, they could have sent a different SMS (see <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_proferentem\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">contra proferentem</a>).</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "copyright", "intellectual-property" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91969, "body": "<p><a href=\"https://toggl.com/track/legal/terms/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Section 20 - Consumer withdrawal</a> has more information.</p>\n<p>The '<a href=\"https://www.ionos.co.uk/digitalguide/online-marketing/online-sales/right-of-withdrawal/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">right to withdraw</a>' refers to a consumers ability to ask for their money to be returned, for say faulty goods, and there is usually a time limit.</p>\n<p>The toggl clause 4 states that if the customer requests that the features of a product are <em>activated immediately</em>, then the right to withdraw is forfeited, as the customer has already received the benefits from the product.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "terms-of-service" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91967, "body": "<p>Possibly, but it would be fact specific e.g. if the person being poked turns around or otherwise reacts with movement because:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A person is said to use force to another if he causes motion ...to that other [person]</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Ultimately it would be for a court to decide, but are you aware of <a href=\"https://www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data?actid=AC_CEN_5_23_00037_186045_1523266765688&amp;sectionId=45829&amp;sectionno=95&amp;orderno=99\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">section 95</a> IPC?</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>Act causing slight harm.</strong></p>\n<p>Nothing is an offence by reason that it causes, or that it is intended to cause, or that it is known to be likely to cause, any harm, if that harm is so slight that no person of ordinary sense and temper would complain of such harm.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>This is related to the principle of <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><em>de minimis non curat lex</em></a></p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "india", "indian-penal-code" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91952, "body": "<p>There is no right or wrong answer. You have named the two main repositories for federal &quot;legal text&quot;, then for your state (for each and every state) you have to find the corresponding resources. In Washington state that is the Revised Code of Washington (<a href=\"https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">RCW</a>) and the Washington Administrative Code (<a href=\"https://app.leg.wa.gov/wac/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">WAC</a>). Knowing where to find a micro-needle in those mega-haystacks is the main challenge, but you can be fairly confident that the state statutes regarding assault are orthogonal to a question about the HIPAA privacy rule.</p>\n<p>In addition, you have to know how to find relevant case law (appellate rulings) that tell you what those rules &quot;really mean&quot; (at a given time). Locating relevant case law is generally a matter of plain Google-fu, unless you also have access to one of those <a href=\"https://lawlibguides.luc.edu/healthlaw/databases\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">paid tools</a> like Lexis-Nexis or Westlaw. That link mentions other resources which may or may not be available to you.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91959, "body": "<p>Google, Google Scholar, and Wikipedia (follow up on the citations supporting the articles) are often decent tools.</p>\n<p>Frequently, they will also send you to the website of a federal agency which has links to relevant legal resources, to law review articles on topic, and to independent third-party discussions often from law firms or non-profits that deal with legal issues in the industry. Sometimes medical or health industry periodicals will discuss legal topics as well. Another great resource when you can find it are Congressional Research Service reports (this is an independent research arm of Congress related to the Library of Congress) and publications of the relevant Congressional committees at their respective websites.</p>\n<p>A law review article on a topic will typically comprehensively review all relevant legal authority on the subject matter of the article through the data of publication (minus two or three months) all in one place with explanatory commentary and is a gold mine if you can find it, although older ones often get outdated in fast changing areas of law like health care law. Law review articles often put in context a newly decided appellate court or U.S. Supreme Court case, a newly enacted statute or amendment to it, a major overhaul of regulations or new regulations where there were none before, or a policy analysis over the overall legal framework of an area of law.</p>\n<p>Some large complex federal health care programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act also have a level of agency guidance below regulations containing agency determinations that are not as general in application as a regulation, but usually those are only available in a digestible manner with an expensive specialty law subscription. Also, note that most operative Medicaid regulations are at the state rather than the federal level in this joint state-federal program with the federal regulations mostly stating what states can and cannot put in their state regulations.</p>\n<p>The biggest thing that the resources you mention are missing from statutes and regulations is case law. If you have the name of the case, a date or year of a decision, and any additional citation information, a variety of sources (e.g. Findlaw) will find the text of the case for you. But, almost all of the leading word search based ways to locate statutes and annotated statutes and regulations that list cases that have interpreted a code or regulation section are on a paid basis.</p>\n<p>Case law is basically indispensable in researching U.S. federal health care law. For example, the meaning of several key provisions of the Affordable Care Act have been the subject to extensive litigation, in some cases all of the way to the U.S. Supreme Court or with conflicting resolutions from different appellate courts. It is impossible to discern the statute's true legal meaning without the interpretive gloss of case law.</p>\n<p>Your university library may have a subscription, however, or might be able to get you temporary access to an affiliated or reciprocity cooperation based law school library with student legal search database access on a temporary basis.</p>\n<p>Short of an online research database that is usually paid, your best shot is probably to look to the hard copy of the <strong>United States Code Annotated (USCA)</strong> of the relevant statutory sections to find relevant cases interpreting the statutes and then something like Findlaw or Cornell to look up the full text of the cases referenced. Every physical law library and many university libraries and public libraries without law schools affiliated with them will at least have a hard copy of USCA.</p>\n<p>USCA will also note the West Digest System key numbers of the cases annotated, and you can then look at the hard copy of <strong>the West Digest</strong> to find other cases (possibly arising under different statutes) that implicate the issue that the West Key Number in Question references. A West Key number has a word or words indicating where the entry appears in alphabetical order in the digest, and a key number which indicates which section number within the word topic is addressed by the annotation. A full set of West Digests (which is a comprehensive compilation of all case annotations of all cases reported by the West Publishing Company, which is the most comprehensive of the annotation systems) would be in every state supreme court library and in every law school library, but you'd probably want to consult of university librarian if your library doesn't have one to see where you can find it.</p>\n<p><strong>Black's Law Dictionary</strong> is something you should just buy in hard copy and use as an unofficial textbook for the course if you are doing anything more than a nominal amount of legal research. Knowing the technical sense definition of terms of art is absolutely key in the medical sciences and in that respect, law is no different.</p>\n<p>There are also a variety of not very expensive <a href=\"https://www.textbooks.com/Catalog/JII/Legal-Research.php\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">handbooks on legal research</a> for aspiring law students (typically first year law students), any of which is adequate for your needs.</p>\n<p>Another secondary source you should consider is a legal treatise in a subject-matter of law that you are working on. This is a topic area reference written by a renowned expert in the subject area that references all relevant legal authorities including statutes, regulations, case law, and other guidance (as well as legislative history) all in one place along with the author's own commentary. In health care, there may be legal treatises on <a href=\"https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/treatise-finders/healthlawandpolicy\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">health care law</a> and there may be legal treatises on <a href=\"https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/treatise-finders/adminlaw\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">administrative law</a>. Again, a library copy is one option, but in the case of a treatise an interlibrary loan is sometimes possible as well. The links in this paragraph are from Georgetown Law School and its publicly available online law library resources are particularly good.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>I was hoping someone knew of any resources that mirror some of my\nfavorite citation/reference searches. This includes:</p>\n<p>Dimensions</p>\n<p>Lens</p>\n<p>Wizdom.ai</p>\n<p>DeepDyve</p>\n<p>Semantic Scholar</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>No freely available resources of this kind exist. Th closest you will get is Google Scholar.</p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/healthlawprof_blog/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Health Care Law Professors Blog</a>, which is searchable, is also a rich lode of resources. Many law review articles have open access preprints posted at the Social Science Research Network, which I've often downloaded paper from but don't know how to search.</p>\n<p>The University of Michigan Law library has the best collection in the nation of non-U.S. legal texts in the original languages, but it doesn't sound like you'll be needing those.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "legal-research", "research", "code-of-federal-regulations" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91957, "body": "<p><strong>Would such cases come under the scope of IPC section 375 or 376?</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Yes</strong></p>\n<p>Notwithstanding it's difficult to prove a negative, there is nothing in the IPC (nor any other Indian legislation that I can find) that says otherwise.</p>\n<p>i.e. rape is rape if the elements of <a href=\"https://www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data?actid=AC_CEN_5_23_00037_186045_1523266765688&amp;orderno=424\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">section 375</a> are proven, and the punishment would be according to <a href=\"https://www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data?actid=AC_CEN_5_23_00037_186045_1523266765688&amp;orderno=425\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">section 376</a> IPC.</p>\n<p>(Whether these offences are under prosecuted, or merely under reported, is probably impossible to answer without carrying out a nationwide survey to collect the data.)</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "india", "indian-penal-code", "rape" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91956, "body": "<p><strong>The decoder is aware that someone might read the combination, open the lock, and go into the locked area ...Has the person committed a crime?</strong></p>\n<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/england-and-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container\">england-and-wales</a></p>\n<p>Maybe not a criminal offence, but the decoder <em>might</em> be liable civilly under <a href=\"https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/tort-law/tort-of-negligence.php\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><strong>the Tort of Negligence</strong></a>, which is:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>a legal wrong that is suffered by someone at the hands of another who fails to take proper care to avoid what a reasonable person would regard as a foreseeable risk. In many cases there will be a contractual relationship (express or implied) between the parties involved, such as that of doctor and patient, employer and employee, bank and customer, and until relatively recently it was necessary for such a contractual relationship to exist in order for a claim for negligence to succeed.</p>\n<p>But the civil law relating to negligence has evolved and grown to deal with situations that arise between two or more parties even where no contract, written or implied, exists between them.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><strong>Is it legal to obtain and publish that information, if no physical damage is done to the object when deriving the information?</strong></p>\n<p>One scenario where this <em>might</em> be a criminal offence is if the information is protected with a <a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-security-classifications\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Government Security Classification</a> marking (i.e. spying).</p>\n<p>See <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/1-2/28/section/1?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Section 1</a>, Official Secrets Act 1911:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) If any person for any purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the State—</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p>(b) makes any <strong>sketch</strong> ... which is calculated to be or might be or is intended to be directly or indirectly useful to an enemy; or</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>(c) ... communicates to any other person any secret ... <strong>sketch</strong> ... which is calculated to be or might be or is intended to be directly or indirectly useful to an enemy;</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>he shall be guilty of felony</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/1-2/28/section/12\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Section 12</a> states that:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The expression <strong>“sketch” includes any photograph</strong> or other mode of representing any place or thing;</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 6 } ]

[ "united-states", "criminal-law", "civil-law", "trespass", "security" ]

[ { "answer_id": 74620, "body": "<p>U.S. law does not forbid 15 year olds from joining dating websites. Direct U.S. regulation of Internet communications mostly via the <a href=\"https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b149fae3-6516-4df6-bb91-4ee20f1d4def\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Children's Online Privacy Protection Act</a> (COPPA) has a cutoff age of 13 years old.</p>\n<p>This said, nothing obligates websites to allow minors to join their dating app, and they may be reluctant to do so for fear that if you are mistreated by someone as a result of the app that they could be held responsible.</p>\n<p>In particular, amendments to the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Decency_Act\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Communications Decency Act (CDA)</a> called <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Decency_Act#FOSTA-SESTA\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">FOSTA-SESTA</a> for the &quot;Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) and &quot;Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA)&quot; which took effect April 11, 2018, limited the prior near total protection from liability under <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Section 230</a> of the CDA. The amendments maked it illegal to knowingly assist, facilitate, or support sex trafficking, and amended the Communications Decency Act's section 230 safe harbors (which make online services immune from civil liability for their users' actions) to exclude enforcement of federal or state sex trafficking laws from immunity.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R43597.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Federal sex trafficking laws</a> largely apply to commercial sex by people under the age of 18, which an online dating app could facilitate, if used by someone inclined to use it in that manner. The two main federal sex trafficking laws are as follows:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Section 1591 now provides in part the following:</p>\n<p>“<strong>Whoever knowingly</strong> in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce,\nor within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the\nUnited States, <strong>recruits, entices, harbors, transports, provides,\nobtains, advertises, maintains, patronizes, or solicits by any means a\nperson</strong>; knowing, or <strong>in reckless disregard of the fact, that means\nof force, threats of force, fraud, coercion ... , or any combination\nof such means will be used to cause the person to engage in a\ncommercial sex act, or that the person has not attained the age of 18\nyears and will be caused to engage in a commercial sex act</strong>,” shall\nbe imprisoned not less than 15 years (not less than 10 years, if the\nvictim is 14 years of age or older and the offender is less than 18\nyears of age).</p>\n<p>The Mann Act outlaws prostitution and unlawful sexual activities that\ninvolve interstate or foreign travel. It consists of three principal\nsubstantive sections.</p>\n<p>Section 2421 proscribes the interstate or foreign transportation of\nsomeone for purposes of prostitution or unlawful sexual activity;\nmisconduct which is punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10\nyears.</p>\n<p>Section 2422 condemns coercing or enticing another person to travel in\ninterstate or foreign commerce to engage in prostitution or unlawful\nsexual activity, or <strong>using interstate communications to coerce or\nentice a child to engage in such conduct</strong>. The communications offense\nis punishable by imprisonment for not less than 10 years; the travel\noffense by imprisonment for not more than 20 years.</p>\n<p>Section 2423 outlaws four distinct offenses:</p>\n<p>(1) §2423(a) - transportation of a child in interstate or foreign\ncommerce for purposes of prostitution or unlawful sexual purposes;</p>\n<p>(2) §2423(b)—interstate or foreign travel for purposes of unlawful\nsexual abuse of a child;</p>\n<p>(3) §2423(c)—foreign travel and subsequent unlawful sexual abuse of a\nchild; and</p>\n<p>(4) §2423(d)— <strong>arranging, for profit, the travel outlawed in any of\nthese offenses</strong>.</p>\n<p>The first is punishable by imprisonment for not less than 10 years,\neach of the others by imprisonment for not more than 30 years.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So, the reluctance of a dating app to allow minors to use their services is understandable. They either need to aggressively police a low cost or free except for ad support service with considerable employee expense to do so, to avoid the risk of FOSTA-SESTA authorized liability, or they can not offer the service at all.</p>\n<p>In a nutshell, the app providers consider you to be jail-bait and don't want to face the associated risks.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "internet" ]

[ { "answer_id": 44142, "body": "<p>The USPS and other postal services have created a service called <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Postmarks\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Digital Postmarks</a> or EPCM (Electronic Postal Certification Mark) to address exactly this problem.</p>\n\n<p>Basically you can upload any document that you want to be \"unalterable and time stamped\". The service computes a hash (a number that will change if the contents change), and store the time stamp and the hash on a secure server.</p>\n\n<p>If, at some time in the future, you want to confirm the authenticity of the document, you can upload another copy - the fact that it produces the same hash proves it's not been tampered with.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 44141, "body": "<p>One common practice is to sign every page on a hard copy and to initial every other page of a hard copy, usually with blue colored ink on a black and white original, and to maintain a copy of the original as authoritative.</p>\n<p>Most electronic digital signature systems have some sort of authentication protocol.</p>\n<p>One can also maintain a copy of what you signed in some way that can be authenticated (e.g. with metadata).</p>\n<p>Certainly, a sophisticated party can find a way to fabricate or forge almost everything, but this doesn't come up very often because most merchants engaging in contracts with lawyer drafted written documents almost never, as a matter of empirical reality, actually do that, and because the lawyers acting as intermediaries have ethical obligations independent of and superseding their duties to their clients not to engage in that kind of fraud and not to submit false evidence. Also, when someone is discovered to have done something like that the implications are often not limited to that transaction and can instead also result in criminal charges and/or loss of professional licensure and punitive damages.</p>\n<p>Has there ever been a case where a lawyer and a business client have conspired to engage in outright forgery? Certainly. But this doesn't happen often and one takes enough precautions to make it unlikely and then lives with the risk. At some point one has to balance the risk of being defrauded against the benefit of doing business. In most situations, there is a customary way of documenting transactions and that is considered &quot;good enough&quot; even though it isn't perfect and most of the time it works.</p>\n<p>The risk is largely a function of who you are dealing with.</p>\n<p>For example, most transfers of commodities on commodity exchanges in the U.S. and publicly held securities listed on securities exchanges other than the NASDAQ aren't documented by written contracts at all, and instead are conducted by oral agreements documented in writing in the personal business notes of the parties.</p>\n<p>Similarly, most decisions of the boards of publicly held corporations and governmental entities are made orally and then documented by a secretary of the meeting in minutes, rather than in documents executed by the decision makers. In each of these contexts, there is a sufficient basis for trust that signed documentation is not needed, in part, because the people interacting constantly interact with other other in transactions large and small, and no one will continue to do business with someone who proves untrustworthy.</p>\n<p>The risk is much higher when a transaction is for high stakes between people who don't deal with each other personally very often and aren't working through intermediaries who do deal with each other very often (working through intermediaries who are established and regularly deal with each other and have an economic interest in being able to continue to do so is one way to mitigate the risk).</p>\n<p>When the risk is high and the stakes are particularly great, one can not only use an original wet ink copy but entrust the original for safekeeping to a trustworthy third-party. Sometimes witnesses, notarizations, or &quot;guaranteed signatures&quot; (a private sector analog to a notarization in which the risk of fraud is insured by the guarantor of the signature) are also common tools to further reduce this risk.</p>\n<p>In Continental Europe and many other &quot;civil law&quot; countries that don't follow the English Common Law legal system, notaries serve the role of third-party signature verifier and third-party custodian of important contracts in a far greater share of significant, legal professional drafted contracts and legal instruments than in the U.S. and other common law jurisdictions.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91938, "body": "<p>I quote <a href=\"https://ak-law.ca/contract-signing/#8\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://ak-law.ca/contract-signing/#8</a>.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>In some legal instances, when the law requires, each page of a document or contract will need to be initialed.</p>\n<p>For example, under article 728 of the Civil Code of Quebec, when a will is written by a third person or electronically, the testator and the witnesses must <a href=\"http://legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/ccq-1991\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">initial or sign each page</a> of the will.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/document/cs/ccq-1991#se:728\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">728.</a> Where the will is written by a third person or by technical means, the testator and the witnesses initial or sign each page of the act which does not bear their signature.\nThe absence of initials or a signature on each page does not prevent a will made before a notary that is not valid as a notarial will from being valid as a will made in the presence of witnesses, if the other formalities are observed.</p>\n<p>1991, c. 64, a. 728; I.N. 2014-05-01; I.N. 2015-11-01; 2016, c. 4, s. 99.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "contract-law", "binding" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91946, "body": "<p>Whether a hash of PII is still PII can certainly be debated at a court of law. Especially since you <em>want</em> to store information identifying the idividual. That is the whole purpose of it. Storing information identifying a person, so they cannot vote twice.</p>\n<p>But the GDPR is not a law to prevent you from doing things. All you need to do is get <strong>consent</strong>. Explain that their data will only be kept as long as neccessary for the stated purpose and then be deleted and ask for the users consent to save their data.</p>\n<p>It's probably enough to set a little checkbox and an explanation text.</p>\n<p>If they do not agree to have their data saved for this timespan and purpose, they cannot vote.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "gdpr", "european-union" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91877, "body": "<p>From the mention of a MLB shirt, I am going to assume the OP is located in the <a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a>.</p>\n<h2>Logos are (in general) copyrightable</h2>\n<p>Anything with a modicum of creative input is by default copyrighted. This includes both film shots from movies and logos of sports organizations.</p>\n<p>&quot;Modicum of creative input&quot; is known as the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">threshold of originality</a>. That legal doctrine is in force in the US, but not in other jurisdictions - for instance, the UK uses &quot;<a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">sweat of the brow</a>&quot; where creativity is not needed to obtain copyright protection.</p>\n<p>A still shot from a film set almost surely passes the threshold of originality. However, some logos do not.</p>\n<p>For instance, the Pittsburgh Pirates logo is a two-dimensional letter P - somewhat stylized, but not that much. It is arguably below the threshold of copyright protection. On the other hand, the Red Socks logos (which is, well, two red socks) is almost surely copyrighted.</p>\n<p>Let us assume that the logo or imagery present on the OP's photo shirt was indeed copyrighted. Does that make the photo a copyright violation?</p>\n<h2>Incidental use</h2>\n<p>It <em>might</em> be the case that having the artwork on the shirt as an incidental part of the photograph makes it OK. In the US, such incidental use could be covered by fair use, but as always, it’s a delicate balancing act. A professional photograph taken for political advertisement is going to be held to a higher standard than a blurry photo from your aunt’s Facebook gallery.</p>\n<p>Dmitry Grigoryev says in comments that walking around with a Star Wars shirt could be construed as distributing (via public display) a copyrighted work. However, &quot;putting it on and walking around&quot; is an essential function of a shirt. Absent terms to the contrary, whoever sells a shirt with a copyrighted design grants an implied license to the shirt-wearer to move about with that shirt. [EDIT: see Mayken’s comment, that’s a statutory exception to copyright.] The scope of such implied licenses can be unclear, though, and it could arguably not extend to promotional photographs for political advertisements.</p>\n<p>Note <a href=\"https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/urheberrechtsverletzung-durch-aufnahmen-von-hotelzimmern-mit-fototapete\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">a recent case in Germany</a> <a href=\"https://www.justiz.nrw.de/nrwe/lgs/koeln/lg_koeln/j2022/14_O_350_21_Urteil_20220818.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">(link to judgement, in German)</a> where it was held that a hotel posting online pictures of its rooms, including a wallpaper design, violated the copyright of the designer. I am not familiar enough with German copyright law to determine if an appeal of that lower-court decision would have any chance of success, but I think that ruling is reasonable within the general principles of EU copyright law. (Whether it is <em>morally</em> acceptable is of course another thing entirely.)</p>\n<h2>Non-legal explanations</h2>\n<p>It is also possible that the photographer or another PR staff member would rather have the politician associated with baseball than with Star Wars for image reasons, and copyright is only a pretext for that. Or that they (mistakenly) thought that the baseball shirt design was not copyrighted.</p>\n", "score": 20 }, { "answer_id": 91884, "body": "<h2>Fair Use is in the eye of the beholder</h2>\n<p>Fair Use is the idea that you can use copyrighted materials to the extent that there's no direct copying. <a href=\"https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-the-four-factors.html\" rel=\"noreferrer\">The Copyright Act of 1976 is where Fair Use is defined</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A court weighs four factors when it considers a fair use defense.\nThese four factors are spelled out in Section 107 of the Copyright Act\nof 1976 (17 U.S.C. § 107) and are:</p>\n<ol>\n<li>the purpose and character of the use, including whether it's of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes</li>\n<li>the nature of the copyrighted work</li>\n<li>the amount of the copyrighted work 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<p>As you can see, these are not yes/no questions, so it's up to the\ncourts to determine whether each factor supports or goes against a\nfinding of fair use. Even then, there's no equation or formula for\ndetermining whether a use is fair use. The courts consider each factor\nand then decide whether, on balance, they point in favor of or against\nfair use.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>In other words, there's a pretty wide latitude to sue anyone who infringes upon your copyright. Why aren't there a ton of lawsuits then?</p>\n<h2>Copyright litigation is prohibitively expensive</h2>\n<p>Nobody wants to be sued for copyright infringement. It can run into large sums of just attorney fees just to get it to court, let alone get a judgment. JK Rowling and Warner Brothers (US copyright licensee) <a href=\"https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/jk-rowling-wins-copyright-suit-118742/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">won $6750 and an injunction against a Pottermore book</a>, but both sides certainly spent far more than that in litigating the issue. If there's a chance you might be seen as infringing upon someone's copyright, it's cheaper to avoid the issue.</p>\n<h2>If you're making money, litigation odds go up</h2>\n<p>&quot;Weird Al&quot; Yankovic, for instance, parodies popular songs. He could make a Fair Use case, but, as he's making money in the process, <a href=\"https://www.weirdal.com/archives/faq/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">it's safer to just license the music instead</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Al does get permission from the original writers of the songs that he parodies. While the law supports his ability to parody without permission, he feels it’s important to maintain the relationships that he’s built with artists and writers over the years. Plus, Al wants to make sure that he gets his songwriter credit (as writer of new lyrics) as well as his rightful share of the royalties.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>This makes a lot of sense. He rarely does anything controversial with his songs and it's extra revenue for the song writers. More importantly, you won't sue someone paying you under license.</p>\n<h2>Does the copyright holder like the use?</h2>\n<p>What's the difference between MLB and Disney? My bet would be something to do with this</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>I was asked to be part of a photo shoot for a political candidate.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>I'll get political for just a second. You don't mention the politician, but I can think of a few that the The Walt Disney Company might not be keen on seeing with their licensed material. Chief among them would be <a href=\"https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/4/20/23691341/ron-desantis-disney-world-board-reedy-creek-florida\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Florida Governor Ron Desantis</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>DeSantis, out for revenge after suffering a major loss in his efforts to punish Disney for being “woke,” announced a new bill to rein in Disney’s theme parks Tuesday. In a return to the issue that first earned it the governor’s ire, the “Happiest Place on Earth” unveiled its first-ever event to celebrate Pride Month on April 14, complete with themed entertainment and specialty menu items.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The open secret here is that you can sue anyone for copyright infringement, even if there's a strong case for Fair Use. <a href=\"https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/youtuber-court-battle-results-in-fair-use-win-for-online-reaction-videos/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Not liking the person you're suing can play a role in suing for copyright infringement</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>After more than a year of battling in court, Ethan and Hila Klein, the YouTubers behind the H3H3 Productions channel, won a lawsuit filed against them by another YouTuber. Matt &quot;Hoss&quot; Hosseinzadeh—MattHossZone on YouTube—sued the pair after they uploaded a video in which the Kleins react to one of Hosseinzadeh's videos and criticize him in the process. Hosseinzadeh then sued the Kleins for a number of things, most notably copyright infringement for using clips of his video in their own.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>A major league baseball team is far less likely to start a feud with a politician's photographer than a major corporation openly engaged in a political feud.</p>\n", "score": 9 }, { "answer_id": 91870, "body": "<h1>Logos aren't copyrightable. Artwork is.</h1>\n<p>Not a lawyer, but my understanding is that logos aren't copyrightable, but artistic designs are.</p>\n<p>Logos are protected by trademark law, not copyright law. Therefore, a shirt with a sports team team logo wouldn't cause any copyright issues (but it may create trademark issues if it looks like the team is endorsing something and they're not).</p>\n<p>Artistic designs, however, are protected by copyright, and that would include designs depicting characters from movies. However, a photograph of a person wearing a shirt featuring an artistic design is likely to be transformative enough to count as fair use. Fair use has <a href=\"https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">four factors</a> that US courts rely upon when making the determination of fair use, and I doubt anyone would be able to make an argument that a photo of someone wearing a shirt will usurp the market for people buying actual shirts.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91890, "body": "<p>Before COVID, I taught acting &amp; modeling. We had a few sessions that were photo shoots. We instructors, and the photographers would also make that same comment.</p>\n<p>The other answers discuss the legal issues. I will answer from another perspective.</p>\n<p>Saying &quot;...to avoid copyright issues...&quot; is a clear, quick and convenient way of saying it. It may not be completely for legal reasons.<br />\n<br>\nSome people are angry. Some people are not very smart. Some are just looking for a fight. (Obv. no one on this site falls into any of those categories).<br />\n<br>\nConsider these scenarios:</p>\n<p>&quot;OMG! is trying to align himself with the Star Wars crowd. I'm in the Star Wars crowd and that dude doesn't represent me!&quot;</p>\n<p>&quot;(One of) The copyright owner(s) is worried that people will be associating them as supporting the candidate. Which, of course, would not be true.&quot;</p>\n<p>&quot;Why in the world would &lt;person/organization associated with the production of Star Wars&gt; want to support ? That's disgusting. I will never watch another thing &lt;person/organization&gt; does.&quot;</p>\n<p>I'm sure there are others. You've probably heard similar arguments (Ex. Politician X pays to use song Y in their campaign. Band T, who recorded the song, writes a letter to Politician X telling them not to use their song because they don't endorse him).</p>\n<p>TL;DR:<br />\nHere's what I told my students:<br />\n&quot;If they ain't paying you to represent them, don't wear their stuff.&quot;<br />\nThat made a lot more sense to them. The end result is the same, just the rationale is different.</p>\n<p>$0.02</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "copyright", "photography", "politics" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91912, "body": "<p>As per Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the maximum period for an accused to be detained in police custody is 15 days and judicial custody is specified as 90 days subject to the proviso under <strong>Explanation I</strong> therein, where payment of bail is the condition required to be fulfilled. In addition to this, conditions may be prescribed by the detaining court while providing bail, which may enlarge the period of undertrial detention if left unmet.</p>\n<p><strong>Undertrial detention</strong></p>\n<p>Although the prescribed period of detention is a maximum of half of the period of sentence under the law for which he has been accused, the percolation of this to prisoner releases seems to be an implementation issue, which Indian courts have tried resolving by <a href=\"https://indiankanoon.org/doc/70780578/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">prioritising cases pending for more than 5 years and providing personal bonds;</a> and forming an <a href=\"http://www.slic.org.in/uploads/2019/07/compilations-of-directives-given-by-sc-1.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Under Trial Review Committee</a>. Notably, in Bhim Singh v. Union of India, the court acknowledged the implementational hurdle.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><em>direct that jurisdictional Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Sessions Judge shall hold one sitting in a week in each jail/prison for two months commencing from 1st October, 2014 for the purposes of <strong>effective implementation</strong> of 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.</em></p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>To answer your doubt regarding anticipatory bail,</p>\n<p>It is a provision enabling a right to future release to a person even before the person is arrested, regardless of whether &quot;<a href=\"https://indiankanoon.org/doc/257280/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">cognizance has been taken or a chargesheet has been filed</a>&quot;.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "india" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91944, "body": "<p><a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/4A\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986</a> (which was amended by <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/33/section/154\" rel=\"noreferrer\">section 154 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994</a>).</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>[F14A Intentional harassment, alarm or distress.</p>\n<p>(1)A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person\nharassment, alarm or distress, he—</p>\n<p>(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or\ndisorderly behaviour, or</p>\n<p>(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is\nthreatening, abusive or insulting,</p>\n<p>thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.</p>\n<p>(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a\nprivate place, except that no offence is committed where the words or\nbehaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible\nrepresentation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the\nperson who is harassed, alarmed or distressed is also inside that or\nanother dwelling.</p>\n<p>(3)It is a defence for the accused to prove—</p>\n<p>(a)that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the\nwords or behaviour used, or the writing, sign or other visible\nrepresentation displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside\nthat or any other dwelling, or</p>\n<p>(b)that his conduct was reasonable.</p>\n<p>(4)F2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .</p>\n<p>(5)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on\nsummary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months\nor a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.]</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 91945, "body": "<p>“Strict liability” means that intent doesn’t matter. What matters is that your behaviour was likely to cause distress etc. whether it did cause distress or not (because that’s what the law says, “likely to cause” is enough). And “strict liability” means the fact that it happened is enough, without any intent.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "freedom-of-speech", "public-order" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91942, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/england-and-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container\">england-and-wales</a></p>\n<h2>&quot;Are street preachers worthy of being sectioned?&quot;</h2>\n<p>No - so far as I'm aware, no police officer has tried to use this power with regard to a street preacher, it doesn't seem relevant.</p>\n<p>To be involuntarily detained, compulsorily admitted, removed or 'sectioned' under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/20/contents\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s136 Mental Health Act 1983</a>, &quot;Removal etc of mentally disordered persons without a warrant&quot;, the person must appear &quot;to the constable to be suffering from mental disorder and to be in immediate need of care or control&quot; and the constable must think it's necessary &quot;in the interests of that person or for the protection of other persons&quot;.</p>\n<h2>&quot;Are the street preachers ... given undue privilege in their legal treatment due to the fact that they are propagating a religious cause?&quot;</h2>\n<p>There have been numerous arrests, prosecutions and convictions (and successful appeals) of street preachers. The question at law in a particular case is whether, given all the circumstances (including the preacher's behaviour and the public's behaviour), the interference with the preacher's (Human Rights Act) rights is necessary, proportionate and in pursuit of a legitimate aim.</p>\n<p>Every public authority (police, prosecution, courts, local authority etc) is required to give effect to the scheduled rights in <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the Human Rights Act 1998</a> unless statute makes that impossible. In this context, usually the two rights engaged are Articles 9 and 10.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>Article 9 Freedom of thought, conscience and religion</strong></p>\n<ol>\n<li><p>Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and\nreligion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief\nand freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or\nprivate, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching,\npractice and observance.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only\nto such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a\ndemocratic society in the interests of public safety, for the\nprotection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of\nthe rights and freedoms of others.</p>\n</li>\n</ol>\n<p><strong>Article 10 Freedom of expression</strong></p>\n<ol>\n<li><p>Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall\ninclude freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information\nand ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of\nfrontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the\nlicensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and\nresponsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions,\nrestrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary\nin a democratic society, in the interests of national security,\nterritorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder\nor crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection\nof the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure\nof information received in confidence, or for maintaining the\nauthority and impartiality of the judiciary.</p>\n</li>\n</ol>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So speech and religion have some statutory protection but, like most of the Convention rights, they are 'qualified' rights. Their second paragraphs say when the state can lawfully interfere with the rights. For an interference to be lawful, it must be prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society; proportionate (i.e. no more than necessary); in pursuit of a 'legitimate aim' in the second paragraph; and rationally connected to the legitimate aim.</p>\n<p>In this context the legitimate aims are usually &quot;the protection of public order&quot; or &quot;the prevention of disorder or crime&quot; and the &quot;prescribed by law&quot; part are <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/5\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the Public Order Act</a> and other statutory powers of the police. Interferences, infringements or infringing measures are things like dispersal notices, arrests, prosecutions, convictions and sentences (community orders, fines or imprisonments).</p>\n<p>The escalation commonly goes from the police asking the preacher to choose their words more carefully or leave, then order to leave, then arrest.</p>\n<p>The media has reported on a number of arrests, prosecutions, convictions and appeals. Try searching the web for &quot;UK street preacher arrest&quot;. Be aware that some results are for websites with undeclared involvements with or links to defending the accused preachers.</p>\n<p>I've put some names and links below and here is a freely available judgment that contains discussion of all the above, describing that process of weighing up that every part of the state must do when it infringes on the Convention rights: <a href=\"https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/3100.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Overd &amp; Ors v The Chief Constable of Avon And Somerset Constabulary [2021] EWHC 3100 (QB) (19 November 2021)</a>. The judgment also cites other judgments to which it links, which may be of interest.</p>\n<p>As backgound the four men, Overd, Stockwell, Karns and Clarke, were arrested while preaching at Broadmead shopping centre in Bristol in July 2016. The police had received complaints from the public about the content of the preaching. On arrival, the police officers perceived imminent public disorder.</p>\n<p>The four were detained, then charged under s5 Public Order Act; the case against Karns was dropped before court and the other three were tried; Clark submitted there was no case to answer and he was successful; Overd and Stockwell were convicted but their convictions were overturned on appeal.</p>\n<p>Subsequently, in December 2020 the four sued the police, alleging breaches of Articles 9, 10 and/or 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, wrongful arrest, assault/trespass to the person/battery, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. Their claim was dismissed on all counts, they appealed and this judgment is in that appeal which was also dismissed.</p>\n<p>Other examples (but not judgments, only media reports):</p>\n<p>In Leeds in June 2021, David McConnell was preaching about &quot;adulterers, drunkards, homosexuals,&quot; when he was challenged by a transwoman. McConnell repeatedly referred to her as a &quot;man&quot;, a &quot;man in woman's clothing&quot; and a &quot;gentleman&quot;. In September 2022 he was convicted of intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress, sentenced to a 12-month community order with 80 hours unpaid work and ordered to pay fines totalling £715. A spokesperson for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said McConnell's words &quot;crossed the line between a legitimate expression of his religious views, to become a distressing and threatening personal attack&quot; (<a href=\"https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-62793135\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">BBC</a>).</p>\n<p>In March 2023 his conviction was overturned. The court found there was no evidence McConnell <em>intended</em> &quot;harassment, alarm and distress&quot; (<a href=\"https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-64905216\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">BBC</a>).</p>\n<p>In November 2020 John Dunn was preaching on Swindon High Street when two women, holding each other's hands, walked past him. He said, &quot;I hope you are sisters,&quot; to which they replied that they were in a same-sex mariage. Dunn responded, &quot;it says in the Bible that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God.&quot; The women made a complaint to the police.</p>\n<p>Dunn was subsequently charged under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/5\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s5 Public Order Act</a>. The CPS eventually dropped the case but not before causing some controversy when it was made public that a prosecution document sent to the defence said some parts of the Bible are &quot;abusive&quot; and &quot;simply no longer appropriate in modern society and which would be deemed offensive if stated in public.&quot; The CPS later said this was not its official position.</p>\n<p>In April 2021, John Sherwood was preaching outside Uxbridge Station in London when police officers approached him and said they had been told he had made homophobic comments. They arrested Sherwood under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/5\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s5 Public Order Act</a> for allegedly causing alarm or distress. (<a href=\"https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9521123/Moment-police-arrest-elderly-preacher-71-street-quoting-homophobic-statements-Bible.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Daily Mail</a>)</p>\n<p>In April 2022, Sherwood was tried and acquitted. Apparently his defence centred on Article 10 (freedom of expression) - I cannot find a judgment.</p>\n<p>In March 2018 a Canadian preacher was arrested outside Barking Station in London. A female passerby had complained to the police that he had made homophobic comments. After being detained for 20 hours, he was released without charge.</p>\n<p>Some preachers are privileged in terms of their legal resources - some for example have been aided by the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Legal_Centre\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Christian Legal Centre</a> (of Christan Concern), which has also involved itself in numerous cases ranging from 'gay cakes' to embryonic stem cell research. <a href=\"https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000110p\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">This Radio 4 documentary by Joshua Rozenberg, <em>A Tale of Belief and the Courts</em></a>, may be of interest.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "england-and-wales", "freedom-of-speech", "religion", "any-jurisdiction" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91941, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/switzerland\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;switzerland&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;switzerland&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-switzerland-tooltip-container\">switzerland</a></p>\n<p>This answer is mostly to point out that the situation isn't so obvious, and may greatly differ between jurisdictions.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/27/317_321_377/en\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">OR Art 7</a> specifies:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>2 The sending of tariffs, price lists and the like does not constitute an offer.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<p>3 By contrast, the display of merchandise with an indication of its price does generally constitute an offer.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So the seller is bound to the price tag of an item in a shelf or in a window. If the prices differ, the customer can generally request the lower price, unless the seller can clearly show that there was a significant error. There's a separate law (&quot;<a href=\"https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1978/2081_2081_2081/de\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Preisbekanntgabeverordnung</a>&quot;) that specifies that (under most circumstances) a shop must put price tags on their items.</p>\n<p>What margin constitutes an error is disputable. The federal court <a href=\"https://www.srf.ch/sendungen/kassensturz-espresso/rechtsfragen/kaufrecht/was-gilt-bei-zwei-preisen-fuer-dasselbe-produkt\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">ruled</a> that an offer for an opal ring for 1380 Francs instead of 13800 could be considered an error. But a T-Shirt that is offered for 20 Francs in the shop window but 25 Francs on the shelf is probably not.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91911, "body": "<p>See <em>Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd.</em> <a href=\"https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1953/6.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">[1953] EWCA Civ 6</a> (05 February 1953). There were several sets of reasons in agreement, but I highlight the crux of the reasoning from Somerville L.J.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Is it to be regarded as an offer which is completed and both sides bound when the article is put into the receptacle, or is it to be regarded as a more organised way of doing what is done already in many types of shops — and a bookseller is perhaps the beat example - namely, enabling customers to have free access to what is in the shop to look at the different articles and then, ultimately, having got the ones which they wish to buy, coming up to the assistant and saying &quot;I want this&quot;? The assistant in 999 times out of 1,000 says &quot;That is all right&quot;, and the money passes and the transaction is completed. I agree entirely with what the Lord Chief Justice says and the reasons he gives for his conclusion that in the case of the ordinary shop, although goods are displayed and it is intended that customers should go and choose what they want, the contract is not completed until, the customer having indicated the articles which he needs, the shop-keeper or someone on his behalf accepts that offer. Then the contract is completed.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The alternative seems wholly absurd. As Romer L.J. describes (and rejects) the alternative:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>if a person picked up an article, once having picked it up, he would never be able to put it back and say he had changed his mind. The shopkeeper would say: &quot;No, the property has passed and you will have to pay&quot;.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "contract-law", "common-law", "retail" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91934, "body": "<p>Yes, it is illegal. See <a href=\"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/wa-court-of-appeals/1481277.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">State v. K.E., Respondent</a> (1999), who created gasoline-styrofoam napalm, and was convicted of violating <a href=\"https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.40.120\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">RCW 9.40.120</a> (possession, manufacture of disposition of an incendiary device). That is defined as &quot;any material, substance, device, or combination thereof which is capable of supplying the initial ignition and/or fuel for a fire and is designed to be used as an instrument of wilful destruction&quot;. The law is framed in terms of the what use underlies the design of the substance, not the individual's personal intent behind possessing or making the substance (defendant's actual use was to light paper in a fireplace).</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "washington" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91093, "body": "<h2>No</h2>\n<p>Contracts that are not personal services contracts are normally assignable unless there is a clause preventing transfer or requiring the other party’s permission. A timeshare contract will almost surely have such a clause, so your idea would be dead in the water.</p>\n<p>However, even if it doesn't, only the <em>rights</em> to a contract are assignable, not the <em>obligations</em>. So, while the LLC can get the benefits of the timeshare, <em>you</em> remain liable for paying for it.</p>\n<p>What you are looking to do is called novation, and that requires the permission of all parties to the contract.</p>\n<p>However, even if the timeshare company agreed to the novation, if you do it with the intention you have outlined, this is illegal.</p>\n<p>Think about your scheme and compare it with the elements of <a href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&amp;sectionNum=532.\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">fraud</a> in, say <a href=\"/questions/tagged/california\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;california&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;california&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-california-tooltip-container\">california</a> (other jurisdictions are available):</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>Every person who knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defrauds any other person of money</strong>, labor, or property, whether real or personal, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character, and by thus imposing upon any person obtains credit, and thereby fraudulently gets possession of money or property, or obtains the labor or service of another, <strong>is punishable in the same manner and to the same extent as for larceny of the money or property so obtained.</strong></p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Your scheme is a textbook example of fraud. So, you go to jail <em>and</em> the fraudulent transaction is of no legal effect so you still owe the money.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "real-estate" ]

[ { "answer_id": 90042, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a></p>\n<p>Copying computer code without permission of the author is copyright infringement. Re-distributing protected material is a further form of copyright infringement. It <em>is</em> legal for a person to read publically-available code that is put out on a web page, and you can take factual knowledge that you gain from understanding the code and implement it in your own works, which you can distribute.</p>\n<p>Permission comes in two forms: implicit and explicit. When you post some text in the open (no password required), you can read it. Even though reading an online file requires copying it, there is an implicit license to read anything out in the open. There is no implicit right to redistribute: a bot which redistributes your code has infringed your copyright. A bot which correctly checks for explicit permission to redistribute and does not redistribute without permission complies with copyright law.</p>\n<p>There have been cases where simple web scraping has been the subject of a lawsuit and where it has been found that &quot;web scraping is legal&quot;, but that refers to gathering of information, and not wholesale redistribution of text. If the extent of copying is minimal, it might be possible to defend against copying plus redistribution via a fair use defense. You describe something that does beyond fair use.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright", "artificial-intelligence", "computer" ]

[ { "answer_id": 19259, "body": "<p>Contracts are generally assignable, meaning that one company can assign their rights, duties and obligations under the contract. Assignment may be specifically barred by the contract, or it may have certain terms (prior written consent, etc.) attached, but if not, a contract is likely freely assignable. Though a contract is not necessarily \"automatically transferred\" the reason Company C buys Company A is for its ability to earn Company C over time, which includes the contract between A &amp; B. So unless the original contract has a \"no assignments clause\" or if an assignment is otherwise impossible or illegal, it is likely that A can freely assign the contract to C.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 7386, "body": "<p>Parties to contracts must be people.</p>\n<p>People are people and companies are (legally) people but businesses are <em>not</em> people.</p>\n<p>Company A is bound by the provisions of its contracts so long as the contracts have not been terminated. One of the ways that a contract will be terminated is if Company A ceases to exist; this is similar to the fact that the death of a (natural) person will also terminate a contract.</p>\n<p>If Company C wants to keep the rights and obligations of Company A's contracts then they must:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>keep Company A operating as a subsidiary and extract the benefits through dividend or share buy-back payments or the operation of another contract,</li>\n<li>assign the contracts to Company C. The benefits of contracts are, in general, transferable unless:\n<ol>\n<li>The contract itself says they aren’t</li>\n<li>They are personal services contracts. That is, contracts where only the contracted individual can perform the service, for example, employment contracts. Because of this quirk, most jurisdictions have transmission of business laws that allow employment contracts to be transferred if those laws are followed.</li>\n</ol>\n<ul>\n<li>Notwithstanding, the obligations of the contract are <em>not</em> transferable and while Company C can get the benefit, Company A remains liable for the obligations. The assignment is only enforcable if the other party to the contract is informed of it.</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n<li>Novate the contract. With the agreement of all parties, Company C can be substituted for Company A and assume all the rights and obligations under the contract</li>\n<li>make new contracts on the same or similar terms with the other party.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Contracts are never &quot;automatically transferred&quot;, the party transferring from and the one transferring to have to make the transfer happen, usually they make a contract. Because contracts usually contain both rights <em>and</em> obligations, transferring one will be good consideration for both sides.</p>\n<p>A company, like a natural person, can change their name while legally remaining the same company and this will not terminate any contracts.</p>\n<p>If the company changes owners in whole or in part, it is still the same company and this will not terminate any contracts. If, instead, the company sells its business (which is an asset of the company that it can sell, like a car or a building), then the contracts are novated as part of that sale if the other party agrees, or assigned if they don't.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 45742, "body": "<p>There are several legal concepts going on in your question here, all of which are relevant to the answer:</p>\n<ol>\n<li>separate legal entities</li>\n<li>privity of contract</li>\n<li>novation of contracts</li>\n</ol>\n<p>The answer to your question is it depends on the law of governing the contract.\nEach State in the US (California, New York, Georgia, …) and each country in the EU (England, France, Spain, …) has its own system of contract law.</p>\n<p>Each contract that you refer to in your question might be governed by the law of a different country.</p>\n<p>So first…</p>\n<p><strong>Separate Legal Entities</strong></p>\n<p>In HL Bolton Engineering Co Ltd v TJ Graham Sons Ltd 1957 1 QB 159, Denning LJ described companies like this:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A company may in many ways be likened to a human body. It has a brain and nerve centre which controls what it does. It also has hands which hold the tools and act in accordance with directions from the centre.</p>\n<p>Some of the people in the company are mere [employees] and agents who are nothing more than hands to do the work and cannot be said to represent the mind or will. Others are directors and managers who represent the directing mind and will of the company, and control what it does.</p>\n<p>The state of mind of these managers is the state of mind of the company and is treated by the law as such.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The hallmarks of a separate legal entity are that it can:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>buy, sell and own property of any kind in its own name</li>\n<li>agree to legally binding contracts, and</li>\n<li>sue and be sued in its own name.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Privity of Contract</strong></p>\n<p>The doctrine of privity of contract consists of two general rules, one of which is:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>a person who is not a party to a contract cannot sue on the contract to obtain the promised performance.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>There are exceptions to privity of contract in some countries’ systems of law.</p>\n<p><strong>Novation of Contracts</strong></p>\n<p>There is no such thing as an assignment of a contract.</p>\n<p>It was held in Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd 1993 UKHL 4 (22 July 1993):</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>It is trite law that it is, in any event, impossible to assign &quot;the contract&quot; as a whole, i.e. including both burden and benefit. The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the consent of the other party to the contract in which event such consent will give rise to a novation.</p>\n<p>Although it is true that the phrase &quot;assign this contract&quot; is not strictly accurate, lawyers frequently use those words inaccurately to describe an assignment of the benefit of a contract since every lawyer knows that the burden of a contract cannot be assigned.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>In short, contracts are not assigned:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>ownership of <em>assets</em> is assigned.</li>\n<li>contractual rights are &quot;transferred&quot;: they're novated.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>The legal obligations under a contract cannot be &quot;assigned&quot; or transferred to another person, without agreement from the other contracting party(ies).</p>\n<p>To transfer (or “assign”, which is a misnomer) contractual obligations the requirements of novation must be satisfied.</p>\n<p>In novation, there is no assignment of rights and obligations: a new contract is created with new rights and obligations, with a new contracting party.</p>\n<p><strong>Sales of Companies</strong></p>\n<p>So, to answer your question, what sometimes happens is the buyer of Company A (ie Company C) puts the contracting parties of Company A on notice that Company A has been acquired and that Company C will now be fulfilling Company A’s contracts.</p>\n<p>Is that an “assignment” of the contract?</p>\n<p>Well no, but of the contracting parties of Company A then order products or receive products from Company C, and everyone is happy.</p>\n<p>The contracting parties to Company A could say to Company A “You’re in breach of contract for not performing my contract. I can sue you for my loss, caused by your non-performance of the contract”.</p>\n<p>Company A could then say, “Well that might be the case, but then you need to mitigate your loss for my breach of contract. There’s a company over there called Company C that can perform the contract that we used to have together on the same terms with you.”.</p>\n<p>In respect of your reference to Company AC, please see the heading &quot;Separate Legal Entities&quot; above. As I understand it, there is some sort of doctrine of merger of companies in some States of the US (such as Delaware, I believe), but I don't get into that here, because I'm not a US lawyer. That doctrine of merger might be relevant to the answer to your question under the law of some States of the US.</p>\n<p>To an English contract lawyer, going by what you say in your question, Company AC is a trading name of Company C (or vice versa) or Company C changed it's name to &quot;Company AC&quot;.</p>\n<p>It might work differently in the governing law of the share purchase agreement or asset sale agreement.</p>\n<p>If you’re thinking of relying on any of the above for an actual acquisition, please seek medical help.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 23370, "body": "<p>Because the case is <em>equity/stock</em> purchase (as opposed to <em>assets</em> purchase), the answer is &quot;yes&quot;.</p>\n<p>From <a href=\"https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/valuation/asset-purchase-vs-stock-purchase/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">here</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><em>All asset and liabilities transfer at carrying value</em></p>\n<p><em>The only way to eliminate unwanted liabilities is to contractually sell them back to the target</em></p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>From <a href=\"http://macabacus.com/accounting/types-of-acquisitions\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">here</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><em>All liabilities transfer to the buyer by operation of law, wanted or\nnot. However, the buyer can contractually allocate liabilities to the\nseller by selling them back.</em></p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So, what happens is the contracts get transferred automatically from A to C, but then, if the parties agree, the contracts will be transferred back to A/AC.</p>\n<p>Because A has changed its name to AC (as opposed to staying unrelated to C), it would be reasonable to assume that this is exactly what happened: AC has got the contracts back.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "contract-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 59159, "body": "<p>When the site says &quot;a license is highly recommended&quot; I can think of one possibility. A web site can be so designed that it uses a particular font <strong>if</strong> that font is already installed locally, but falls back to some other font if it is no0t, rather than embedding the font. Since the font in question is provided free for personal use, those who individually download it could use such a site.</p>\n<p>The designer of a font holds copyright on it, and may license it under whatever terms s/he chooses. If a person wants to design a web site with this as an embedded font, then it must be licensed from the rights-holder on whatever terms the rights-holder offers or will agree to. There does not seem any option but to pay the licensing fee if this font is to be used in a commercial site or product. Using it without permission would be copyright infringement. The rights-holder could sue for damages. Whether it is worth paying that fee is a matter of judgement for the site designer. But there does not seem to be any provision making a license optional for a commercial developer.</p>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 91933, "body": "<p>That website is pirating it. The rights to digital fonts branded Akzidenz-Grotesk, and the trademarked name, belong to Monotype, which sells it on its MyFonts website (and some other platforms). (Monotype bought up its previous owner, Berthold Types, a few years ago.)</p>\n<p>The design of the Akzidenz-Grotesk typeface is in the public domain: in the US font designs can't be copyrighted and the design anyway is long out of copyright in any country as it was published in the 1890s. There's nothing stopping you from designing your own version of Akzidenz-Grotesk provided you call it something else and many people have (<a href=\"https://klim.co.nz/retail-fonts/soehne/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">this one</a> is very good).</p>\n<p>But the digital font versions of Akzidenz-Grotesk published by Bertold/Monotype are in copyright and the name is trademarked.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 59207, "body": "<p>The wording is (possibly intentionally) misleading, and suggests a false choice of</p>\n<ol>\n<li>buy a license, or</li>\n<li>buy this license</li>\n</ol>\n<p>where it may be that &quot;this license&quot; is the only valid one. You would need a licence - and probably that one - to use the font commercially without infringement of the copyright holder's rights.</p>\n<p>Alternatively, the option could be</p>\n<ol>\n<li>buy a licence, or</li>\n<li>risk legal action</li>\n</ol>\n<p>which is technically an option, but not one that most people would consider.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "copyright", "internet", "licensing" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91923, "body": "<p>One way to think about it is that the self-driving feature is just like any other feature of the car.</p>\n<p>Suppose you set the parking brake of your car, but it still rolled down the hill and struck someone. I think it's clear that you would be liable, since it's your car and you were in control of it.</p>\n<p>If the brakes were faulty, you <em>might</em> have a civil claim against the manufacturer for producing a faulty device. But that would be a separate claim</p>\n<p>You can think of the self-driving feature the same way. Of course, this is an area of emerging law and new technology, so things could change.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91931, "body": "<p>Did you willfully operate the car?</p>\n<p>If yes, you're the person liable.</p>\n<p><strong>Then</strong>, you might have a civil case against Tesla for selling you a product that did not meet your expectations.</p>\n<p>If the product didn't meet even the most basic expectations of usability - e.g. if the brake pedal acted as gas instead - it can be a decisive argument in your defense. But you're still the defendant, as it was you that pressed that pedal.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "driving", "negligence", "car" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91929, "body": "<p>The basis is set out in the <a href=\"https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/644939aa529eda000c3b0525/Microsoft_Activision_Final_Report_.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Final Report</a> of the <a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/microsoft-slash-activision-blizzard-merger-inquiry\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Microsoft / Activision Blizzard Merger Inquiry</a>, in particular Chapters 1 (p24) and 3 (p35-36). The role and powers of the Competition and Markets Authority are set out in the <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/40/contents\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Enterprise Act 2002</a>, as amended in 2013 when it replaced the Competition Commission (with predecessor bodies going back to 1949).</p>\n<p>The overall procedure is pretty complex, but the main point is that a CMA investigation will happen whenever there is a &quot;relevant merger situation&quot;, and the result of that may be an order telling the companies what to do. It could stop them from merging, or impose various conditions about the conduct of business - see <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/40/schedule/8\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Schedule 8</a> for a long list of possibilities. Their jurisdiction over this anticipated &quot;relevant merger situation&quot; is on the basis that</p>\n<ol>\n<li>The two enterprises, namely Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, would cease to be distinct enterprises (<a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/40/section/23\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s.23(1)(a)</a>) because they would be brought under common ownership or control (<a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/40/section/26\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s.26</a>).</li>\n<li>The acquired company, Activision Blizzard, has a UK turnover of more than £70m (s.23(1)(b)), in fact £716m in FY2021.</li>\n</ol>\n<p>The report dedicates some words in Chapter 3 to proving that Microsoft and Activision are both businesses, just in case anybody was in doubt about that.</p>\n<p>In essence, the CMA has these powers because a lot of people in the UK play World of Warcraft (etc.) and there could be a &quot;substantial lessening of competition&quot; in the console gaming market as a result of the acquisition. If Activision had fewer UK customers then the £70m threshold would not be reached.</p>\n<p>While the investigation overall is addressed to &quot;Microsoft&quot; and &quot;Activision Blizzard&quot; without analyzing the precise structure of the enterprises, any final order from the CMA would be addressed to more specific entities - perhaps <a href=\"https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01624297\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Microsoft Ltd.</a> in the UK as well as its American parent, among others. In other cases, orders have been similarly directed to various non-UK companies as well as domestic ones. But the CMA does not require a company to be UK-registered in order to exercise power over it. The relevant statutory condition is about how the enterprise (of whatever kind, wherever incorporated, however structured) does business in the UK.</p>\n<p>Other countries' equivalent bodies do basically the same thing, and can similarly impose conditions on foreign companies.</p>\n<p>The structure and safeguards in the law mean that the CMA cannot act totally capriciously, or impose conditions that go beyond the scope of its remit (competition in the UK market). So even though Schedule 8 seems very broad on its face, it actually is more limited.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91928, "body": "<h2>They do business in the UK</h2>\n<p>That makes them subject to UK law.</p>\n<p>If they withdrew from that market, then they would no longer be subject to UK law. However, the business that each does in the UK is likely several orders of magnitude more profitable than the merger is likely to be, so they won’t.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91930, "body": "<p>The <a href=\"https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/644939aa529eda000c3b0525/Microsoft_Activision_Final_Report_.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Final Report</a> of the Competition &amp; Markets Authority explains the effectiveness of a merger prohibition remedy.</p>\n<p>It explains that the prohibition &quot;would be effected by accepting undertakings under section 82 of the Act or making an order under section 84 of <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/40/contents\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the Act</a>.&quot;</p>\n<p>It also explains the &quot;jurisdiction test&quot;: &quot;whether the Merger has sufficient connection with the UK on a turnover or share of supply basis to give the CMA jurisdiction to investigate.&quot;</p>\n<p>There are various enforcement actions available under the <em>Enterprise Act</em>, including rights of action given to anyone affected by a contravention of a prohibition order or undertaking (<a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/40/section/94\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s. 94</a>).</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "international", "business", "competition", "antitrust-law", "standing" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91891, "body": "<p>No, a defendant may not remain silent on cross-examination.</p>\n<p>Witnesses who voluntarily testify in their own defense are subject to cross-examination on that testimony.</p>\n<p>In <a href=\"https://casetext.com/case/fitzpatrick-v-united-states-2#p315\" rel=\"noreferrer\"><em>Fitzpatrick v. United States</em>, 178 U.S. 304, (1900)</a>, a murder defendant testified that he was at two bars and then his cabin the night of the crime. The trial court held that having waived his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, the defendant was subject to cross examination about what he was wearing that night, his connections to a co-defendant, the co-defendant's clothes, and who else was at the cabin with him. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that if a defendant voluntary makes a statement about the crime at trial, the prosecution may cross-examine him with as much latitude as it would have with any other witness:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The witness having sworn to an alibi, it was perfectly competent for the government to cross-examine him as to every fact which had a bearing upon his whereabouts upon the night of the murder, and as to what he did and the persons with whom he associated that night. Indeed, we know of no reason why an accused person, who takes the stand as a witness, should not be subject to cross-examination as other witnesses are.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><em>Fitzpatrick v. United States</em>, 178 U.S. 304, 315 (1900).</p>\n", "score": 27 }, { "answer_id": 91888, "body": "<p>Perhaps. <a href=\"https://legalbrief.com/ingram.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">This article</a> addresses the balance between the 5th Amendment protection against compelled self-incrimination, and the Confrontation Clause of the 6th Amendment. For example, a defense witness cannot refuse to answer a question that is solely about the witness' credibility. The basis for such a refusal is limited to protection against self-incrimination. Then, the witness can still be compelled to testify if granted immunity from prosecution (since there is no risk of incrimination). There are other protections pertaining to convicted defendants and the likelihood of a death sentence or a more severe non-death penalty. For a non-defendant, the right is asserted on a question-by-question basis. However (<a href=\"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/340/367/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Rogers v. US</a>, 340 U.S. 367), when a witness has voluntarily self-incriminated, they cannot then refuse to answer further questions that supply details. Even then, the right is not waived entirely, and exists in terms of increased risk of incrimination.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 91924, "body": "<p>As noted, in a <em>criminal trial</em> the defendant, having voluntarily taken the stand in his own defense, is deemed to have <em>waived</em> (given up) his right to the protections of the Fifth Amendment, and must answer the prosecutor's questions.</p>\n<p>But this does not mean that he must answer any and all questions the prosecutor may ask him. <em>Relevance</em> is still an issue; the question must be <em>relevant</em> to the matter on trial. If the prosecutor asks a question not relevant to the current trial, the judge will sustain an objection and tell the defendant he need not answer.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "criminal-law", "fifth-amendment", "testimony", "cross-examination" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3599, "body": "<p>Generally speaking arrest records are open and made available to the public. Except in the case of an ongoing investigation. In which case the rules vary by state.</p>\n\n<p>The details of what's available also vary by location.</p>\n\n<p>I would begin searching by going to the courthouse or police station if you know it. And inquiring with the clerk. If you want a broad search on a specific individual, you can do a criminal background check which sweeps multiple databases of many jurisdictions simultaneously.</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://www.rcfp.org/private-eyes/arrest-records\" rel=\"nofollow\">Here is an article explaining more details</a>.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "privacy", "arrest" ]

[ { "answer_id": 42468, "body": "<p>There is probably a record of your arrest which would show up in a background search (although the jurisdiction in question, i.e. the country, or sub-division of a country such as a U.S. state in countries organized on a federal basis, would matter).</p>\n\n<p>Generally, a failure to seek criminal charges does not mean that there is no record of your arrest. </p>\n\n<p>The courthouse is often not the bureaucratic entity that maintains arrest records. In many jurisdictions, arrest records (unlike records of criminal charges and criminal convictions) are maintained by law enforcement rather than the courts.</p>\n\n<p>Whether it is possible to have arrest records sealed is a separate and more complicated and jurisdiction specific question.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "criminal-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 51441, "body": "<p>The real story is that the articles you link to are logically fallacious.</p>\n\n<p>The first hedges its assertions by saying a mailbox is \"effectively considered\" to be federal property. It cites <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1705\" rel=\"noreferrer\">18 USC 1705</a>, which it correctly notes \"puts your mailbox under Federal jurisdiction.\" But that's not the same as assuming ownership of it. The piece also says that you \"effectively lease\" your mailbox to the federal government, which is a somewhat exaggerated way of putting it, but even if we accept it at face value it falls far short of a claim that the mailbox is federal property.</p>\n\n<p>The second concludes that mailbox tampering is a federal offense because \"the mailbox belongs to and is controlled by the USPS.\" There is no evidence offered to support the assertion of ownership, and there is of course an alternative explanation for the fact that mailbox tampering is a federal offense, which is that there are laws such as the aforementioned 18 USC 1705 that prohibit it. These laws, however, say nothing about ownership.</p>\n\n<p>The third is ultimately based on the assertion of a letter carrier who said, \"Listen, lady, your friends don’t own these mailboxes. We do.\" The claim was made in explanation of the prohibition against private individuals putting items into a mailbox. As far as I can see, the article is off the mark in another way: that prohibition has nothing to do with safety and security, but rather with protecting the postal service's revenue: it arises from <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1725\" rel=\"noreferrer\">18 USC 1725</a>, which explicitly is about avoiding the payment of postage. In any event, it does not establish ownership.</p>\n\n<p>In short, the idea that all mailboxes are federal property is a myth, as implied by the USPS page you link to.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>To what extent do property owners have control over their own mailbox?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>To a fairly high extent, but they do need to comply with the relevant law. They can't, for example, hang a plastic bottle by the roadside for the purpose of receiving their mail.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Can they deface or place non-mail in their own mailbox?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>18 USC 1705 actually prohibits willful or malicious injury, tearing down, or destruction of a mailbox, not defacing. So technically, they could, but a prosecution seems highly unlikely. Under section 1725, placing non-mail in the box is only prohibited to the extent that there is intent to avoid paying postage. That would be difficult to establish for someone putting something in their own mailbox.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Can they tear it down with no intent to replace it?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>If they're willing to forego mail delivery, yes. They may be able to arrange to have the mail held for retrieval at the post office. If they do not, their mail will be returned to the sender as undeliverable. This arises from the Domestic Mail Manual, which says (in general) that <a href=\"https://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/508.htm#ep1058021\" rel=\"noreferrer\">\"customers must provide authorized mail receptacles or door slots\"</a> as a condition of city delivery (I could not find a corresponding requirement for rural delivery, but it must exist somewhere). The manual also <a href=\"https://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/508.htm#ep1051804\" rel=\"noreferrer\">describes requirements for customer mail receptacles</a>.</p>\n", "score": 41 } ]

[ "united-states", "mail" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91917, "body": "<p>The most likely reason is that in the Americas, most cities are built in grids. For the first couple of hundred years of European colonization, grid cities were highly efficient, as it was easy to survey and parcel off property and allowed for movement of pedestrian and equine traffic efficiently in lines (go two blocks up and two blocks right, and you're there). Then, everything changed when the automobile was invented... Most roads were not built with the car in mind and they were a bit faster and less mobile for grid cities. This lead to a situation where many roads in urban cores are more crowded because of cars, but the roads cannot be expanded because the property along them is owned by many different parties, and that's not with historical structures that are protected from being torn down.</p>\n<p>As such, it may be prudent to add stricter controls to the vehicle flow in cities by limiting the ability to turn around. One of the main disadvantages of grids for automobiles is that there is frequent intersections, which disrupts the flow of traffic because often only one direction can go. Often to ease this, &quot;Right on Red&quot; rules are introduced that allow traffic making right hand turns to do so after stopping for oncoming traffic. This helps reduce the wait for the green light and allows more people to continue on their journey and free up space on that section of a road. Because a U-turn is a wide turn on a left hand turn, it might risk the people who have Right on Red (often times if traffic is only allowed to make left hand turns on a green left hand arrow, the right hand turns are also given a green arrow). U-Turns there for are difficult for Right on Red traffic to predict because there is no way to indicate if a car is making a left or a U. Furthermore, in a grid city, a U-Turn can be achieved by making three lefts and then a right hand turn onto the original road, so it's not much of an inconvenience.</p>\n<p>This is likely a quirk of Alberta, as the U.S. (where driving rules tend to be similar.) U-turns are typically permitted unless signs specifically disallow it. We do have occasional intersections where signs will indicate a lane can make a U-Turn (these generally have two dedicated left hand turn lanes, with the furthest left turn being a U-turn permitted lane, and all other left turn only lanes not permitting it.).</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "traffic", "alberta" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91776, "body": "<ul>\n<li>No, you are not personally criminally liable for a crime a third party has committed, even if you are their guardian.\nThe conflict is managed by <strong>civil action</strong>, i. e. the store owner sues the child/guardian for damages.</li>\n<li>In general, it is not a crime to <em>not</em> report a crime, planned, happening, or finished.\nThere is one section that <strong>penalizes failing to report</strong> a <em>planned</em> crime, § 138 StGB.\nHowever, only very serious crimes such as homicide are eligible.</li>\n<li>So what about <strong>aiding theft</strong>, §§ 242 Ⅰ, 27 Ⅰ StGB, e. g. by attending the child:\nThis requires criminal intent, that means knowledge about and deliberate intent to commit a crime.\nSince the guardian wasn’t aware of anything, he can’t be liable.</li>\n<li>As a guardian (§ 1626 BGB, or in general any guarantor) you can commit a crime by <em>omitting</em> a behavior, § 13 Ⅰ StGB (<em>Garantenstellung</em>).\n<strong>Theft by omission</strong>, §§ 242 Ⅰ, 13 Ⅰ StGB.\nThe purpose of § 13 Ⅰ StGB is that you are forced intervene if an infringement of protected legal interests (e. g. life and limb, property, freedom) is imminent.\nAs a parent you are a guarding guarantor (<em>Beschützergarant</em>).\nYou are supposed to protect your child.\nHowever, § 13 Ⅰ StGB only has the extent of protecting legal interests of your patron.\nThe <em>supermarket</em> owner’s property is not a legal interest you are mandated to protect.\nHence no crime either.</li>\n<li><strong>Approving or rewarding a crime</strong>, § 140 StGB:\nTheft is not eligible, only crimes that are deemed suitable to disturb public order.</li>\n<li><strong>Failure to educate</strong>, § 171 StGB:\nIf you <em>grossly</em> fail to educate your child, even go as far as encouraging it in engaging in criminal activities, you commit a crime.\nHowever, this is a one time occurrence we’re talking about, so not even remotely criminal.</li>\n<li>Various “gang crimes”.\nA family should not be considered a gang (Art. 6 Ⅰ GG), but the DA has an infinite amount of fantasy.</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "germany", "theft", "children", "prosecution" ]

[ { "answer_id": 17077, "body": "<p>It could depend on jurisdiction: in Georgia, attempted murder has a 10 year maximum term and aggravate assault has 20 years max. The essential difference is that attempted murder requires proving intent to kill, whereas \"harm\" is much broader and thus easier to prove.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "united-states", "criminal-law", "murder" ]

[ { "answer_id": 43404, "body": "<p>The police officers themselves are covered by <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Qualified Immunity</a> - to put it briefly, a government official acting in their official capacity in a discretionary act (as in, they have some discretion in whether/how they carry out the act) is immune from suit so long as they pay reasonable deference to relevant law. In the case of the police, so long as the search or seizure itself is reasonable (either because there is a warrant, or because they had probable cause), they can take appropriately destructive measures to carry out their duty. Even if the search or seizure is later found to have been unreasonable, an officer may still have Qualified Immunity unless their action violated \"clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which reasonable person would have known\" (<a href=\"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/800/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Harlow v. Fitzgerald</a>). However, a search/seizure doesn't give the police license for arbitrary destruction, whatever they do has to be reasonably pursuant to the legal search/seizure. For example, if a suspect is barricaded in a house with a gun, they can knock down doors, windows and walls to apprehend them. On the other hand, that does not mean the officers can then break open safes to try and find evidence - once their probable cause for the entry is fulfilled (apprehending the suspect), they need to get a warrant to do more than a plain sight search of the house. Warrants will specify what items are being searched for, so even with a warrant the police have to take reasonable measures to carry it out - an example of an unreasonable measure would be to tear into walls in order to try and find a stolen bicycle. On the other hand, tearing into walls could be justified if their warrant included searching for drugs from a dealer, where it is not uncommon to hide them in the walls.</p>\n\n<p>States and the Federal Government enjoy <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States#State_actions_in_violation_of_the_US_or_state_Constitution\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Sovereign Immunity</a> from suits in most cases. There are some exceptions, but none would apply in this case so long as the general policy of the police department was not illegal or unconstitutional. However, county and city governments do not enjoy Sovereign Immunity and state governments and the Federal Government often allow suits against them for negligence from their actors, so someone injured by unreasonable police action can usually try to recover damages from the officer's department.</p>\n", "score": 11 } ]

[ "united-states", "criminal-law", "rental-property", "damages", "malpractice" ]

[ { "answer_id": 27972, "body": "<p>Yes. </p>\n\n<p>This is clearly kidnapping. It is probably not a terribly aggravated sub-type of kidnapping, but it is kidnapping nonetheless. It is probably a felony. </p>\n\n<p>The fact that the victim does not press charges, or ratifies the conduct after the fact, does not change the fact that a crime was committed. </p>\n\n<p>The police decision to arrest the ex-boyfriend was entirely proper. It was not a false arrest. They had probable cause to believe that a crime was committed by the ex-boyfriend, and, in fact, a crime actually was committed by the ex-boyfriend.</p>\n\n<p>In the United States, the prosecutor has full authority to prosecute the ex-boyfriend to the full extent of the law for felony kidnapping for his conduct, over the objections of the victim. The decision to prosecute or not is entirely in the discretion of the prosecutor who brings criminal charges on behalf of the state and not the victim. Often the police and prosecutors will honor a victim's wishes, and this appears to be what happened in this case, but they are not required to do so, and could change their minds and bring charges in the future against the ex-boyfriend within the statute of limitations, if they wanted to do so.</p>\n\n<p>(This analysis does not apply in countries with Islamic law, but the facts of the question suggest that Islamic law does not apply in this jurisdiction.)</p>\n", "score": 9 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "definition", "false-arrest", "kidnapping" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91893, "body": "<p>No. The first part addresses the penalties for a second offense. The second part addresses the penalties for a third or subsequent offense.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91900, "body": "<p>The wording is from the current ongoing trial that leads to a conviction.</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Alice drives drunk. She has no prior convictions, so is not disqualified.</li>\n<li>Bob drives drunk. He has a conviction from last year. He is disqualified to drive for 3 years from his new conviction.</li>\n<li>Charly drives Drunk. He has one conviction from 5 years ago, one from 4 years ago, and just regained his license last year. Now he is convicted and disqualified for the next 5 years.</li>\n<li>Dorothy drives Drunk. She has a long record of drunken driving, but never without a license. She regained her license two weeks ago after having been disqualified for 5 years. That was 2 weeks ago, and now she is standing in court for drunk driving again. The last disqualification happened 5 years and 16 days after the preceding conviction and is thus 10 years and 1 month prior to the new conviction - and thus outside the 10-year window. As a strange result, she only has a single conviction inside that window and would be disqualified for only 3 years.</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "driving", "definition", "alcohol" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91895, "body": "<h2>No</h2>\n<p>It is not a fundamental human right to be able to become a resident of Denmark.</p>\n<p>Every country has the right to decide who is and who is not a resident and what criteria need to be satisfied. Having a residence is usually a pretty fundamental criterion for being a resident.</p>\n<p>At the same time, most countries have laws that state what areas and types of structures can be used as residences. There may be zoning requirements and building codes. You may argue that you should be able to decide what you will accept as your living quarters but that presumes, wrongly, that your decision doesn’t affect other people. As a simple counter example, emergency services might need to enter your “dwelling” and it must be, among other things, structurally sound enough for them to do so safely.</p>\n<p>So given that becoming a resident of Denmark is not a fundamental human right stated anywhere, Denmark can decide who is and is not.</p>\n<p>Of course, you can lie and say you have a residence when you don’t but lying to the government in order to obtain something you are not actually entitled to is likely to solve all your Danish residence problems; they’ll deport you.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91898, "body": "<p>You mentioned <a href=\"/questions/tagged/germany\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-germany-tooltip-container\">germany</a>.</p>\n<p>Germany discriminates between German citizens, EU citizens, foreign permanent residents, and not-yet-resident foreigners. Your assertion is wrong, the lack of a residence can lead to the deportation of a foreigner.</p>\n<p>A German citizen does not have to have a residence. While it is legally required to register a primary residence if there is one, the relevant laws cope with citizens who have lost their residence (e.g. become homeless, become imprisoned, become hospitalized for the long term). For practical purposes, EU/EEA citizens can <em>stay</em> in Germany indefinitely without a residential addess, but they will have problems with accessing certain government services and subsidies and with their taxes (but then homeless people tend to earn little).</p>\n<p>A foreign permanent resident, on the other hand, has to show adequate housing for herself/himself and any dependents, if any. This is explicitly examined during naturalization procedures as well. Visitors will have to show the financial means to rent short-term accommodation if that is not provided by a host.</p>\n<p>As to the practical ease of evasion, there are two issues. The first is <em>lying</em> on an official document. Maintaining a lie often requires more lies, which can lead to trouble. And then there is the second part. Official correspondence is considered delivered once it is in your letter box. Failing to read it can have consequences.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "property", "human-rights", "fair-housing-acts", "residency", "denmark" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91467, "body": "<p>Look at the seal the notary affixes to your document and see what county it says, or ask the notary when they do it. Look up the clerk of that county and take the notarized document to their office and ask them to certify the signature for an Apostille.</p>\n<p>For example, the city of Nashville is in Davidson County. If the notary has their commission in Davidson County, you'd go to the <a href=\"https://www.nashville.gov/departments/county-clerk\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Davidson County Clerk</a>.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "united-states", "tennessee" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91825, "body": "<p>Copyright law holds that you may not copy the works of a person without the permission of the author. Taking a photograph of a work, even a text work, is making a copy. The foundation of your plan is therefore illegal, but still you might get away with it. In some jurisdictions such as the US there are concepts like &quot;fair use&quot;, or related concepts (<em>not</em> in US law) allowing copying for educational or personal purposes.</p>\n<p>There is also a concept of <a href=\"https://www.authorsalliance.org/2020/05/27/implied-licenses-in-copyright-law/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">implied license</a>, where a person acts in such a way that a person reasonably infers that they have permission for certain purposes (which underlies the legality of general web page access). It may be reasonable to infer that the author intended that the reader actually do what the text instructs them to do (&quot;try it yourself&quot; is endemic in HTML instructional webpages, for example). However, inferring permission when there is none is risky. A lack of explicit statement about copying could either be because the author failed to permit copying, or because he failed to expressly prohibit it or password-protect it. The law requires you to have permission and is not framed in terms of &quot;not having been prohibited&quot; – when it comes to copyright. Reliance on an implied license argument is therefore very risky.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "copyright" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91883, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>...I have to find the contract online somehow, I know.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>I'm sure the contract will state that, by signing (or clicking through the TOS or hosting agreement) you hold Artspan not liable for any loss of data or images, hacks, service disruptions, loss of income or anything else that happens to your website and artwork.</p>\n<p>You're simply out of luck on getting a refund; you signed a contract, and it is legally binding. Artspan could still offer a refund, but it would be their choice, and they are not legally bound to do so.</p>\n<p>You could <em>possibly</em> have recourse on a state or local level, if your jurisdiction has consumer protection laws, and Artspan is legally located in such a jurisdiction (as stated in the contract), but that's for you to investigate.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91889, "body": "<h2>You are only entitled to a refund if the contract says so or in the case of <a href=\"http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UWALawRw/2006/6.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">total failure of consideration</a></h2>\n<p>I don’t know what the contract says about refunds but I would guess it doesn’t mention them. Since you have had the use of the service for a period of time there has not been total failure of consideration. So you are not entitled to a refund, partial or full.</p>\n<p>You may be entitled to damages which are the monetary value of the loss you suffered due to their negligence. This can be pursued as a contract claim, a tort, or in some jurisdictions, as a breech of a statutory guarantee. The contract likely has a limitation of liability clause which may be enforceable which may close down or restrict this approach. Notwithstanding, any money you get this way is damages, not a refund.</p>\n<p>In <a href=\"/questions/tagged/australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-australia-tooltip-container\">australia</a> the leading case is <a href=\"https://www.australiancontractlaw.info/cases/database/baltic-shipping-v-dillon\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Baltic Shipping v Dillon</a>. Ms Dillon was on a cruise ship that ran aground off New Zealand. She was rescued and claimed damages for the loss of her luggage and the distress etc. which the court awarded. She also claimed refund of the fare, however, she had received 9 days of the 14 day cruise and so she failed on this point.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "liability", "terms-of-service", "hacking" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91851, "body": "<p>In all likelihood, the property would have gone to Stanley. Keep in mind that Warden Walker and her family owned the remains of the town of Green Lake, which had become a ghost town in the 20 years between Kissin' Kate's crimes and her death. The books likely take place in the year of the release. In all likelihood, the state owned the lake proper, and thus the lake bed, even if Trout bought all the buildings as the town population dwindled. In all likelihood, the loot was abandoned property on public land (the dried lakebed). As such, it was Hector and Zeroni opperating on their own, who discovered the treasure and thus would be able to claim it as their property. As we do not see the deed to the land, this is an assumption. However, the lack of any fencing around a juvenile detention facility probably hints that they were operating on land that the camp could not legally fence off and used the threat of dehydration to deter escape.</p>\n<p>If it was on the property, there might be a legal dispute as it was stolen property in the first place and the estate of Stanley Yelnats would be able to make a claim against Warden Walker that they need to return the goods that were not theirs. This is complicated by the fact that Warden Walker and her employees are knowingly violating the law by using Juvenile Offenders as unpaid labor, despite the fact that they are private state contractors and advertise themselves as a counseling service and are engaging in computer crimes to cover up two offenders running off into the desert as well as fraud. This results in the state seizing control of the facility to properly dispose of those in it's custody and the property itself. This means that even if Warden Walker rightly owned the land, the state felt it like it was in everyone's interest to back the Yelnats' claim to the contents of the chest (In all likelihood, they could have included it as a settlement to prevent a lawsuit as the state would be a party to any case (at the least, they failed to properly inspect the facility and it's operations) and the Yelnats and Zeroni's are the victims who were impacted the most. It could also have been used to incentivize or thank them for testimony against the Walker operation.).</p>\n<p>It could also be the case that the book ended prior to the treasurer's ownership being rightfully decided by the law. The Yelnats were independently wealthy thanks to Yelnats III's discovery of a cure for foot oder (Sploosh), which was so successful that they were able to advertise it with a Superbowl commercial with a celebrity endorsement from a Major League Baseball player no less. While the baseball player likely was doing it at a significant discount because his testimony lead to Yelnats IV's wrongful conviction and abuse at Camp Green Lake, the price for a 30 second spot in Super Bowl XXXIII (1999) was $1.6 million dollars and was likely payed for from (Sploosh's) own income as an advertising expense is nothing to sneeze at.</p>\n<p>It should also be pointed out that Holes is not a story about the law (this comes as early as Stanley IV's trial, where he is not given an lawyer and his family cannot afford one, along with some testimony that would not have been allowed being allowed to be heard.). The point of the treasure being found was symbolic of the family curse being lifted, a result of Stanley carrying Zero up the mount where they found water, and allowing him to drink while he sang the fabled song (The terms that Stanley's No good pig stealing Great-Great-Grandfather failed to oblige to Hector &quot;Zero&quot; Zeroni's Great-Great-Grandmother that brought the curse upon the family.). As a major theme of the book is the choices of the past affecting the present, the treasure is a symbolic victory. Stanley IV is rewarded for fulfilling his ancestor's promise out of the goodness of his own heart and no idea that he was doing this. When Zero reveal his real name as Zeroni, Stanley has no idea of the relation to the gypsy woman who cursed his family (if I recall the book spells it out for the reader. I remember in my first read, I forgot Madam Zeroni's name by the time we learn it's Zero's name.). As such, the legality of do they own it because it was stolen and their name was on it wasn't considered. Green Lake is also recieves the first rain it has in 100 years after the treasure is found and Zero is taken with Stanley's lawyers out of Green Lake (it's implied that Sam, Kissin' Kate's lover, whose death at the hands of the towns folk brought about the cursed drought, had also been broken.).</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "property", "texas", "inheritance", "law-in-fiction" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91880, "body": "<p>State legislation can be invalid due to inconsistency with <em>either</em> the U.S. Constitution <em>or</em> the state's constitution.</p>\n<p>State legislation can also be inoperative due to <a href=\"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_preemption\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">pre-emption</a> by conflicting and valid federal law.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91881, "body": "<p>All states have written constitutions which limit what laws that state can pass. States are also limited by what rights are <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">incorporated</a> by the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. While state law cannot violate the US Constitution, states are free to write constitutions that grant more or more expansive rights to their citizens. A good case example of this is <em><a href=\"https://www.oyez.org/cases/1979/79-289\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Pruneyard Shopping Center v Robins</a></em>. Briefly, the case was whether the shopping center could expel students who were protesting a UN resolution on its property, which was generally open to the public. The Supreme Court of the US found that while the US Constitution did not protect the speech of the students, the California Constitution was more expansive in its protection of speech and as a result did protect the conduct of the students against the shopping center.</p>\n<p>The trick here is that usually SCOTUS will defer to the findings of the state supreme court (using &quot;supreme court&quot; to mean whichever court is the highest court in the state) on the interpretation of the state's constitution, on the theory that they are the experts on their state constitution's meaning and historical precedent. So if a state supreme court has ruled that a law is non-violative of the state constitution, SCOTUS is unlikely to overrule that.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "federal-courts" ]

[ { "answer_id": 77615, "body": "<p>The legal answer is that it depends on where in the world you are. In the US, &quot;sexual harassment&quot; is legally subsumed under laws against illegal discrimination, which can exist at the federal level and the state level. You cannot discriminate on the basis of race for employment, housing, public accomodations and so on. You cannot discriminate on the basis of sex in employment. However, you are not employing anyone, so that law does not apply to you. In general, being a customer or potential customer, or a person in possession of a phone, is not a federally-regulated activity.</p>\n<p>The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects your right to expression, regardless of whether they may be found to be offensive. It is legal in the US to be rude.</p>\n", "score": 6 }, { "answer_id": 77617, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/revisions/77613/1\">Did I commit sexual harassment</a> unknowingly?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>No. That falls short of harassment (sexual or otherwise).</p>\n<p>Statutory definitions of harassment typically require a <em>course</em> of action, that is, a plurality of acts. The second time you said it to the agent does not count as plurality because she explicitly asked you to repeat your statement. In some jurisdictions a single act can be cognizable as sexual harassment if the act was egregious (see <a href=\"https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000037289662/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">art. 222-33.II of the French civil code</a>, requiring repetition or plurality of acts absent &quot;<em>toute forme de pression grave</em>&quot;). However, what you describe is a joke that clearly falls short of egregious.</p>\n<p>Another reason why this cannot constitute harassment is that obviously the agent is entirely unknown to you and unidentifiable by you. The agent cannot reasonably become concerned for her safety in a context where she basically acts incognito. Nor would it be reasonable for her to allege that the matter annoyed her (that is, for purposes of the statutory definition of harassment) because she was the one who resumed the pattern of unsolicited contacts that understandably irritate you and your friend.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "harassment" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91677, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>what if it is established in court that you knowingly or through gross\nnegligence included a falsehood, or a claim you have no evidence for,\njust to clear that initial hurdle? What would the consequences be for\nthat?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The case proceeds and if it goes to trial, the finder of fact determines if the case prevails or not. Also, note that except in the case of a verified complaint, a complaint in a civil case is not made under oath or under penalty of perjury.</p>\n<p>In the rare and unlikely event that it is established that you knew that your case had no factual basis at the outset, you (and your attorney in many cases), can be sanctioned by the court, usually in the form of the attorney fees incurred by other side as a result of the knowingly false statement.</p>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 91658, "body": "<p>In common law trials, a trial asks 2 fundamental questions: &quot;What do the facts say?&quot; and &quot;What does the law say?&quot; With rare exceptions, the first question is always answered by the jury in both civil and criminal matters, but the second question is answered by a judge, who has actually studied law.</p>\n<p>A motion to dismiss is essentially the defense/respondents in a civil case asking the judge to not let the case proceed because the plaintiff is not supported by law. Therefore there is no evidentiary matter brought to the court for this determination, but rather just a summation of why the actions alleged are not violations of tort laws, and thus why the plaintiff cannot sue the respondent. The respondent can cite case law and make opinion statements, but it is up to the judge to determine if the case has merit to progress to the next stage of the lawsuit's procedures: discovery.</p>\n<p>Discovery is actually where evidence (which is fact) is developed, and generally it's in everyone's best interest to avoid discovery (Typically, if you hear about a settlement, it is happening shortly after discovery is scheduled.) In discovery, both parties may request the other to turn over possible evidence to build their case against them. During this process, the requesting party need not show that the evidence exists in a location, but merely show that evidence COULD exist in order to get the court to approve requests. This can be very invasive (for both sides) of the suit, and since it may have evidence, it will mean the information is made public.</p>\n<p>So, in fact, during the initial motions to dismiss, there isn't necessarily evidence that has been developed, so there are no factual arguments being made. Only legal arguments that are more persuading a judge to interpret the law in one way over another way.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

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

[ { "answer_id": 91876, "body": "<p>In summary,</p>\n<ul>\n<li>An order of the County Court is meant to have the judge's name and court seal, but conventionally will not include a signature.</li>\n<li>Form N24 is submitted by a party to the case, as a proposal for the court to make an order in the given terms, and naturally wouldn't be sealed at the time of submission.</li>\n<li>Even if a court order has some formal defect, you still have to obey it.</li>\n</ul>\n<h2>What Form N24 is and does</h2>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n24-general-form-of-judgment-or-order\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Form N24</a> is used when a party to a civil case proposes that the court should make a certain order. They write down the words that they would like the court to endorse. The court could go along with the proposal, or do something different, and naturally there will be disagreements and counterproposals about what it ought to do. Orders of court can also be made on its own initiative, without waiting for someone to make a suggestion.</p>\n<p>But any order made by the court will have the same formal structure, reflected on Form N24. That includes the actual text of the order (the big box), which might say things like &quot;Defendant is to pay Claimant the sum of £200&quot;. It names the parties, the court, and the case number. There is also a little circle labelled SEAL, which is where the court seal will be placed in order to convert an ordinary piece of paper into an actual order of the court. In practice, that will be a stamp rather than an elaborate affair involving wax and ribbons.</p>\n<p>When a party submits Form N24, they do not put the judge's signature on it, and they do not seal it. It's not a court order yet, just a proposed draft of one.</p>\n<p>When a judge (or in some situations, a court officer) wants to make an order - whether it originates on a submitted Form N24 or not - they arrange with court staff for the appropriate adminstrative actions to take place, including updating the case records, making copies, using the stamp, distributing copies, etc. The text of the order will include the name of the judge, and it will show the date it was made (which may be different from the date when it was sealed). In the Magistrates' Court, for historical reasons, orders are signed instead of being sealed. But the seal and signature serve the same function of demonstrating that the document is authentic.</p>\n<p>The court can make a new order varying the terms of a previous sealed order, but this is only meant to be done in order to correct a mistake. Conceptually, once the order is sealed, it is final and can be used in order to enforce its terms, e.g. obtaining that £200 from Defendant.</p>\n<h2>What information court orders must have on their face</h2>\n<p>The Civil Procedure Rules go into detail on this topic in <a href=\"https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part40\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Rule 40</a> and the accompanying <a href=\"https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part40/pd_part40b\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Practice Direction 40B</a>. In particular, for the metadata mentioned in the question above, Rule 40.2(2)(b) says that</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>[Every judgment or order must] be sealed by the court.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Rule 40.1 also says that</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Every judgment or order must state the name and judicial title of the person who made it [...]</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>with a catalogue of exceptions for when the order is made by a court officer rather than a judge.</p>\n<h2>When court orders have something wrong with them</h2>\n<p>The Supreme Court recently revisited the problem of defective court orders in <a href=\"https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2020-0008-judgment.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><em>R (Majera) v Home Secretary</em> [2021] UKSC 46</a>, and endorsed a strong line of authority going back at least to 1846. In that year, the Lord Chancellor, <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Pepys,_1st_Earl_of_Cottenham\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Lord Cottenham</a>, giving judgement in <a href=\"https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_English_Reports_Chancery/yfRCAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&amp;gbpv=1&amp;pg=PA884&amp;printsec=frontcover\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><em>Chuck v Cremer</em> 1 Coop temp Cott 338; 47 ER 884</a> said:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A party, who knows of an order, whether null or valid,\nregular or irregular, cannot be permitted to disobey it. It did not even signify whether the order was drawn up. That there were many cases in which a party had been held to have committed a contempt for disobeying an order, which had not only not been served, but had not even been drawn up. It would be most dangerous to hold that the suitors, or their solicitors, could themselves judge whether an order was null or valid - whether it was regular or irregular. That they should come to the Court and not take upon themselves to determine such a question. That the course of a party knowing of an order, which was null or irregular, and who might be affected by it, was plain. He should apply to the Court that it might be discharged. As long as it existed it must not be disobeyed.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The Supreme Court confirmed at para 45,</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Notwithstanding the paradox involved in this use of language, a court order which is &quot;null&quot; must be obeyed unless and until it is set aside.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>They considered this principle to relate to the rule of law in general, as respect for court orders is critical to the functioning of the courts at all. They wanted parties to steer well clear of feeling able to decide for themselves whether an order should be followed.</p>\n<p>In light of the many other cited cases in the Supreme Court judgement, it is clear that an apparently defective &quot;order of court&quot; should still be treated as binding until the court itself has resolved the issue. If the order is real then the court can do the necessary formal steps that were missed originally, or simply confirm that the order does indeed reflect what the court had intended to order. If it contained some serious mistake then it is up to the court to remedy the situation (and not the parties to the case). If it were a total forgery then a very different course of events would follow.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "england-and-wales", "court-order", "judgment", "county-court", "court-forms" ]

[ { "answer_id": 90882, "body": "<h2>Depends on the NDA</h2>\n<p>Just like any other contract, it does what it says it does. You could draft the NDA either way.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "canada", "non-disclosure", "confidentiality" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91874, "body": "<h2>Such clauses are problematic</h2>\n<p>For example, the Australian Consumer Law imposes statutory <a href=\"https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/buying-products-and-services/consumer-rights-and-guarantees\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">guarantees</a> on the supply of goods and services to consumers even when when these are supplied as gifts. The one we are interested in for software is they must be provided with Due care and skill:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Service providers must carry out all services using an acceptable level of care and skill. Their work must be at least as good as what a competent service provider with average skills and experience would provide. They must also take reasonable steps to avoid causing loss or damage when providing the service.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>A blanket “as is” statement does not and cannot remove the requirement that the software author must “ take reasonable steps to avoid causing loss or damage when providing the service.” Further, claiming that they have no obligation when they actually do is misleading and a breach of the law all by itself (<a href=\"https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Valve to pay $3 million in penalties for misrepresenting gamers' consumer guarantee rights</a>)</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "licensing" ]

[ { "answer_id": 24644, "body": "<p>What a lovely question!</p>\n<p>US Copyright law is clear: the author of a creative work owns the copyright unless it is work for hire. In this instance, the photographer is not doing work for hire so they own the copyright.</p>\n<p>However, the photographer does not own a copy of the photograph – that is owned by the owner of the camera. The photographer cannot demand that they give him a copy but the parties can agree on such a transfer on whatever terms they like.</p>\n<p>As the owner of a “physical” copy they can do what they like with that copy but they cannot duplicate it except as fair use or as licensed. They could sell the memory card to whomever they like but the new owner couldn’t copy it either so it would seriously limit publication. Similarly they could move the file provided there was only one copy. Arguably, they could make a print of it providing they deleted the electronic version without copyright violation.</p>\n<p>Which brings us to who owns the copyright <em>now</em>. The camera owner can argue that the photographer has gifted the copyright to them. This is quite a strong argument as the parties' intentions at the time of arranging the taking of the photograph is that the photographer would have no further interest in it – after all he probably doesn’t want to hang a photo of some strangers on his wall. However, in many jurisdictions, including the <a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a>, copyright transfers must be in writing.</p>\n<p>As a fallback position the camera owner can argue there is an <em>implicit</em> license given even if copyright was not transferred. The scope of the license then becomes an issue. It is probably indisputable that the license is perpetual and royalty free. What is arguable is if the license allows commercial exploitation or only personal use. This is where the battle lines would be drawn and I don’t know how it would play out.</p>\n<h2>Other jurisdictions are different</h2>\n<p>For example, in Australia, copyright in a photo commissioned “for valuable consideration” for a “private or domestic purpose” vests in the commissioning party, not the photographer; even though this is not work for hire by an employee.</p>\n<p>For the circumstances you describe, the purpose is “private or domestic” but there is no “valuable consideration” so the photographer owns the copyright in this case. However, if there was an agreement to “pay” the photographer (even one as simple as “I’ll take your family photo if you’ll take mine”) then the person who asked for the photo to be taken owns the copyright.</p>\n", "score": 23 }, { "answer_id": 89207, "body": "<p>A case this year (2023) addresses this:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Shah v. NYP Holdings, Inc., 2023 WL 266511 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 18, 2023).</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>From the court's ruling:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Shah’s claim raises an interesting question: who should hold copyright\nin a photograph when the photographer only takes the photo upon being\nasked? The law, with strict requirements for joint authorship, does\nnot reflect the current circumstances surrounding cellphone photo\netiquette. Nonetheless, Shah [the camera owner] has not alleged authorship under current\nSeventh Circuit law and the Court dismisses his copyright infringement\nclaim.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2023/01/if-you-ask-your-friend-to-take-your-photo-using-your-camera-who-owns-the-copyright-shah-v-nyp.htm\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Analysis by Eric Goldman.</a></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilndce/1:2021cv06148/409000/64/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Link to the case.</a></p>\n", "score": 8 } ]

[ "copyright", "photography" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91760, "body": "<p><strong>None</strong>, if the intention is merely trespassing, unlike <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/9?timeline=false\" rel=\"noreferrer\">burglary</a> which requires intent to steal, commit criminal damage, or inflict grevious bodily harm or if the building is a <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/15/part/4/crossheading/trespass-on-designated-site?timeline=false\" rel=\"noreferrer\">protected site</a> - neither of which isn't evident from the question.</p>\n<p>Note, for both offences, the <em>actus reus</em> is <strong>entry</strong> - there is no requirement for any form of &quot;breaking&quot;</p>\n<p>Further to ohwilleke's comment, unless the lock is damaged or destroyed etc, then there is no offence of <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/1?timeline=false\" rel=\"noreferrer\">criminal damage</a></p>\n", "score": 19 }, { "answer_id": 91758, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/canada\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-canada-tooltip-container\">canada</a></p>\n<p>This would be breaking and entering contrary to <a href=\"https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-348.html\" rel=\"noreferrer\">s. 348</a> of the <em>Criminal Code</em>.</p>\n<p>&quot;Breaking&quot; under this offence means &quot;to break any part, internal or external, or ... to open any thing that is or intended to be used to close or cover an internal or external opening&quot; (s. 321).</p>\n<p>A person is deemed to have broken and entered if they &quot;enter[] without lawful justification or excuse by a permanent or temporary opening&quot; (s. 350). Even entry through an unlocked door, when it is done without consent, is deemed to be breaking and entering. See <em>Todorov c. R.</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/ghjlj\" rel=\"noreferrer\">2015 QCCA 812</a>.</p>\n", "score": 16 }, { "answer_id": 91775, "body": "<h2><a href=\"https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-1901-033#sec.4\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Unlawful entry on Inclosed Land</a></h2>\n<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/new-south-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-new-south-wales-tooltip-container\">new-south-wales</a></p>\n<p>Under s4 of the Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) Any person who, without lawful excuse (proof of which lies on the person), enters into inclosed lands without the consent of the owner, occupier or person apparently in charge of those lands, or who remains on those lands after being requested by the owner, occupier or person apparently in charge of those lands to leave those lands, is liable to a penalty not exceeding …</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>There is an additional penalty if you don’t close the door when you leave. Because the Act is primarily about protecting agricultural land and leaving gates open can lead to stock wandering but it is applicable to all land.</p>\n", "score": 10 }, { "answer_id": 91856, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/illinois\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;illinois&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;illinois&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-illinois-tooltip-container\">illinois</a></p>\n<p>This answer assumes no intent of wrongdoing other than opening the lock was proven by the prosecution.</p>\n<p>Tampering with security devices is a class 4 felony. The bold text below is mine.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(720 ILCS 5/17-11.5) (was 720 ILCS 5/16-22)<br />\nSec. 17-11.5. Tampering with a security, fire, or life safety system.<br />\n(a) A person commits tampering with a security, fire, or life safety system when he or she knowingly damages, <strong>sabotages</strong>, destroys, or causes a permanent or <strong>temporary malfunction</strong> in any physical or electronic security, fire, or life safety system or any component part of any of those systems including, but not limited to, [...] (a long list of devices) [...].<br />\n(b) Sentence. A violation of this Section is a Class 4 felony.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The lock suffered a temporary malfunction, as it was not doing its job of keeping the door closed. The security feature was also sabotaged (though not harmed), not fulfilling its function, when it was left open.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sabotage/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sabotage/</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Sabotage is the act of hampering, deliberating subverting, or hurting the efforts of another.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>In this case, the efforts of whoever wanted the door to stay locked were <em>sabotaged</em>.</p>\n<p>Did the intruder tamper with the lock?</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://definitions.uslegal.com/t/tampering/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">https://definitions.uslegal.com/t/tampering/</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Tampering is an intentional act of interfering improperly or in a harmful manner. [...]</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>By switching the lock to &quot;open&quot; without permission, the person exposed the secured area to intruders (and became one in the process). Testing combinations until the correct one was entered is an intentional act. The opening of the lock is harmful as it compromises the security of the venue.</p>\n<p>The trespasser, aside from civil charges, can also face 1 to 3 years in prison and fines up to USD 25k. (730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-45)</p>\n", "score": 6 }, { "answer_id": 91836, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/victoria\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;victoria&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;victoria&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-victoria-tooltip-container\">victoria</a></p>\n<p>Summary Offences Act 1966, Section 9(1)(e)</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>without express or implied authority given\nby the owner or occupier or given on behalf\nof the owner or occupier by a person\nauthorised to give it or without any other\nlawful excuse, wilfully enters any private\nplace or Scheduled public place, unless for a\nlegitimate purpose; or</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Normally prosecuted as &quot;unlawfully on premises&quot;. Note: for whatever reason, section 9 is titled <strong>Wilful destruction, damage etc. of property</strong>, which makes it a little harder to find. This is a summary offense tried by a magistrate without a jury, so &quot;lawful&quot; and &quot;legitimate&quot; are not complicated legal terms: they limit rather than extend the terms &quot;excuse&quot; and &quot;purpose&quot;.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "criminal-law", "england-and-wales", "trespass" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91854, "body": "<p>I am addressing only a detail of the question, but I think it is important.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Does this suggest that in some sense or other, the crimes of Deedee against her daughter were somehow “worth” 20 years of imprisonment?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>No.</p>\n<p>For most countries(*) criminal procedures are not a matter of revenge or settling the scores. They are not something between the criminal who caused the damage and the victim who suffered the damage, but between the criminal who broke a law and the state that established that law and wants it enforced.</p>\n<p>The opinion of the victim is, theoretically(*2), not important. It does not matter if they pardon the criminal or even if they think that they deserved the crime, the state should prosecute the criminal nonetheless. A very usual example is marital violence; many jurisdictions have guidelines forcing the state to prosecute even if the victim does not want to press charges.</p>\n<p>So, how long could Deedee Blanchard have been convicted to has no relation at all with those twenty years that you claim were &quot;reduced.&quot;</p>\n<p>And from <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Dee_Dee_Blanchard\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the WP page</a> it seems that she pleaded guilty, which means that a deal was reached with the DA. She got a reduced sentence, the DA ensured a conviction. Nothing out of the ordinary here.</p>\n<p>Maybe the DA thought that the case against her was weak and not good enough to pursue a first-degree murder accusation. Maybe the DA thought the mother abuse could be used as part as a successful insanity defense. Perhaps the DA even feared the jury showing some sympathy for her.</p>\n<p>We cannot tell, so the whole &quot;was going to receive 30 years imprisonement&quot; thing is just your opinion.</p>\n<p>*1 And certainly all Western countries.</p>\n<p>*2 At a practical level, if the victim does not want to press charges, it can help the criminal as either the prosecution feels that they will not be able to get evidence without the victim's testimony, or because they want to concentrate their resources on other crimes. But theoretically it would not matter.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "criminal-law", "any-jurisdiction", "sentencing", "child-abuse" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91833, "body": "<h2>You’re overthinking this</h2>\n<p>The President can pardon Federal crimes, the state Governor can pardon state crimes.</p>\n<p>A convicted person will have been convicted under a Federal law, a State law or, possibly, both. The President can pardon the Federal convictions but not the State ones and vice-versa for the Governor.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "india", "indian-constitutional-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91857, "body": "<p>This is a pretty good example of &quot;Contributory Negligence&quot;.</p>\n<p>Depending on the precise details of the case, both (or multiple) parties may have contributed to Karen's injuries.</p>\n<p>She certainly had some role by ignoring posted signs and wearing inappropriate footwear.</p>\n<p>But the shop may have made access too easy. Maybe they didn't have a front-desk person posted in a safe-area, causing her to go seeking an employee.</p>\n<p>The shop had a dangerous bin of metal shavings without a lid on it, and at a height and location where a single misstep means someone could fall into it head-first.</p>\n<p>They had dangerous crane-control mechanism in easy reach that didn't need a Key or other Lock-out mechanism.</p>\n<p>Ultimately, the details will matter. But it should be straightforward for mediation or a trial to determine each parties contribution to the overall unsafe situation and injuries. Taking the description above at face-value, I think Karen and the shop might both be found partially responsible for the injuries. It may not be a 50/50 split, but Karen likely acted unreasonably, and the shop, despite OSHA compliance, may well have created more hazards than appropriate.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "liability", "texas", "trespass", "injury", "osha" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91770, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-australia-tooltip-container\">australia</a></p>\n<p>Here are the <a href=\"https://www.matthewsfolbigg.com.au/services/debt-recovery/enforcement-of-judgments/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">options</a>:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Examination summons. The debtor must front court and disclose all their assets and liabilities. This doesn’t get you the money but it can inform which of the following methods might be best.</li>\n<li>Garnishee order. This is served on anyone who owes money to the debtor and requires them to pay you instead of them. Usually served on a bank or employer.</li>\n<li>Writ for the Levy of Property. The Sheriff (which is a different job from a UK or US Sheriff) goes to their place, takes their stuff, sells it at public auction and gives you your money. If the judgement is for more than $3,000, you can instead get a lien over real property.</li>\n<li>Bankruptcy (for individuals) or Liquidation (for corporations). For debts of more than $5,000 and $2,000 respectively (temporarily raised to $20,000 for both during the Covid pandemic and not yet repealed), you can begin the process of having a bankruptcy trustee or liquidator appointed.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>You can, of course, sell the debt to a debt collector at a discount and make it their problem instead of yours.</p>\n<p>Note, specific dollar thresholds are specific to <a href=\"/questions/tagged/new-south-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-new-south-wales-tooltip-container\">new-south-wales</a> but the processes are the same everywhere.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91863, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/england-and-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container\">england-and-wales</a></p>\n<p>In no particular order:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>ask the debtor</li>\n<li>apply to court to order the debtor to provide information under oath\nabout their financial situation (<a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n316-application-for-order-that-debtor-attend-court-for-questioning\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Form N316: Apply for an order for a\ndebtor to attend court</a>) (on pain of imprisonment)</li>\n<li>search their publicly available financial reports</li>\n<li>search <a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Companies House</a></li>\n<li>search the Land Registry</li>\n<li>check the <a href=\"https://rojof.org.uk/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Register of Judgments, orders and fines</a></li>\n<li>search the insolvency courts and the London Gazette to check whether\nthe debtor company is subject to any ongoing insolvency procedures</li>\n<li>instruct an 'enquiry agent' (aka private investigator) or debt recovery agent</li>\n<li>ask the court to make a winding up order to force the company into\ninsolvency proceedings - at this point the company might pay up or go\ninto insolvency</li>\n<li>ask the court to instruct bailiffs to seize and sell goods owned by\nthe debtor</li>\n<li>ask the court to make a third party debt order to seize money held by\na third party, e.g. the debtor's bank account</li>\n<li>ask the court to make a charging order on the debtor's property to secure the debt on it</li>\n</ul>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/what-to-do-if-a-defendant-doesnt-pay-money-after-judgment-ex321/what-to-do-if-you-have-a-judgement-but-the-defendant-has-not-paid-ex321\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/what-to-do-if-a-defendant-doesnt-pay-money-after-judgment-ex321/what-to-do-if-you-have-a-judgement-but-the-defendant-has-not-paid-ex321</a></p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "england-and-wales", "any-jurisdiction", "civil-judgment", "enforcement" ]

[ { "answer_id": 8600, "body": "<p>Under the law of common law contracts, posting a price is an <a href=\"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitation_to_treat\" rel=\"noreferrer\">invitation to treat</a> and is <strong>not</strong> binding.</p>\n\n<p>However, in many jurisdictions, there may be (probably is) statutory <a href=\"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_protection\" rel=\"noreferrer\">consumer protection</a> law that make this practice illegal. Whether this means the business must honor the price or merely makes them liable to prosecution and fines depends on the specific law.</p>\n\n<p>For example, in Australia the law refers to this as <a href=\"https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/prices-receipts/price-displays\" rel=\"noreferrer\">multiple pricing</a>. The law requires that the business withdraw the product from sale until the multiple pricing is fixed (i.e. they take the poster down) or, if they are unable or unwilling to do this, they must sell for the lower price. If they do neither then they have committed an offence and are liable to be fined by the government; the consumer does not get any compensation.</p>\n", "score": 8 }, { "answer_id": 8625, "body": "<p>It depends on where exactly in the world you are. </p>\n\n<p>In the United Kingdom, you cannot force the shop to trade at the advertised price. They can claim that they made a mistake and refuse. </p>\n\n<p>However, they are not allowed to use incorrect pricing to lure customers in. After you try to buy and they refuse because of a mistake, they need to fix that mistake and change the advertised price. If they deliberately advertise a price at which they don't sell, that would be misleading customers and illegal. In the UK, \"Trading Standards\" would be interested to hear about that. </p>\n\n<p>If you suspect that's what's happening, take a photo of the advertised price, ask them to change the price, and come back the next day. If the price is unchanged, and they still refuse to sell, you might be forced to notify Trading Standards. Obviously that shouldn't happen. </p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "consumer-protection", "new-york-state", "commerce", "advertisements" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91862, "body": "<p>N.G. was <a href=\"https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/crime/2018/11/16/nicholas-godejohn-found-guilty-blanchard-murder/2027186002/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">sentenced to life <em>without</em> the possibility of parole</a>.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "parole", "life-sentence" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91824, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/canada\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-canada-tooltip-container\">canada</a></p>\n<p>If this is done with the specific intention of obstructing justice (see <em>R. c. Charbonneau</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/1pd96\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">1992 CanLII 2979</a> (QCCA)), then this is an offence contrary to <a href=\"https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-139.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s. 139(2) of the <em>Criminal Code</em></a>. The offence is not dependent on the deleted evidence being evidence that would have been used against the deleter.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Every person who intentionally attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of [an offence].</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>A couple of examples:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>In <em>R. c. Renaud</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/j7vs0\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2019 CM 4021</a>, the accused had asked someone to delete photographs and texts off of their smart phone. He was found not guilty on this charge because the <em>mens rea</em> was not proved.</li>\n<li>In <em>R. v. Subia</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/jn6sb\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2022 ONSC 1693</a>, the accused admitted that he used specialized software in an attempt to delete traces of evidence (images) from his phone. He was found guilty of attempted obstruction of justice.</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91832, "body": "<h2>Using it may be a crime</h2>\n<p><strong>Having it is fine</strong></p>\n<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-australia-tooltip-container\">australia</a></p>\n<p>There is a similar crime in all jurisdictions which in <a href=\"/questions/tagged/new-south-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-new-south-wales-tooltip-container\">new-south-wales</a> is called <a href=\"https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/crimes-act/tampering-with-evidence/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Tampering etc with evidence</a> under <a href=\"http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s317.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s317</a> of the Crimes Act 1900.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>To establish the offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that:</p>\n<ol>\n<li><p>You suppressed, concealed, destroyed, altered or falsified information knowing it is or may be required as evidence in a judicial proceeding, or you fabricated false evidence (other than by perjury), or you knowingly made use of false evidence, and</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>You intended by doing so to mislead any judicial tribunal in judicial proceedings.</p>\n</li>\n</ol>\n<p>A ‘judicial proceeding’ is any proceeding in or before a judicial tribunal in which evidence may be taken on oath.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Evidence of a crime (even if not your crime) “is or may be required as evidence in a judicial proceeding” even if no such proceeding has commenced. If you know its there and your intention is to destroy this evidence to prevent it being used in the (hypothetical) judicial proceeding, then you have committed the crime.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91850, "body": "<p>Yes using it can be illegal depending on the circumstances.</p>\n<p>In numerous (if not all) jurisdictions there are offences like the following:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>tampering with, destroying, mutilating, altering or concealing evidence; and/or</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">obstructing justice</a>, <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverting_the_course_of_justice\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">perverting the course of justice</a> or defeating the ends of justice (more broad); and/or</li>\n<li>contempt of court (even more broad).</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Some jurisdictions compel the preservation or disclosure of records (e.g. for tax assessments or freedom of information law).</p>\n<p>Some jurisdictions compel cooperation with agents of the state (e.g. when being questioned at a border).</p>\n<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/england-and-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container\">england-and-wales</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>[At common law] the offence of <a href=\"https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-justice-offences-incorporating-charging-standard#_Toc536105663\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Perverting the Course of Justice</a> is committed when an accused:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>does an act or series of acts;</li>\n<li>which has or have a tendency to pervert; and</li>\n<li>which is or are intended to pervert;</li>\n<li>the course of public justice.</li>\n</ul>\n</blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2011/729.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">T v. R [2011] EWCA Crim 729</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>In a criminal case, the course of justice includes the police investigation of a possible crime. An act that makes that investigation more difficult, or which may mislead the police in their investigation, may tend to pervert the course of justice.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The circumstances might be such that there is a more appropriate or specific offence (that would be preferred to a broader offence). For example, in England and Wales there is the <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/77\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">offence of altering etc. records with intent to prevent disclosure, s77 Freedom of Information Act 2000</a>.</p>\n<p>In some circumstances using it is not illegal, e.g. if someone steals your device and demands you tell them your username and password.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "is-x-legal", "any-jurisdiction", "borders" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91849, "body": "<p>Kinda but not really.</p>\n<p>As a rough approximation, GDPR applies when in a controller–subject relationship, at least one of them is in Europe:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>GDPR applies per Art 3(1) to all processing activities that occur in the context of an European establishment.</li>\n<li>For non-European data controllers, GDPR applies per Art 3(2) to those processing activities that relate to the offering of goods or services to people who are to Europe, i.e. services that are marketed to Europeans.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Citizenship is explicitly not a factor here.</p>\n<p>If you're interacting with European companies (not via non-European intermediaries), then you're covered by GDPR regardless of whether you use a VPN.</p>\n<p>If you're interacting with non-European companies but consume their Europe-oriented services, for example by pretending to have an European network location, then things are tricky. You'd clearly be covered by GDPR if you were physically in Europe, for example during a tourist trip. <strong>It is likely that websites would treat you as GDPR-covered. However, you might run into practical difficulties if you'd try to enforce your rights.</strong> In particular, I think that no data protection authority would be responsible for your case, and no European court would have jurisdiction.</p>\n<p>If you're interacting with non-European companies that don't explicitly offer their services to an European market, GDPR will likely not apply at all, regardless of where you are or where you purport to be.</p>\n<p>In this answer, &quot;Europe&quot; means EU/EEA/UK as appropriate.</p>\n<p>Personal opinion: using a VPN like this might or might not work, but it is unlikely to make things worse privacy-wise. So you might as well try. But you shouldn't rely on this as legal protection. Also, note that many companies should comply with privacy rules, but don't.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "gdpr", "privacy", "data-protection" ]

[ { "answer_id": 90865, "body": "<p>The data would be recorded and held/controlled by the retail employee, making them a controller under the Data Protection Act 2018. In <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2016/679/article/4\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Article 4 of the GDPR</a> a controller is defined as</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(7) ‘controller’ means the natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data (but see section 6 of the 2018 Act);</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Section 6 of the 2018 Act is irrelevant to this question. In this case, it seems clear that the employee determines, on their own, the purposes and means of processing personal data by recording a customer using their personal smartphone. They control the data.</p>\n<p>In theory, the customer would enjoy subject access rights to view the recording under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2016/679/article/15\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Article 15 of the GDPR</a> because the recording constitutes personal data. In reality, it seems unlikely the employee would give them access.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning him or her are being processed, and, where that is the case, access to the personal data [...]</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "gdpr", "england-and-wales", "any-jurisdiction" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91845, "body": "<p>A person's exclusive rights granted under U.S. statutory copyright law do not expire when the person ceases to promote the work.</p>\n<p>The Copyright Clause of the Constitution does not provide copyright protection. It grants a power to Congress to create laws with a particular purpose. The Supreme Court has analyzed Congress's exercise of this power under a rational basis standard: are the laws chosen by Congress rationally connected to the specified purpose of the granted power (i.e. the promotion of science and useful arts)? See e.g. <em>Golan v. Holder</em>, 566 U.S. 302 (2012).</p>\n<p>The Court has not required the laws created by Congress under this power to be so narrowly tailored such that they would only grant rights in circumstances where the rights <em>actually</em> promote the progress of science and the useful arts in that particular case.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright", "constitutional-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91843, "body": "<p>Businesses (in its broadest meaning) may be organized under either federal or provincial laws in Canada in parallel.</p>\n<p>Federally, a cooperative may be formed under the <a href=\"https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-1.7/FullText.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Canada Cooperatives Act</a>. Under federal law, membership in a federally incorporated cooperative must be &quot;open, in a non-discriminatory manner, to persons who can use the services of the cooperative and who are willing and able to accept the responsibilities of membership&quot; according to s. 7(1)(a), &quot;subject to any restrictions on the classes of persons to which membership may be available that may reasonably relate to any business restriction set out in the articles of the cooperative and to the reasonable commercial ability of the cooperative to provide services to prospective members, as long as the restrictions are consistent with applicable laws with respect to human rights&quot; under s. 7(2).</p>\n<p>The central aspect of a cooperative is that the coop must provide services to members and the membership rule is open and non-discriminatory, other than for explicit business reasons.</p>\n<p>I did not check all provinces' cooperative acts, but at least in Alberta and Manitoba, the basis of membership rules are similar to the federal rules. In Alberta's case, the cooperative can impose any restriction on membership not in violation of human rights laws.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>a community cooperatives where anyone in the community can be a member</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Depending on how community is defined. Membership based on restrictions of race, sex, national origins etc. may or may not be held as a violation of human rights laws depending on specifics.</p>\n<p>A geographical community based cooperative focusing on local development for example should usually be acceptable.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>employee cooperatives where a company is owned by employees of a certain other company</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>In any case an incorporated body that is not owned by its own employees is not a worker cooperative within the meaning of the Cooperative Acts. Specific worker coop rules apply to coops where their own employees are members of the coop.</p>\n<p>But it could well be another type of coop. Membership restriction based on employment is usually acceptable and a coop, other than a worker coop, may employ non-members freely and all coops may own subsidiary assets, including other corporations.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "canada" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91840, "body": "<p>GDPR gives you a lot of flexibility here to choose either DPA. From Art 77:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, in particular in the Member State of his or her habitual residence, place of work or place of the alleged infringement if the data subject considers that the processing of personal data relating to him or her infringes this Regulation.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>However, the DPA from the company's country would be designated the lead supervisory authority for this investigation. If multiple DPAs are involved, they would coordinate with each other. There is no EU body that you could contact directly. But if the different DPAs have a dispute regarding this investigation, the EDPB would provide a consistency mechanism. This mechanism has been used in the past e.g. to force the Irish DPA to correctly apply the GDPR against companies from the Meta group, like WhatsApp and Instagram.</p>\n<p>Though it might slow things down, it could be advantageous to have multiple DPAs involved, precisely so that the investigation is double-checked. If the lead supervisory authority declines the case, this would also enable the other DPA to do its own investigation.</p>\n<p>So, it would be a good idea to lodge a complaint with the DPA of your home country, and let it forward the issue to other DPAs as needed. However, contacting the DPA in the company's country would also be fine, especially if you are fluent in the relevant official language, and/or if you live in Ireland.</p>\n", "score": 5 } ]

[ "gdpr", "european-union", "data-protection" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91784, "body": "<p><a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Article III</a> of the United States Constitution vests the nation's judicial power -- which includes the authority to hear &quot;all cases, in law and equity, arising under ... the laws of the United States&quot; -- in the Supreme Court of the United States, and in the inferior courts established by Congress.</p>\n<p>The federal courts therefore have authority under the Constitution to hear basically any case alleging that a federal law has been violated.</p>\n<p>The federal district courts specifically have jurisdiction over any case in which the United States or any federal agency is a <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1345\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">plaintiff</a> or <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1346\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">defendant</a>.</p>\n<p>But jurisdiction to hear a case is different than being empowered to grant the relief requested in a case. That authority comes from the Administrative Procedure Act, where Congress has specifically permitted judicial review of agency actions in <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/702\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">5 U.S.C. § 702</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 18 }, { "answer_id": 91783, "body": "<p>The <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedure_Act_(United_States)\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Administrative Procedures Act</a> grants federal courts the power to review agency actions, including approval of pharmaceuticals. See <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/706\" rel=\"noreferrer\">5 U.S.C. § 706</a>. This section gives federal courts the power to invalidate agency actions on various bases.</p>\n", "score": 9 } ]

[ "united-states", "jurisdiction" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91815, "body": "<p>From <a href=\"https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/faqs/copyright-ownership/#:%7E:text=Copyrights%20are%20generally%20owned%20by,the%20employer%20owns%20the%20copyright.\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Stanford Fair Use</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>What are the exceptions to the rule that the creator of a work owns the copyright?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Copyrights are generally owned by the people who create the works of expression, with some important exceptions:</p>\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<p>If a work is created by an employee in the course of his or her\nemployment, the employer owns the copyright.</p>\n<p>If the work is created by an independent contractor and the\nindependent contractor signs a written agreement stating that the work\nshall be “made for hire,” the commissioning person or organization\nowns the copyright only if the work is (1) a part of a larger literary\nwork, such as an article in a magazine or a poem or story in an\nanthology; (2) part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work,\nsuch as a screenplay; (3) a translation; (4) a supplementary work such\nas an afterword, an introduction, chart, editorial note, bibliography,\nappendix or index; (5) a compilation; (6) an instructional text; (7) a\ntest or answer material for a test; or (8) an atlas. Works that don’t\nfall within one of these eight categories constitute works made for\nhire only if created by an employee within the scope of his or her\nemployment.</p>\n<p>If the creator has sold the entire copyright, the purchasing business\nor person becomes the copyright owner.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>It would appear that by failing to gain a written agreement that the work was &quot;made for hire&quot; you have lost the rights to it.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91831, "body": "<h2>You own the copyright under Australian law</h2>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The owner of any copyright in a sound recording or a film is normally the person/s who made it. The 'maker' of a sound recording is the owner of the master recording, but where the recording is of a live performance, the performers are also ‘makers’. The 'maker' of a film is the person who undertook the arrangements necessary for the making of the film.</p>\n<p>However, for commissioned sound recordings and films, the default position is that the copyright is owned by the commissioning party. The rules for first ownership of copyright in sound recordings and films can, as in the case of works, be varied by contract.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><em>The Australian Government’s <a href=\"https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/short_guide_to_copyright.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Short Guide to Copyright</a> p.8</em></p>\n<p>You state that you paid the video man - that means you commissioned the film and that makes you the copyright owner baring any other agreement to the contrary. You have a verbal contract and, presuming you did not discuss copyright, there is no “agreement to the contrary”.</p>\n<p>If you still consider him a friend, you can ask him to take the videos down. If you don’t, you can just sue him for damages.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "copyright", "australia", "human-rights", "music" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91828, "body": "<p>I do not know the exact circumstances for the alleged obstruction (and whether there was a political or diplomatic purpose to prompt the questioning would be off-topic here) so I have just focused on the relevant legislation in answer to:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>What is the law here?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><strong>SHORT ANSWER</strong></p>\n<p>It's not a crime <em>to answer a police question with &quot;I would like to speak to my lawyer&quot;?</em></p>\n<p>But it is a(n alleged) crime to obstruct or otherwise fail to comply with an examination under the Terrorism Act 2000.</p>\n<p>This Act is one of a very small number of laws that makes it compulsory for someone to answer questions or provide information, but as they are not under arrest there is no statutory requirement for them to have independent legal advice.</p>\n<p>What they say or provide cannot be used against them (with some exemptions, below) and failure to comply is an offence.</p>\n<p><strong>LONG ANSWER</strong></p>\n<p>A police officer is an <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7/paragraph/1?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">examining officer</a>, and under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7/paragraph/2?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">paragraph 2</a>\nSchedule 7, Terrorism Act 2000:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) An examining officer may question a person to whom this paragraph applies for the purpose of determining whether he appears to be a person falling within section 40(1)(b).</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/40?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">section 40(1)(b)</a>\nsays:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(b) is or has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7/paragraph/5?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Paragraph 5</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A person who is questioned under paragraph 2 or 3 <strong>must</strong>—</p>\n<p>(a) give the examining officer any information in his possession which the officer requests;</p>\n<p>(b) give the examining officer on request either a valid passport which includes a photograph or another document which establishes his identity;</p>\n<p>(c) declare whether he has with him documents of a kind specified by the examining officer;</p>\n<p>(d) give the examining officer on request any document which he has with him and which is of a kind specified by the officer.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><strong>BUT</strong>, under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7/paragraph/5A?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">paragraph 5A</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) An answer or information given orally by a person in response to a question asked under paragraph 2 or 3 may not be used in evidence against the person in criminal proceedings.</p>\n<p>(2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not apply—</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p>(a) in the case of proceedings for an offence under paragraph 18 of this Schedule,</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>(b) on a prosecution for perjury, or</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>(c) on a prosecution for some other offence where, in giving evidence, the person makes a statement inconsistent with the answer or information mentioned in sub-paragraph (1).</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Failure to comply with paragraph 5 is an offence under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7/paragraph/18?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">paragraph 18</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) A person commits an offence if he—</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p>(a) wilfully fails to comply with a duty imposed under or by virtue of this Schedule,</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>(b) wilfully contravenes a prohibition imposed under or by virtue of this Schedule, or</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>(c) <strong>wilfully obstructs, or seeks to frustrate, a search or examination under or by virtue of this Schedule.</strong></p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Once they're arrested on suspicion of this offence then they are entitled to free and independent legal advice under <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/58?timeline=false\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">section 58</a> Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "united-kingdom", "england-and-wales", "police", "is-x-legal", "never-talk-to-police" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91823, "body": "<h2>Unfair trading usually means selling below cost or engaging in cartel behaviour</h2>\n<p>LV is not captured because they sell well above the cost of production, distribution, and retail.</p>\n<p>The type of behaviour that is captured is known as predatory pricing where a large competitor sells below cost in a market to drive smaller competitors out of business either by cross-subsidies from other markets or by simply absorbing the losses from greater capital reserves. A large North American coffee company has been accused of doing this when expanding into new markets.</p>\n<p>Another type of unfair practice is actively conspiring with your competitors to agree a market price, or to not compete in other dimensions - perhaps by agreeing not to advertise in certain markets. This deprives consumers of choice because there is no price differentiation or there is no opportunity to learn about competition.</p>\n<p>Other types of (arguable) unfair practices is buying up your competitors or refusing to supply certain markets (i.e. tacit or explicit agreements not to compete).</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "european-union", "competition", "antitrust-law", "tfeu" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91655, "body": "<p>To the title question, yes, of course, Justices are subject to the law same as anyone else is (at least in theory; whether actual practice bears that out is another matter). Chief Justice Roberts (and the rest of SCOTUS, and a good chunk of the judiciary to boot, and then some) was a named defendant in the case <a href=\"https://casetext.com/case/shao-v-roberts\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Shao v. Roberts</a> that was appealed to SCOTUS. The Justices all recused themselves <a href=\"https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3388975323636448078\" rel=\"noreferrer\">rendering the court short of a quorum</a> and leaving the prior appellate court decision to dismiss the case <em>sua sponte</em> in place.</p>\n<p>However, Justices essentially police themselves. As the head of the judicial branch they are largely independent of Congressional or Executive attempts to control how they go about their business. Recent calls to create a legal code of ethics for Justices <em>exist</em> because such a code perhaps cannot, and currently does not, exist under the current constitutional order. As such Justices make their own decisions on when to recuse (see <a href=\"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/48131/can-john-roberts-rule-on-whether-witnesses-have-to-testify-in-the-impeachment-in/48134#48134\">my answer here</a> for further details). Your hypothetical justice would do the same, and the court would proceed as it always does whether they do or don't.</p>\n", "score": 13 }, { "answer_id": 91654, "body": "<h2>The problem is the <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Statute of Limitations</a></h2>\n<p>Let's say Abel defames Bob. Abel then studies law and becomes a judge, and about 30 years down the line becomes Supreme Court Judge Abel.</p>\n<p>Now, Defamation is one of the shorter statutes of Limitation: <a href=\"https://mullenlawfirm.com/federal-defamation-statute-of-limitations/\" rel=\"noreferrer\">The claim has to be made one year from the defaming statement.</a> By the time Abel has his law degree, the case can no longer be brought and Bob has no legal recourse to sue. His case will be dismissed with prejudice for the statute of Limitations in the first instance, the appeals court will deny to review a case that is multiple decades past its statute of limitations and the Supreme court will deny to hear the case also.</p>\n<p>As the case can't reach the supreme court, there is no reason for the judge to recuse themselves.</p>\n<h2><a href=\"https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/USCode28USC455Disqualificationofjusticejudgeormagistratejudge?doc_id=XEIMFQ003\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Judges involved with the case or parties should recuse themselves</a></h2>\n<p>However, two much more likely setups are the following, and repeatedly have happened:</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p>Judge Abel hears Bob's case in his time at the Court of Appeals and is elevated to SCOTUS. Then case slogs through the instances and ends up on the SCOTUS table years later. Judge Abel now should recuse themselves, since they had already judged on it.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>Judge Abel has an investment in Bob Inc, and Bob Inc ends in front of SCOTUS, they should recuse themselves.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>SCOTUS does not need to disclose their form of involvement with the case, so it is often a <a href=\"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/alito-kagan-top-justices-in-supreme-court-recusal-black-box-1\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Black Box.</a> To some degree, how often a judge recuses themselves is highly dependent on how long they are on the court: new judges like Barrett and Jackson are much more likely to meet their own old cases in court while judges that are on the bench longer have other reasons to recuse themselves.</p>\n<p>But the decision of each judge is on their own, and at times there is critique on some of the judges that do not recuse themselves, as SCOTUS is the last instance and no other instance can review their decision to recuse themselves. However, most of the times, if a SCOTUS judge is an actual defendant, they will recuse themselves. Which... in case the whole court is sued jointly and separately - as happened in <a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/a/91655/10334\">Shao v Roberts (et al.)</a> - would usually lead to the whole bench recusing themselves for being involved with the case.</p>\n", "score": 7 }, { "answer_id": 91656, "body": "<h2>Yes</h2>\n<p>To avoid statute of limitations issues assume a sitting Supreme Court justice allegedly defames someone today outside the colour of their office. The aggrieved person can sue and because judges are not the President, they are not immune from civil suits in their private capacity.</p>\n<p>Since Supreme Court judges serve for life, that justice could very well be there when any appeal reached that level. They would then have to decide if there is a conflict of interest or not. Now, most people would say yes, there is but the decision isn’t up to most people, it’s up to the judge themselves. And, since there is no appeal from the Supreme Court, their decision on recusal is binding.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "us-supreme-court", "judge", "recusal" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91795, "body": "<p>I think there are a couple of different ways to look at this.</p>\n<h2>Deduplication is a technical detail that's irrelevant here</h2>\n<p>While the data may be deduplicated on a technical level, the files remain logically distinct.\nIf users 1 and 2 upload identical files, and then one user edits or deletes their file, this will not affect the other user's data.\nUsers cannot tell whether their files are duplicates of someone else. From the user's perspective, it makes no difference whether or not the storage uses deduplication, except perhaps via the cost of the service.</p>\n<p>Because there is no user-perceptible difference, it would be difficult to interpret some GDPR significance into this scenario.</p>\n<h2>Whose personal data is it anyway?</h2>\n<p>Personal data is any information that relates to an identifiable data subject. The files here are likely to be their uploader's personal data. Thus, the uploaders would also have a right to have their uploaded files erased. In case of deduplicated storage, this would affect their logical copy.</p>\n<p>The contents of the uploaded files might also be personal data relating to a third party. Then that third party might have a right to get the file contents erased. But this right must be invoked with the data controller for that processing activity, which might be company A, company B, or the uploaders, depending on context. Which leads us to the next aspect:</p>\n<h2>Company A is not responsible for handling erasures</h2>\n<p>From your description, it sounds like company A is a data processor providing services on behalf of company B. In turn, B might be a processor acting on behalf of the uploaders. In any case, it seems that A would not be the data controller for these processing activities. Data subject rights like erasure must be invoked against the controller, as only the controller can understand whether such a request should be granted. The right to erasure is not absolute, and depends a lot on <em>why</em> that data is being processed. In particular:</p>\n<h2>Personal data need not be erased if it is still necessary</h2>\n<p>For example, a person might very well be the data subject of some of these files, and might then ask for erasure. But if the files are being stored because they are going to be needed as evidence in legal proceedings, the data subject can't use this GDPR right to destroy evidence. The data controller would be allowed to refuse a request in such cases.</p>\n<p>It could now happen that two different users of this deduplicated storage are storing the same file, but for entirely different purposes. Blanket deletion of all copies of a file could be quite problematic. Note that deletion is also a &quot;processing activity&quot; and needs a legal basis under the GDPR. Unexpected data loss could be a data breach. One user's erasure could be another user's reportable data breach incident.</p>\n<p>Thus, I would strongly expect such requests to be handled on a logical file level, not on the deduplicated storage level.</p>\n<h2>Caveat: public access and cloned files</h2>\n<p>If the (logical) file is made available to the public who can then clone or copy this file, and if the &quot;original&quot; is taken down due to an erasure request (or copyright takedown notice), it might be appropriate to remove logical clones as well. Again, this might not involve deleting the contents on the deduplicated storage level, but it might affect other users' copies.</p>\n<p>In a GDPR context, the grounds for this would be the Art 17(2) right to be forgotten:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Where the controller has made the personal data public and is obliged pursuant to paragraph 1 to erase the personal data, the controller, taking account of available technology and the cost of implementation, shall take reasonable steps, including technical measures, to inform controllers which are processing the personal data that the data subject has requested the erasure by such controllers of any links to, or copy or replication of, those personal data.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>But this depends crucially on who those other controllers are. If A is the sole controller, the logical files could probably be deleted directly. If B or the end users are controllers, it could be more appropriate to forward the erasure request to them.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "gdpr", "data-protection", "data-ownership", "data-storage", "data" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91723, "body": "<ul>\n<li>You are wrong that they never get into legal trouble. It isn't terribly common but it certainly happens to those that get relatively prominent.</li>\n<li>Many of the folks doing the copyright infringement are judgement proof. It makes little sense for Disney, for example, to sue some guy living in his parents' basement for uploading a clip of their movie when that guy has no assets. Financially, it wouldn't be worth the cost of a lawyer.</li>\n<li>Many of the folks doing the copyright infringement are in jurisdictions that look the other way. If you're a Russian citizen pirating content owned by American companies, the Russian authorities aren't going to cooperate and arrest you and the American companies likely can't recover any judgement they'd get because you don't have any assets in America.</li>\n<li>There is a whack-a-mole problem. If there are hundreds of people posting pirated content to Facebook and each one is running hundreds of pages, that's tens of thousands of pages posting content. By the time you identify and close all of them, the pirates will have created tens of thousands of new pages.</li>\n<li>There is a cat-and-mouse problem. Copyright owners have automated tools to scan for their IP to issue takedown notices. Piraters know this so they modify the video (posting it as a mirror image or adding some additional video elements) in order to evade the automated tools. If copyright owners have to manually identify pirated content, it's realistically not cost effective to do so. The humans finding that content would cost more than the business loses in revenue to pirates.</li>\n<li>Tracking down the actual human/ business behind the copyright infringement is often a fair amount of work and may involve motions in courts in multiple countries. That work tends not to be highly prioritized by law enforcement. If you're a small fish, it is unlikely that anyone would go to the effort of unmasking you in order to sue.</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 33 }, { "answer_id": 91761, "body": "<p>There's also a political dimension here: the copyright holders (e.g., music labels, publishers etc.) as a group would be extremely ill-advised to prosecute commoners for something like posting on social media. The copyright law evolved to its existing shape as copyright holders were strongly lobbying, and no-one else was paying attention. Thus, for example, the original 14+14 years of copyright turned to 28+14, then to 28+28, then to 50 after author's death, then to 70 after author's death. Maybe this really reflects a consensus of how many years is fair and best serves public interests, but I find other explanation more plausible - when these laws were passed, it was not a tangible issue for anyone besides the copyright holders.</p>\n<p>Making it a tangible issue for every user of social media, and thus bringing on a serious discussion of whether the current copyright law is fair, is not something they want to do.</p>\n", "score": 11 }, { "answer_id": 91779, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>There are so many YouTube Shorts that just blatantly post clips of Movies, Football games, TV Programmes, etc. Why do these never get in trouble? Perhaps they get a copyright strike, but surely they would be prosecuted/sued?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>If they are using the clip for commentary, then it's covered under Fair Use doctrine (in the U.S. at least).</p>\n<p>Another big reason is optics. When a big media corporation goes after some small fry for copyright infringement on a small scale, it tends to generate a lot of negative publicity. If you see a headline like &quot;Multi-billion dollar Disney corporation sics their lawyers on 20-year-old for unauthorized use of 'Let It Go' on YouTube&quot;, what's your gut reaction? An average person's reaction will be more along the lines of &quot;damn those big corporations and their soulless corporate lawyers&quot; than &quot;shame on that young adult for their flagrant violation of copyright law!&quot;</p>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 91738, "body": "<p>Uploading an exciting movie excerpt which is so short that it cannot be a substitute for watching the actual movie is actually <strong>an advertisement</strong> for the movie. There is no incentive for the publisher to harass fans and interdict free advertisements. All to the contrary: Going viral online is the best thing that can happen to a TV show or a movie.</p>\n<p>Actual valuable assets are much more closely guarded. You won't find live streams of top sports events on YouTube for which TV networks have payed millions of dollars, and you typically don't find entire movies, with a few exceptions where copyright has expired or where the monetary value is so low (no streaming sales, no theater screenings) that nobody really cares (is my guess) — one example I stumbled across recently are the tacky Winnetou western movies of my childhood, like <a href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQCbTBGWUuc&amp;pp=ygUId2lubmV0b3U%3D\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">this one</a>.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 91740, "body": "<p>The first cut that should be made regards &quot;prosecution&quot;. Copyright infringement as crime is a narrow subset of general copyright infringement, in the US involving copying and redistribution for monetary gain. The incidence of <em>criminal</em> infringement is relatively low, compared to &quot;infringement for free&quot;. The government might have an interest and does have the resources to criminally prosecute infringers, though it also has many other interests and demands on its resources.</p>\n<p>At the level of pursuing infringement via individual civil suits, the next cut that needs to be made, in understanding lack of legal action, is in terms of the kinds of plaintiffs out there. This is a continuum based on the &quot;size&quot; of the plaintiff (resources, really) and their interest, with Disney being towards the top of that list, and me being towards the bottom. Disney is highly motivated to protect its lucrative primary source income, but my content is a tiny source of income.</p>\n<p>The third factor to consider is potential for awareness. I know of artists whose music is repeatedly copied from CD and posted on Youtube. Even if you know in principle that your work is being infringed, you may not know the details required for taking legal action (such as the URL).</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91816, "body": "<p>In the <a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a>, the basic unit of copyright infringement enforcement on the modern internet is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (<strong>DMCA</strong>) take-down.</p>\n<p>Online service providers (e.g. YouTube) are given <strong>safe harbor</strong> (are protected from litigation) as long as they expeditiously remove infringing content their users have uploaded.</p>\n<p>This enforcement mechanism is much cheaper than hiring a P.I., process server, lawyer, etc. to identify, sue, and prevail in court against some unknown person, who in all likelihood won’t even have any valuable assets to seize. So, in general, a DMCA takedown (or an automated identification system like YouTube’s) is the only one that is used.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91734, "body": "<p>Regardless of what country copyright infringement occurs in, it's all about money.\nIn most cases the reason why infringer are not pursued is because of money. The cost of court proceedings is extremely expensive regardless of Country so it makes it prohibitive.\nThe other issue is that a lot of copyright infringement online cannot be traced because of cloudflare as well as other similar services.<br />\nWe wrote and article about this topic here: <a href=\"https://www.dundaslawyers.com.au/copyright-infringement-online-lessons-for-website-owners/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://www.dundaslawyers.com.au/copyright-infringement-online-lessons-for-website-owners/</a></p>\n<p>Hope that helps.</p>\n", "score": 0 }, { "answer_id": 91767, "body": "<p>I just want to comment on that &quot;there are so many YouTube Shorts that just blatantly post clips of&quot; copyrighted material, as the OP says. I can tell that in my experience that kind of content is actually detected and dealt with by Youtube.</p>\n<p>I made a video with a piece of music (taken from a CD) and some free images (taken from Wikimedia Commons and used according to their licenses) and uploaded it to Youtube. In a few days, Youtube notified me that the copyrighted content (the piece of music) had been automatically identified and that all income that my video could produce would be given to the copyright holder of the music. It wasn't a big deal because I didn't expect any income from my video (1.8 k views in 9 years), but it shows that copyright infringements are controlled in Youtube so they become somehow a licensed use. A lot of the apparent copyright infringements that you can find in Youtube can be actually allowed by the copyright owner in the same way.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "united-states", "copyright", "united-kingdom" ]

[ { "answer_id": 82560, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>To my understanding the arbitrator to decide whether she has authority\nto decide such as a case, and whether the RTA applies. Is my\nunderstanding correct?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The tribunal handling the eviction determines if it applies.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>If she does not have authority or the RTA doesn't apply, would that\nmean the eviction is cancelled unless a different avenue is taken?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Yes.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A lot of these conditions do not seem very objective to me. Are there\nconcrete tests to determine if the RTA applies?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>This is much more definite and specific that many, many others statutes. Nothing in the law is perfectly objective and there are always edge cases, but this is relatively clear. There might be case law interpreting the statute, but even if there is, there might be no cases on point.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>For example if there is a nurse or social worker whose job it is to\nassist the tenants, would that mean the RTA doesn't apply?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>In cases (i), (ii), (iv) and (vi) there is probably a license for the facility or some kind of equivalent government documentation that establishes its status. One could ask the facility how, if at all, it is licensed, and that is probably also a public record somewhere. The residual category would be (v) which states:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>in a housing based health facility that provides hospitality support\nservices and personal health care</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>One would have to investigate the facts about the facility to determine the truth, but this is still a fairly clear standard. If it is not a &quot;health facility&quot; or does not provide &quot;personal health care&quot; it might not quality.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "canada", "rental-property", "tenant", "british-columbia", "disabilities" ]

[ { "answer_id": 82436, "body": "<p>Since one of the things that the 21st amendment does is repeal that Amendment, the 18th Amendment would again be a valid part of the Constitution (until SCOTUS says otherwise). Also note that prior to repeal of the 18th Amendment, the restrictions were lightened e.g. via the <a href=\"https://govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/48/STATUTE-48-Pg16.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Cullen-Harrison Act</a>. In the original instance, enabling legislation had to be passed – <a href=\"https://govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/41/STATUTE-41-Pg305a.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the National Prohibition Act</a>. That act was not formally repealed or amended, it just fell to desuetude. Congress could re-pass enabling legislation like it did the first time. Or, the executive branch could conclude that the National Prohibition Act is good law, it would be enforced, there would be a lawsuit, and SCOTUS would decide.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "us-constitution", "alcohol" ]

[ { "answer_id": 4383, "body": "<p>If I were a federal prosecutor (which I'm emphatically not), I might try to charge you under <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/32\" rel=\"nofollow\">18 USC § 32</a> (a) (5):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>a) Whoever willfully— [...] (5) interferes with or disables, with intent to endanger the safety of any person or with a reckless disregard for the safety of human life, anyone engaged in the authorized operation of such aircraft or any air navigation facility aiding in the navigation of any such aircraft;\n [...] shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years or both.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Since you clearly know, or believe, that this has the potential to interfere with piloting, which would obviously be a serious danger to people on board the aircraft, I'd argue you would be acting with \"reckless disregard for the safety of human life.\"</p>\n\n<p>If your conduct results in anybody's death, then life imprisonment and/or the death penalty are also on the table, under <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/34\" rel=\"nofollow\">18 USC § 34</a>.</p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "aviation" ]

[ { "answer_id": 76843, "body": "<p>OK, seems I was right to begin with, but after building some work with this I had to be sure. The problem seems to step from a lot of not-lawyers overinterpreting the reach and applicability of copyright law, which, with a few asides, is the full extent of the AGPL. Additionally, the software is not based in an English-speaking country, which may have thrown the interpreted meaning of &quot;derivative product&quot;, as opposed to simply &quot;product&quot;.</p>\n<p>The AGPL is indeed in almost all ways the same as the GPL version 3; in fact you can see this by <code>diff</code>ing the two documents. The only extension of the GPLv3 made for AGPL applies to software being run on a server. While it is indeed possible to include code in the final files, which might, in theory, constitute a significant portion of this program, that does not happen.</p>\n<p>The AGPL is apparently also meant almost exclusively for software, though the wording does include the ambiguous phrase &quot;and other products&quot;; this concerned me as it felt as though it might apply to the resources created by the work. It, broadly speaking, does not.</p>\n<p>So, I've got nothing to worry about--unless I was distributing derivative software, which would be an entirely different question and subject to this.</p>\n", "score": 5 }, { "answer_id": 90550, "body": "<p>The AGPL and GPL can be applied to output, since the output is a derivative of data licensed under the (A)GPL. Making a model with MB-Lab is not the same as writing a word document from scratch. The model is not conjured from the end-user's input. The sliders are illusions of user input and control; the programmer, not you, decided what happens when a slider is moved. To claim that a MB-Lab character model belongs to you because you moved a slider is similar to claiming that a Skyrim or Fire Emblem Awakening character model belongs to you because you moved a slider.</p>\n<p>This is why <a href=\"https://spdx.org/licenses/exceptions-index.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">exceptions to the AGPL and GPL exist</a>. One fitting exception is <a href=\"https://www.gnu.org/licenses/autoconf-exception-3.0.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Autoconf-exception-3.0</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>AUTOCONF CONFIGURE SCRIPT EXCEPTION</p>\n<p>Version 3.0, 18 August 2009</p>\n<p>Copyright (C) 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc. <a href=\"https://fsf.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://fsf.org/</a></p>\n<p>Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.</p>\n<p>This Exception is an additional permission under section 7 of the GNU General Public License, version 3 (&quot;GPLv3&quot;). It applies to a given file that bears a notice placed by the copyright holder of the file stating that the file is governed by GPLv3 along with this Exception.</p>\n<p>The purpose of this Exception is to allow distribution of Autoconf's typical output under terms of the recipient's choice (including proprietary).</p>\n<ol start=\"0\">\n<li>Definitions</li>\n</ol>\n<p>&quot;Covered Code&quot; is the source or object code of a version of Autoconf that is a covered work under this License.</p>\n<p>&quot;Normally Copied Code&quot; for a version of Autoconf means all parts of its Covered Code which that version can copy from its code (i.e., not from its input file) into its minimally verbose, non-debugging and non-tracing output.</p>\n<p>&quot;Ineligible Code&quot; is Covered Code that is not Normally Copied Code.</p>\n<ol>\n<li>Grant of Additional Permission.</li>\n</ol>\n<p>You have permission to propagate output of Autoconf, even if such propagation would otherwise violate the terms of GPLv3. However, if by modifying Autoconf you cause any Ineligible Code of the version you received to become Normally Copied Code of your modified version, then you void this Exception for the resulting covered work. If you convey that resulting covered work, you must remove this Exception in accordance with the second paragraph of Section 7 of GPLv3.</p>\n<ol start=\"2\">\n<li>No Weakening of Autoconf Copyleft.</li>\n</ol>\n<p>The availability of this Exception does not imply any general presumption that third-party software is unaffected by the copyleft requirements of the license of Autoconf.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>This exception permits the end-user to own and choose the license of the output by making an explicit distinction between &quot;Ineligible Code&quot; and &quot;Normally Copied Code&quot; and spelling out what you may and may not do with each. However, without an explicit exception, such output would be automatically be covered by GPL. If it were otherwise, as you claim, then such exceptions wouldn't be necessary. To put it another way, the need to explicitly list an exception indicates that the rule and its associated problems do indeed exist, i.e. <em>the exception proves the rule</em>.</p>\n<p>Another exception is the the <a href=\"https://github.com/makehumancommunity/makehuman/blob/master/LICENSE.md\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">MakeHuman's license exception</a>: Unlike ML-Lab, they explicitly licensed their data under CC0 so that the end-user can choose the license for the output derived from that data. I have to wonder if the original question mistakenly conflated MakeHuman and MB-Lab together: MakeHuman uses <a href=\"https://github.com/makehumancommunity/makehuman/blob/master/LICENSE.md\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">a AGPL+CC0 combo</a>, while MB-Lab uses <a href=\"https://github.com/animate1978/MB-Lab/blob/master/license.txt\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">a GPL+AGPL combo</a>.</p>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 79164, "body": "<p>I suspect this might depend on the program you're refering to. At least with MB-Labs, the meshes themselves are considered under gnu3/agpl according to the license faq - they seem to use agpl and gnu3 interchangably, which doesn't help matters, but i think thry changed from gnu3 to agpl once it was designed. Unfortunately, the licence basically made the program impossible for me to use for anything other then diy drawing references. :(</p>\n<p>if I am wrong, i would LOVE to know that! So far mb has been the best free human design program i've found.</p>\n<p>quote from the official website for MB-Labs</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>All data files released in the MB-Lab package, including all the meshes and data &gt;contained in .blend files or in any other 3d file format, all the images and all the &gt;json files are released under GNU Affero General Public License 3.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "open-source-software", "gpl" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91809, "body": "<p>There is only one majority &quot;opinion of the court&quot;, which is the one that is binding. Concurring opinions are not binding, but can be persuasive. However, the opinion of the court can be w.r.t. a section so there can be multiple non-overlapping opinions of the court, see <a href=\"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/540bv.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">McConnell v. FEC</a>, 540 U.S. 93. At the tail end of the syllabus, there is statement of who delivered the opinion and who joined in that opinion (also a statement of &quot;exceptions&quot;). Those three opinions define &quot;the law&quot;. Then there are concurring opinions, and dissenting opinions, and an opinion which is not &quot;the opinion of the court&quot; can concur in part and dissent in part.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

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

[ { "answer_id": 91808, "body": "<p>There are two distinct legal questions lurking in this question.</p>\n<p>One, in a conversation on the phone between someone in a single party consent state and a two party consent state, is it legal for the single party consent state participant to record the conversation.</p>\n<p>Second, assuming for the sake of argument that the recording was made illegally, it is admissible in evidence in a civil lawsuit in federal court.</p>\n<p>I'll answer only the second piece.</p>\n<p>There is not an automatic exclusionary rule to exclude the admission of evidence illegally obtained by a private individual in a federal civil lawsuit in the way that such evidence would be automatically excluded from evidence in a criminal case if it was obtained illegally by law enforcement.</p>\n<p>Instead, the court applies a balancing test on a case by case basis, weighing the circumstances that render the obtaining of the evidence illegal against the probative value of the evidence to establishing a disputed evidentiary fact in the case. The federal judge has fairly wide discretion to admit or exclude illegally obtained evidence in a federal civil lawsuit.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "evidence", "recording", "federal-courts", "phonecall" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91807, "body": "<p>Suggested finishing dates in contracts carry little weight, unless they are expressed clearly via a <a href=\"https://www.hahnlaw.com/insights/time-is-of-the-essence-or-is-it/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">time is of the essence clause</a>. A 30 day delay in completion is not too surprising in the ordinary home-reno business. Obviously, they can't get away with repeatedly declaring &quot;We'll get you on the schedule as soon as possible&quot; for 5 years, but what constitutes an unreasonable delay depends on the local facts. Lawyering up could speed things up: even writing a simple formal letter that implies that legal action will be your next step could facilitate a solution.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "contract-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91699, "body": "<p>The words of the prohibition in <a href=\"https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-100\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">24 CFR 100.60(a)</a>are that</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>It shall be unlawful for a person to refuse to sell or rent a dwelling\nto a person who has made a bona fide offer, because of race, color,\nreligion, sex, familial status, or national origin or to refuse to\nnegotiate with a person for the sale or rental of a dwelling because\nof race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin, or\nto discriminate against any person in the sale or rental of a dwelling\nbecause of handicap.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>It <em>would</em> be discriminatory for the landlord to refuse to rent to a person because they are or are not of some sex. Based just on the plain language of the prohibition, the author of the app or operator of a website is not renting / refusing to rent. Nevertheless, Roommate.com was sued, and found not liable, though not on the grounds that they hadn't discriminated</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/02/02/09-55272.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Fair Housing Councils v. Rommate.com</a> addressed an attempt to punish roommate.com on discriminatory grounds. The court states that &quot;The pivotal question is whether the FHA applies to roommates&quot;.\nThe court's reasoning is a clear application of the notion of &quot;Congressional intent&quot;. As they say,</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>There’s no indication that Congress intended to interfere with\npersonal relationships inside the home. Congress wanted to address the\nproblem of landlords discriminating in the sale and rental of housing,\nwhich deprived protected classes of housing opportunities. But a\nbusiness transaction between a tenant and landlord is quite different\nfrom an arrangement between two people sharing the same living space.\nWe seriously doubt Congress meant the FHA to apply to the latter.\nConsider, for example, the FHA’s prohibition against sex discrimination. Could Congress, in the 1960s, really have meant that\nwomen must accept men as roommates? Telling women they may not\nlawfully exclude men from the list of acceptable roommates would be\ncontroversial today; it would have been scandalous in the 1960s</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The court continued on other grounds, observing that</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>given that the FHA is a remedial statute that we construe broadly...\nwe turn to constitutional concerns, which provide strong\ncountervailing considerations</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>That is, even if you ignore congressional intent, there is a constitutional reason why FHA cannot apply to roommate choice.</p>\n<p>SCOTUS in Bd. of Dirs. of Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club of\nDuarte, 481 U.S. 537 stated that &quot;the freedom to enter into and carry on certain intimate or private relationships is a fundamental element of liberty protected by the Bill of Rights&quot;, and &quot;Courts have extended the right of intimate association to marriage, child bearing, child rearing and cohabitation with relatives&quot;. Then in order to &quot;determine whether a particular relationship is protected by the right to intimate association we look to 'size, purpose, selectivity, and whether others are excluded from critical aspects of the relationship'&quot;. After extensive analysis centered around the point that &quot;Government regulation of an individual’s ability to\npick a roommate thus intrudes into the home, which 'is entitled to special protection as the center of the private lives of\nour people'&quot;, the court &quot;adopt[s] the narrower construction that excludes roommate selection from the reach of the FHA&quot;.</p>\n<p><strong>TL;DR</strong> the FHA doesn't apply to roommates and it's legal to select one's roommates based on their race, color, religion, sex, sexuality, etc...</p>\n", "score": 49 }, { "answer_id": 91806, "body": "<p>Whether this is lawful, has already been answered. Whether this is ethical (and by extension <em>should</em> be lawful) can be argued. Without knowing the intentions of the advertisers, your best approach would be to interpret this as a way to search for homes that are friendly towards queer folks. Similarly, tenants may be looking for homes friendly to their religion or race, neurodiversity, or hobbies. This filter lets advertisers be proactive and explicit about non-tangible aspects of the home.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "united-states", "fair-housing-acts" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91732, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/germany\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-germany-tooltip-container\">germany</a></p>\n<p>Ah, okay, there isn't any easy answer/number/table for this.</p>\n<p>In general, the &quot;Aufsichtspflicht&quot; results from <a href=\"https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1631.html\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB)\n§ 1631 Inhalt und Grenzen der Personensorge</a>.</p>\n<p>There are not clear cut lines or given ages. This is mainly because it does not make a lot of sense. A very independent and mature 6 year old can do things a less developed or even disabled person might not be able to do, even at the age of 18+.</p>\n<p>Generally speaking, the parents have the duty to care for the child, anything else can be handled by contracts. For example a contract with a kindergarten. Or School. Or private/public pool.</p>\n<p>From personal experience I can say this: Germany is <em>very</em> safe. Kids go to school on foot, on bike or longer distances by <em>normal public transport</em> among all the other adults. We do not have &quot;school busses&quot;. Between 07:00 and 08:00 public transport is <em>packed</em> with kids of all ages going to school. Schools do not normally have their own stops. Kids get off at the nearest stop and walk the rest of the way. Around the school you will see streams of children coming from all directions on bike or foot. It is rare to see adults accompanying them, unless it's the first weeks of elementary school or the last day before school holidays where parents pick up their kids to do something fun after school.</p>\n<p>When I was a kid, I walked to school every day, almost from day one of elementary school. The first few weeks an adult would accompany us (one of the parents, they had a rotation going), then we walked on our own, as a group of 3-4 kids in the same class from the same neighborhood block. Google maps says it's a 10 minute walk of 800 meters. If any teacher had stopped me from leaving the school building on my own when school was finished, I am sure people would have wondered why. That only happened for mentally handicapped kids. Even kids who needed transport for one reason or another would just know to wait in front of the school. No teacher or other adult would be there.</p>\n<p>At 5th grade, I know half my class came by bike and in the winter or on rainy days by public transport, because they did not live in walking distance to the school. Neither did I, but I lived close enough to not get the public transport ticket subsidized, so the kids from our street got there by bike, or on foot when the parents deemed riding a bike to unsafe in snow and ice in winter.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Who is responsible for the child now that the class has ended?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The parents. Unless the contract says otherwise, or circumstances are exceptionally dangerous. There is no exact written guideline for this, because it would not make sense. The adult has to know what is exceptionally dangerous and what is not. It can be perfectly safe for a 10 year old to walk home through the woods. If that is what the parents deem okay, then it is okay. Yet as the adult in charge, you have the duty to keep them back, if you know the woods are on fire today, or a criminal escaped into the woods or something similar that would make it significantly more dangerous then the parents had in mind when they made their general decision.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>If a 10-year-old child says that their parents &quot;said they could go home alone&quot;, can I reasonably stop them?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>If you have a contract that says they cannot go home alone, sure. If there is a special situation that implies the conditions have changed from what your contract said (lets say the radio broadcasts a storm warning and you see that the weather is horrible and branches flying around could injure a smaller kid) you can (maybe even have to), even if you do not have a contract.</p>\n<p>Otherwise... why would you? It’s their parents decision. If they had wanted you to keep an eye on their kids when the time is up, they would have made a contract that says so.</p>\n", "score": 34 }, { "answer_id": 91730, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-australia-tooltip-container\">australia</a></p>\n<p>This is a matter of <a href=\"https://www.bhg.com.au/legal-age-children-can-walk-to-school-alone\" rel=\"noreferrer\">state</a> law:</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/queensland\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;queensland&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;queensland&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-queensland-tooltip-container\">queensland</a> A person who, having the lawful care or charge of a child under 12 years, leaves the child for an unreasonable time without making reasonable provision for the supervision and care of the child during that time commits a misdemeanour. Maximum penalty — 3 years imprisonment. However, this is not a blanket prohibition - it may be reasonable for an 11-year-old to walk 5 minutes home alone.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/new-south-wales\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-new-south-wales-tooltip-container\">new-south-wales</a> No specific law, according to Family and Community Services NSW, at the judgement of the parents based on the family circumstances and the age and maturity of the child.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/victoria\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;victoria&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;victoria&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-victoria-tooltip-container\">victoria</a> A person who has the control or charge of a child must not leave the child without making reasonable provision for the child's supervision and care for a time which is unreasonable having regard to all the circumstances of the case.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/western-australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;western-australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;western-australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-western-australia-tooltip-container\">western-australia</a>, <a href=\"/questions/tagged/australian-capital-territory\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;australian-capital-territory&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;australian-capital-territory&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-australian-capital-territory-tooltip-container\">australian-capital-territory</a>, <a href=\"/questions/tagged/tasmania\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;tasmania&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;tasmania&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-tasmania-tooltip-container\">tasmania</a>, <a href=\"/questions/tagged/south-australia\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;south-australia&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;south-australia&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-south-australia-tooltip-container\">south-australia</a> &amp; <a href=\"/questions/tagged/northern-territory\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;northern-territory&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;northern-territory&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-northern-territory-tooltip-container\">northern-territory</a> No specific laws and no government guidance.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Even though Queensland is the only state with a specific legislated age, the laws are basically not that different: parents (and in loco paretis) have a duty to protect children in their care, including providing reasonable supervision. However, reasonable supervision may be <em>no</em> supervision if appropriate to the circumstances.</p>\n<p>If you are their swimming instructor, you can and should be guided by the parents, but it is ultimately your decision. If harm were to come to the children, you might be called upon to justify your decision.</p>\n<p>Of course, you are a mandatory reporter, so if you believe that what the parents allow amounts to neglect, you must tell the government of your concerns.</p>\n", "score": 9 }, { "answer_id": 91731, "body": "<p>This is a question of <em>Aufsichtspflicht</em> (duty to supervise). Minors have to be supervised, as appropriate for the individual circumstances and the child's maturity. There is an expectation that children incrementally get more freedom as they grow, especially once they reach school age. Thus, it <em>can</em> be entirely appropriate to let six- or seven year olds play unattended for multiple hours, or to let them go home alone. There is no explicit age limit, just the full legal age at 18 years.</p>\n<p>A swimming course is dangerous, and will require intense supervision.</p>\n<p>After such an activity, it would generally be expected that young children are picked up by their parents. In order to minimize liability, the supervisors should make explicit arrangements with the parents. Who is authorized to pick up the kid? Or shall the child be sent home by itself? <strong>If the parents/guardians want the child to go home alone, that's an issue for the parent's duty of care.</strong> For swimming lessons and youth groups this will probably be discussed informally, but more institutional supervisors might keep written notes about this to avoid misunderstandings.</p>\n<p>If a child should be picked up, supervisors/instructors would have to wait with the child, or have to make alternative arrangements. If a child claims that it can go alone, but this contradicts other arrangements or doesn't seem appropriate for this child, then supervisors should clarify, for example by calling the parents.</p>\n<p>Further reading:</p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufsichtsperson_(Erziehung)\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Aufsichtsperson</a> on the German Wikipedia</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/832.html\" rel=\"noreferrer\">§ 832 BGB</a> which establishes liability when the duty of care is violated</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://kita.rlp.de/fileadmin/kita/01_Themen/Startseite/Aktuelle_Meldungen_2023/Infoblatt_Aufsicht_in_Kitas_BF.pdf\" rel=\"noreferrer\">Infoblatt <em>Aufsicht in Kitas</em> der Unfallkasse RLP</a> which summarizes liability concerns for day care providers. See in particular the Q&amp;A on page 6: <em>Dürfen Kinder den Nachhauseweg alleine antreten?</em> and <em>Was passiert, wenn das Kind nicht abgeholt wird?</em></li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 9 }, { "answer_id": 91733, "body": "<p>For your question:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>If a 10-year-old child says that their parents &quot;said they could go home alone&quot;, can I reasonably stop them?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>I would consider two scenarios. First, assume you are the supervisor of a sports course or similar activity with a bunch of kids. That means you have an agreement with the parents that you are responsible for their supervision during the course. You also need some kind of agreement what happens at the end of the course. Either the parents tell you they will pick up the kids or they tell you the kid can leave on their own. There are no formal age limits, you do what the parents tell you.</p>\n<p>Second, you are 'a random stranger' and just observe the kids walking off on their own. You have no basis to intervene just because the kids are on their own, even if they are much younger. You can offer help but please don't call the police just because you saw a 5-year old walking around on their own with no sign of any problems.</p>\n", "score": 7 } ]

[ "germany", "children" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91141, "body": "<p>It does not, as prosecutors often use statutes for purposes other than the purposes for which they were intended. <em>See</em>, <em>e.g.</em>, <a href=\"https://casetext.com/case/yates-v-united-states-26\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><em>Yates v. United States</em>, 135 S. Ct. 1074 (2014)</a>.</p>\n<p>For a very straightforward example, take the classic law school hypothetical: A law that says &quot;No cars in the park.&quot;</p>\n<p>If you drive your truck into the park, a purposivist approach would permit your conviction for violating the statute. In that case, purposivism favors the state.</p>\n<p>But if you bring a Matchbox car into the park, a purposivist approach would not permit your conviction for violating the staute. In that case, purposivism favors the defendant.</p>\n<p>And of course, prosecutors are a creative bunch, so they're forever coming up with new ways to existing statutes to prosecute people using statutes that aren't a natural fit for their misconduct.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "interpretation" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91764, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/canada\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-canada-tooltip-container\">canada</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>does 7 business days necessarily imply at least 9 calendar days?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>&quot;7 business days&quot; does not necessarily imply &quot;at least 9 calendar days.&quot;</p>\n<p>For example, until 2017, section 67 of the <em><a href=\"https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/laws/stat/rsbc-1996-c-267/latest/rsbc-1996-c-267.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Liquor Control and Licensing Regulation</a></em> defined &quot;business day&quot; to mean &quot;in respect of a licensee, a day specified by the general manager [of the Liquor Control and Licencing Branch] as a business day.&quot;</p>\n<p>In a contract, &quot;business day&quot; would be interpreted in the full context of the agreement, including the background, the market, etc. See generally <em>Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp.</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/g88q1\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2014 SCC 53</a>. And for a specific example, see <em>Goldstein et al. v. Grant</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/g1b3h\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">1978 CanLII 1476</a> (Ont. C.A.), finding that in that particular agreement, a Saturday was a &quot;business day.&quot;</p>\n<p>Under Rule 8-1 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules of British Columbia, &quot;business day&quot; means &quot;a day on which the court registries are open for business.&quot;</p>\n<hr />\n<p>When counting business days, one does not count non-business days. I do not have a clear citation for this principle, but see <em>D.R. v The Co-operators</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/jc04x\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2020 CanLII 95858</a> (Ont. Licence Appeal Tribunal); <em>G.A. v Allstate Insurance</em>, <a href=\"https://canlii.ca/t/j8nvv\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2020 CanLII 47718</a> (Ont. Licence Appeal Tribunal).</p>\n<p>You do not necessarily start counting from zero. Whether the first or last days are included in the count depends on surrounding phrasing and context. See e.g. <em>Interpretation Act</em>, <a href=\"https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-21/page-2.html#h-279382\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">s. 27</a>.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>This answer says nothing about how to count business hours.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91777, "body": "<h2>TL;DR</h2>\n<p>You do not count non-business days and you count starting from 0. So the next business day after you receive the correspondence is 1, then 2, and so on. And days end at midnight.</p>\n<h2>Business Days are defined by the context</h2>\n<p>What is, and what is not, a business day is not a straightforward proposition. Your understanding that it does not include weekends and public holidays is common-sensical but possibly wrong.</p>\n<p>Most jurisdictions define business days, often in a foundational act like the <a href=\"https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00028\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Acts Interpretation Act</a> 1901:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>business day</strong> means a day that is not a Saturday, a Sunday or a public holiday in the place concerned.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>However, those definitions are limited to the particular scope. In the above example, to the interpretation of Commonwealth legislation:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>State legislation will have their own definition (which happens to be the same but only by coincidence),</li>\n<li>specific legislation may override the general definition (e.g the NSW Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 adds 27, 28, 29, 30 or 31 December as non-business days and its Queensland equivalent excludes the entire period from 22 December to 10 January)</li>\n<li>it doesn’t apply to contracts, which need to define the term or risk having it be ambiguous. For example, for a retail store that is open every day of the year except Good Friday, a reasonable understanding of “business day” is every day except Good Friday.</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "england-and-wales", "interpretation", "any-jurisdiction", "calculation" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91743, "body": "<p>In my State (Louisiana, USA), pedestrians may walk on the side of the road. No guidance is given on how fast they should walk. Pedestrians are not allowed to walk in the middle of the street. In the US, the laws for this will vary by state. Louisiana has statutes that say that pedestrians are bound by traffic laws, and obstruction of traffic is not legal on foot or in a vehicle. Basically, consult your local laws.</p>\n<p>§216. Pedestrians on highways or interstate highways</p>\n<p>A. Where sidewalks are provided, it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent highway.</p>\n<p>B. Where sidewalks are not provided, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall, when practicable, walk only on the left side of the highway or its shoulder, facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.</p>\n<p>C. It shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to cross an interstate highway, except in the case of an emergency.</p>\n<p>D. Upon conviction of a violation of this Section, a court may order, in lieu of the penalty provisions provided in R.S. 32:57, that the offender perform three eight-hour days of court-approved community service activities, at least half of which shall consist of participation in a litter abatement or collection program.</p>\n<p>§213. Crossing at other than crosswalks</p>\n<p>A. Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.</p>\n<p>B. Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.</p>\n<p>&quot;Highway&quot; means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way or place of whatever nature publicly maintained and open to the use of the public for the purpose of vehicular travel, including bridges, causeways, tunnels and ferries; synonymous with the word &quot;street&quot;.</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 91745, "body": "<p>Laws may govern the speed of motor vehicles on highways, either stating maximum or minimum speeds. Pedestrians are not subject to any specific speed limits in any jurisdiction that I know of, but they can be subject to &quot;conduct&quot; restrictions. In Washington, <a href=\"https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.250\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">RCW 46.61.250</a> states those limits. Stay on the sidewalk. If there is no sidewalk,the restrictions are that</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(a) When shoulders are provided and are accessible, walk or move on\nthe shoulder of the roadway as far as is practicable from the edge of\nthe roadway, facing traffic when a shoulder is available in this\ndirection; or</p>\n<p>(b) When shoulders are not provided or are inaccessible, walk or move\nas near as is practicable to the outside edge of the roadway facing\ntraffic, and when practicable, move clear of the roadway upon meeting\nan oncoming vehicle</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Sprinting and slow walking at the edge of the road (when there is no shoulder) are legal, doing same in the middle of the lane is illegal. The law generally says &quot;motor vehicles have to suck it up when there are pedestrians on the road&quot;. But walking (or bicycling) 6 abreast is illegal, because it is practical to walk (or cycle) single-file at the edge of the road.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91790, "body": "<p>In <a href=\"/questions/tagged/germany\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-germany-tooltip-container\">germany</a>, demonstrating in public is a constitutionally protected right. How exactly it can be exercised is restricted by law, but the laws must make protests possible.</p>\n<ul>\n<li>For <strong>preplanned demonstrations</strong>, the organizers must contact the police with the planned route, an estimate of the expected numbers, etc. The police consider this estimate, the likelihood of counter-protests, and similar factors, and &quot;negotiate&quot; with the organizers about the actual route of the demonstration.<br />\nWhen the organizers predict tens of thousands, and the police find that credible, a main street may be closed to motor traffic while the protesters march that way. If the police expect a couple of dozen to come (whatever the organizers hope), they may be told to stay on the sidewalk, with a lone patrol car to watch the traffic.<br />\nWhen the organizers and the police disagree, the organizers can go to court and ask for an injunction. This commonly happens when the organizers feel that the police wants to &quot;shuffle them away&quot; out of sight ...</li>\n<li>For <strong>spontaneous demonstrations</strong>, there are no organizers who could contact the police beforehand. When the demonstration has started, the police will watch numbers and regulate traffic according to the size of the protest.<br />\nAgain, a few dozen protesters will be told to stay on the sidewalk, while thousands will justify the closure of the road.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Organizers can try to pretend that a demonstration is spontaneous to get around the planning requirements. This is not legal, but the prosecution would have to prove it. (For instance, people might have &quot;shared&quot; the time and place on public internet forums.)</p>\n<p>So as to your question: <strong>It depends on the number of walkers, in proportion to the location.</strong></p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "traffic", "protest" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91787, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a></p>\n<p>The flowchart included in the question is trying to summarize a rather large amount of legal uncertainty into one image. It must be emphasized that each decision point represents an unsettled area of law. Nobody knows which path through that flowchart the law will take, or even if different forms or implementations of AI might take different paths. The short and disappointing answer to your question is that <strong>nobody knows what is or isn't legal yet.</strong></p>\n<p>To further elaborate on each decision point:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>The first point is asking whether the training process requires a license at all. There are two possible reasons to think that it does not:\n<ul>\n<li>AI training is protected by fair use (see <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107\" rel=\"noreferrer\">17 USC 107</a>). This is a case-by-case inquiry that would have to be decided by a judge.</li>\n<li>AI training is nothing more than the collection of statistical information relating to a work, and does not involve &quot;copying&quot; the work within the meaning of <a href=\"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106\" rel=\"noreferrer\">17 USC 106</a> (except for a <em>de minimis</em> period which is similar to the caching done by a web browser, and therefore subject to a fair use defense).</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n<li>The second point is, I think, asking whether the model is subject to copyright protection under <a href=\"https://www.oyez.org/cases/1990/89-1909\" rel=\"noreferrer\"><em>Feist v. Rural</em></a> and related caselaw. Because the model is trained by a purely automated process, there's a case to be made that the model is not the product of human creativity, and is therefore unprotected by copyright altogether.\n<ul>\n<li>Dicta in <em>Feist</em> suggest that the person or entity directing the training might be able to obtain a &quot;thin&quot; copyright in the &quot;selection or organization&quot; of training data, but no court has ever addressed this to my knowledge.</li>\n<li>This branch can also be read as asking whether the output of the model is copyrightable, when the model is run with some prompt or input. The Copyright Office <a href=\"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence\" rel=\"noreferrer\">seems to think</a> the answer to that question is &quot;no, because a human didn't create it.&quot;</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n<li>The third decision point is, uniquely, not a legal question, but a practical question: Do you intend to distribute anything, or are you just using it for your own private entertainment? This determines whether you need to consult the rest of the flowchart or not.</li>\n<li>The final decision point is whether the &quot;output&quot; (i.e. either the model itself, or its output) is a derivative work of the training input.\n<ul>\n<li>This would likely be decided on the basis of <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity\" rel=\"noreferrer\">substantial similarity</a>, which is a rather complicated area of law. To grossly oversimplify, the trier of fact would be shown both the training input and the allegedly infringing output, and asked to determine whether the two items have enough copyrightable elements in common that copying can reasonably be inferred.</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n", "score": 12 } ]

[ "united-states", "fair-use", "creative-commons", "data", "artificial-intelligence" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91781, "body": "<p>Limiting this to the legal question, it is actually extremely simple. The Hebrew Bible is in the public domain, end of story. Therefore you can freely create a derivative work, a translation to English if you like, based on that original text. You may have to use some copyrighted aids, such as a dictionary, but that's okay, because &quot;using a dictionary&quot; is not copyright infringement. You may want to use some copyrighted software to format the result, but again using software is not itself copyright infringement. It would be infringement to lift someone else's protected English translation, but it would not be infringement to consult competing translations as a means of better understanding the original text.</p>\n<p>It is true that in the case of a translation from language to language, there is going to be a substantial similarity in translations to a particular language. This is especially true when dealing with a text that has been independently translated to English hundreds of times. You may therefore have to prove that there is only one possible English translation of בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃\nand that there are only two or three reasonable translations of וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָיְתָ֥ה תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְחֹ֖שֶׁךְ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י תְהֹ֑ום וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם׃\nin other words that the similarity is a necessary coincidence, given the subject matter.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

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

[ { "answer_id": 1771, "body": "<p>This would be entirely dependant on the jurisdiction.</p>\n<p>The things that would need to be legal to make this transaction legal are:</p>\n<ol>\n<li>Is the sexual act legal?</li>\n<li>Is gambling legal?</li>\n<li>Ongoing consent by both parties</li>\n</ol>\n<p>To make this an enforceable contract, in addition you would need:</p>\n<ol>\n<li>Sexual acts to be valuable consideration, basically, is prostitution legal?</li>\n<li>The fundamentals of a binding contract: intention, legality of objects etc.</li>\n</ol>\n", "score": 3 }, { "answer_id": 91757, "body": "<p><a href=\"/questions/tagged/united-states\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" aria-label=\"show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;\" rel=\"tag\" aria-labelledby=\"tag-united-states-tooltip-container\">united-states</a></p>\n<p>In most jurisdictions in the U.S. this would be unenforceable, and possible even a crime. (Many non-U.S. jurisdiction are more legally tolerant of both gambling and of prostitution, and I'm not familiar with those jurisdictions at a sufficient level of detail to answer regarding those places.)</p>\n<p>First, most U.S. jurisdictions have a common law rule that contracts with meretricious consideration (i.e. where sex is one of the things that someone is contributing economically to the contract) are void as contrary to public policy.</p>\n<p>Second, this would be considered prostitution in most jurisdictions as it is defined under local laws. Prostitution is illegal in essentially every jurisdiction but a few counties in Nevada and is regulated there in a way that wouldn't allow this kind of contract in those jurisdictions. The illegality of prostitution would make the contract unenforceable, and depending upon the definition of prostitution in a particular jurisdiction would also make it a crime.</p>\n<p>Third, most U.S. jurisdictions prohibit gambling generally, subject to only narrow exceptions, most of which are regulated, and this would not fall within any of the common exceptions to the rule prohibiting gambling. Gambling is usually a misdemeanor or low level felony depending upon the nature of one's involvement.</p>\n<p>This said, however, between consenting adults who have or are open to having a sexual relationship with each other, who would never consider seeking to enforce their bet legally, one of the stronger defenses legally would be to argue that it isn't what it superficially seems to be.</p>\n<p>In other words, one could argue that this was not really a true &quot;contract&quot; or transactional sex, and was also not bona fide gambling, that would actually be enforced or considered binding by the participants, but was instead merely a form of role playing or informal adult play that isn't a genuine gambling or transactional sex transaction, even though it mimics the form of such an arrangement. If the implicit assumptions of the parties in context was that someone losing a bet could decline to perform the sexual act without consequences despite the seeming obligation arising from losing the bet, this defense could prevail. And, as a practical matter, this kind of activity would not be likely to be characterized as criminal conduct by people with knowledge of it, reported to authorities, prosecuted, or enforced in a civil lawsuit, if it was just silliness between friends as opposed to genuine commercial prostitution in bet form or genuine gambling with hard stakes that would be taken seriously and enforced extra-legally.</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "contract-law", "is-x-legal", "gambling", "prostitution" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91768, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>Can two natural persons sign a contract on a different day?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Yes.</p>\n<p>This happens routinely. In general, the contract is formed when the last person signs in this situation (unless the contract says otherwise).</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Do there have to be written different dates of signing, the actual\nones, on the contract?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>No.</p>\n<p>It is convenient to note the dates of signing on the contract to simplify proving of what happened if there is every a lawsuit where the dates of signing turn out to be material for some reason (e.g., proving when the contract was entered into for tax purposes). But this is not required by law for the contract to be valid. If the dates of signing are material facts in a later lawsuit, then the dates of signing can be proved with other evidence, such as sworn witness testimony in the course of that lawsuit.</p>\n<p><strong>Related Point</strong></p>\n<p>Also, the parties to the contract do not need to sign the same physical piece of paper (unless the contract says otherwise). When one person signs one physical signature page and another person signs a different physical signature page for the same contract, this is called &quot;executing the contract in counterparts.&quot;</p>\n<p>Many contracts expressly authorize the parties to sign the contract in counterparts, but the default rule if the contract is silent on the question is that executing the contract in counterparts is permitted.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "contract-law" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91707, "body": "<p>The First Amendment protects freedom of speech. This protection includes the right of one employer to contact another employer.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91763, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>Surely, Company A will rightfully terminate the employee.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>If Company A terminates the employee for also working full time at Company B, this is likely to be wrongful conduct by Company A, although the analysis is complicated and the stakes are relatively low.</p>\n<p>It isn't illegal to work two full time jobs, unless an employment contract provides that <a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/55239/what-is-the-point-of-devotion-of-all-working-time-clauses/55253#55253\">the employee's full efforts will be devoted to the job</a>, which is rare except in the case of senior executives.</p>\n<p>While the analysis under the <a href=\"https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/flsa\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Fair Labor Standards Act</a> (which regulates minimum wages and overtime pay at the federal level), and the parallel Illinois state law on the subject, is somewhat involved, it is probably illegal to have a &quot;full efforts&quot; clause in an employment contract for a full time hourly worker who is not exempt from overtime pay requirements under the FLSA and state law. Many remote workers are not exempt from overtime pay requirements (even in the tech industry). The federal FSLA exemptions from overtime pay requirements which are important in relation to dual-timing, are described <a href=\"https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/interpretive-guidance\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">here</a>. State limitations on exemptions from overtime are often more constraining on employers but I haven't independently reviewed if this is case in Illinois.</p>\n<p>Most employees of U.S. based companies are employees at will and can be fired at any time for any reason.</p>\n<p>Thus, outside of a unionized employer or a civil service employment situation, a wrongfully fired employee can't be reinstated. And, unless the employee is fired for a discriminatory reason or for something like trying to organize a union, the employee is not allowed to sue the employer for money damages arising from a wrongful termination. (A handful of states are exceptions: Montana requires that terminations of employment be for good cause in most circumstances. Colorado authorized limited remedies when an employee is fired for lawful conduct while away from work like smoking. Many states authorize wrongful termination lawsuits for very narrow reasons like firing someone for taking legally mandated time off to vote in a Presidential election. New York City is atypical in many respects.)</p>\n<p>The only distinction in a state like Illinois between a termination for good cause and a termination of employment without good cause, is eligibility for unemployment benefits. Someone who quits or is terminated for good cause isn't eligible for unemployment benefits. But, someone who is not terminated for good cause (either in a layoff or for some wrongful reason) is entitled to unemployment benefits.</p>\n<p><strong>As a general rule, for unemployment insurance benefits purposes, working two full time jobs is not good cause to terminate an employee's employment</strong> (unless you affirmatively lied to your employer and said you were only working one job, in which case the good cause for termination is dishonesty and not just working two jobs at once).</p>\n<p>But there would be exceptions to the general rule if there was an exclusivity clause in an employment contract, if there was a non-competition clause in the employment agreement and it identified Company B as a competitor of Company A, or if there was a common law duty of loyalty of the employee and Companies A and B were competitors.</p>\n<p>These are low stakes fights, however. You have to have worked for an employer for a certain amount of time to be eligible for unemployment insurance benefits at all. Unemployment benefits are limited in duration and amount (a percentage of past wages with a fairly modest maximum benefit cap) and continued receipt of benefits requires active efforts to find new work which are communicates to the unemployment office. A claim that pays benefits doesn't directly impact the bottom line of the employer. But the unemployment insurance premium rates of employers who have lots of successful claims made against them go up a little (although usually less in the aggregate than the amount of claims paid on those successful claims).</p>\n<p>An overview of the unemployment insurance system in Illinois can be found <a href=\"https://ides.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/ides/ides_forms_and_publications/CLI111L.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">here</a>.</p>\n<p>To be clear, Company A could terminate the employee in this situation and would face only very limited consequences for doing so. But, (1) usually any &quot;full efforts&quot; clause in the employee's employment contract would be invalid, and (2) the employee would not be considered &quot;terminated for good cause&quot; for unemployment insurance benefits purposes if this happened (which would be likely to cause Company A's unemployment insurance premium to go up prospectively).</p>\n<p>Also to be clear, simply contacting Company B with no intent to cause a termination of employment and not saying anything untruthful, that does not result in the employee's termination by Company A or by Company B, is not wrongful in any way. The First Amendment privileges truthful, non-tortious communication from liability.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Can Company A legally contact Company B to inform them that the\nemployee has been working at both companies, resulting in dual\ntermination?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><strong>Yes.</strong></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Any laws that would prevent a company from doing this?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><strong>No.</strong></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Does it changed anything if the companies are headquartered in a\ndifferent state?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p><strong>No</strong> (with the possible exception of New York City based firms in some circumstances similar to this, although perhaps not exactly the same, I have some vague recollection of a NYC specific employment ordinance related to a similar fact pattern, but can't find a citation to it at this time).</p>\n<p><strong>Other Similar Fact Patterns</strong></p>\n<p><em>Defamation</em></p>\n<p>If Company A calls Company B and tells Company B something false (e.g. that you falsified records when it had no reason to think that was true) that causes you to be fired at Company B, the fired employee could probably sue Company A (and could also personally sue the Company A employee who made the statement) <a href=\"https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-lawsuits-do-you-have-case-against-former-employer.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">for defamation</a> with damages equal to the wages lost from being fired by Company B.</p>\n<p><em>Tortious Interference</em></p>\n<p>If Company A calls Company B and knowing that you have an employment contract with Company B tries to get you fired from Company B, in some circumstances this could constitute actionable <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">tortious interference with contract</a> (i.e. this is something that the employee could sue Company A over). Indeed, this business tort originally emerged from employee poaching cases which have some similarities to the question in this case. As explained at the link above:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Tortious interference with contract rights can occur when one party\npersuades another to breach its contract with a third party (e.g.,\nusing blackmail, threats, influence, etc.) or where someone knowingly\ninterferes with a contractor's ability to perform his contractual\nobligations, preventing the client from receiving the services or\ngoods promised (e.g., by refusing to deliver goods). The tortfeasor is\nthe person who interferes with the contractual relationship between\nothers. When a tortfeasor is aware of an existing contract and\ndeliberately induces a breach by one of the contract holders, it is\ntermed &quot;tortious inducement of breach of contract.&quot;</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>But, the full scope of when there is intentional interference with contract liability is beyond the scope of this answer.</p>\n<p>The most famous recent tortious interference with contract case in recent memory involved <a href=\"https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/14/entertainment/taylor-swift-verdict/index.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">allegations that Taylor Swift caused a Denver DJ whom she alleged groped women to lose his job</a> (a jury ruled in her favor on the claim following a federal court trial).</p>\n<p>Many companies, as a matter of policy, avoid making calls like the one described in the question, in part, to avoid potential defamation or tortious interference with contract liability.</p>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "labor-law", "illinois" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91759, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>In a case that has the disposition Probation Before Judgement, what\nhappens at the end of the probation period (assuming no violation of\nthe probation)?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The case is closed and <a href=\"https://triallawyersmaryland.com/maryland-probation-before-judgment/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">the defendant does not have a criminal conviction associated with the charge</a>. It is equivalent to what most states call a deferred prosecution.</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Does the defendant need to do anything (i.e. petition the court), or\nis the verdict entered automatically?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The guilty verdict is stricken with the probation before judgment is entered. After the duration of the probation before judgment has expired without a violation, there is no longer any basis for citing the defendant for a probation violation.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "criminal-procedure", "maryland" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91754, "body": "<p>From <a href=\"https://nj.gov/njsp/firearms/firearms-faqs.shtml\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Firearms Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's) | New Jersey State Police</a></p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>25: Can I travel through New Jersey with my firearms?</p>\n<p>Yes. With no unreasonable deviations from your travels you may drive\nthrough New Jersey with any type firearm or ammunition. If New Jersey\nis the State of destination, then the firearms must be legal in this\nState.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>and</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>6: How do you transport firearms?</p>\n<p>Firearms shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and\nfastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk\nof the automobile in which it is being transported. If the vehicle\ndoes not have a compartment separate from the passenger compartment,\nthe firearm and or ammunition shall be in a locked container other\nthan the vehicle's glove compartment or center console and kept\nfarthest from the driver.</p>\n<p>As a precaution, ammunition shall be transported in a separate\ncontainer and locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is\nbeing transported. Ammunition magazines may remain loaded during\ntransportation and shall be carried separate from the firearm.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Unless, of course, the gun is a type simply illegal to own in NJ, such as an assault rifle, automatic rifle, etc. This may be dated, but outlines what firearms are illegal: <a href=\"https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/a-guide-to-legal-firearms-possession-in-new-jersey-51287\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">A Guide to Legal Firearms Possession in New Jersey - HG.org</a>.</p>\n<p>See also <a href=\"https://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/pdf/firearms/njac-title13-ch54.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">New Jersey State Police - NJ Firearm Laws - N.J.A.C. Title 13 Chapter 54 - Firearms and Weapons - njac-title13-ch54.pdf</a></p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91753, "body": "<p>I recommend that you study this page and it's links carefully as New Jersey has notoriously arbitrary and complex gun laws and enforcement:</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://handgunlaw.us/states/newjersey.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">HandgunLaw NJ</a></p>\n<p>Specifically this:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>New Jersey Law also states that before possessing or transporting any\nrifle or shotgun without first having obtained a New Jersey firearms\npurchaser identification card (FPIC), or possessing or transporting\nany handgun without first having obtained a New Jersey handgun carry\npermit is a violation of their law. You can transport it from place of\npurchase to home. Home to a Certified Shooting Range. Going hunting\nbut must have a valid hunting license. You just can’t have it in your\nvehicle. Again the law says you must have a FPIC or NJ Carry Permit to\neven transport firearms in NJ. From all I read and have heard someone\nfrom outside NJ must have a very good reason to transport a firearm\ninto NJ and better have the proper paperwork.</p>\n</blockquote>\n", "score": 0 } ]

[ "new-jersey", "firearms" ]

[ { "answer_id": 8689, "body": "<p>The <a href=\"https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/rightofwayrules.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">NHTSA gives rules for the United States</a>.</p>\n\n<p>Right of way goes to the first person to stop. So if a line of cars were at both stop signs, and all cars wanted to make the same conflicting turns, they would alternate.</p>\n\n<p>If the opposing cars stop at the same time then the one turning right has the right of way. (This is because a right turn falls under the \"Straight Traffic Goes First\" rule.)</p>\n", "score": 4 }, { "answer_id": 66638, "body": "<p>This scenario is covered in every state I've looked at, including Ohio, with a rule like &quot;A driver must yield the Right of Way to oncoming traffic when making a left turn.&quot; The rules of 4-way stop signs are a special case, and do not necessarily apply at 2-way stops.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://driving-tests.org/ohio/oh-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://driving-tests.org/ohio/oh-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/</a> Page 40.</p>\n<p>This explanation can help you see the logic:</p>\n<p>At a two-way stop when you’re at a stop sign, you obviously yield to traffic crossing in front of you. But if you’re making a left-hand turn, you’re expected to yield to any vehicle that’s facing you and coming across the intersection – even if you had to wait for traffic to clear and that driver got there after you did. (If that doesn’t make sense to you, picture the intersection with traffic lights. No matter who arrived first, when the light turns green, you always wait for cars to proceed before you make a left-hand turn. This is the same, only with signs instead of red lights.)</p>\n<p>In almost all driving situations, when you’re making a left-hand turn, you are expected to yield to other vehicles, including when a driver facing you is turning right.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://driving.ca/column/how-it-works/how-it-works-right-of-way\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://driving.ca/column/how-it-works/how-it-works-right-of-way</a></p>\n<p>Here's a video from a driving school that covers the same situation (The second intersection in the video) <a href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4e1XPcDIZ0\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4e1XPcDIZ0</a></p>\n", "score": 3 } ]

[ "united-states", "traffic" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91701, "body": "<p>It does not, as I understand what you mean. in <a href=\"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-177_b97c.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. II</a>, the Supreme Court held that &quot;plaintiffs’ foreign affiliates possess no First Amendment\nrights&quot;. Specifically</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Two bedrock legal principles lead to this conclusion. As a mat- ter of\nAmerican constitutional law, foreign citizens outside U. S. territory\ndo not possess rights under the U. S. Constitution. And as a matter\nof American corporate law, separately incorporated organizations are\nseparate legal units with distinct legal rights and obligations....it is long settled as a matter of American constitu-\ntional law that foreign citizens outside U. S. territory do not\npossess rights under the U. S. Constitution.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Thus a First Amendment argument against a law prohibiting funds being given to a foreign entity would fail (it did fail in that instance).</p>\n<p>On the other hand, if you mean, can the US government suppress speech by a foreign person <strong>in</strong> the US, it cannot, not even if they are government agents.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91750, "body": "<blockquote>\n<p>I am asking about foreign government agency operating on U.S. territory where the US does have jurisdiction.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Foreign government agencies are generally immune from US jurisdiction in the US under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. As such, they cannot be prosecuted for any crime nor sued for any civil violation unless the foreign government agrees to waive the immunity.</p>\n<p>However, if a foreign government agency says anything that the US doesn't like, the US can expel the foreign government agency, or any subset of its officers, or even the entire diplomatic and consular delegation of that country. They can do this regardless of where the disliked statement was made, because under the convention a host country can expel diplomats for any reason or for no reason at all. In its most extreme manifestation, this is called &quot;breaking off diplomatic relations&quot; or similar.</p>\n<p>The reaction of the US government to unpopular speech by a foreign government is therefore a political and diplomatic matter, not a legal one, and it is not particularly affected by the provision &quot;Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.&quot;</p>\n", "score": 2 } ]

[ "first-amendment" ]

[ { "answer_id": 91710, "body": "<p>There is no single answer under Shari`ah law, for example because apostacy is not a single thing, and because there are multiple schools of interpretation. <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">This article</a> gives a fairly detailed analysis. This <a href=\"https://web.archive.org/web/20171011180050/http://www.loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/apostasy.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">other article</a> focuses on statutory implementations of the prohibition against irtidād and its punishments. In Brunei, Section 112(1) of the Syariah Penal code allows execution for a Muslim who declares himself non-Muslim and does not repent, and Iranian law also apparently allows the death penalty. Presumably the same holds of current Afghanistan.</p>\n", "score": 2 }, { "answer_id": 91711, "body": "<h2><a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#:%7E:text=Apostasy%20from%20Islam%20is%20considered,repents%20and%20return%20to%20Islam.\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Yes</a>, but ...</h2>\n<p>&quot;Shari'a Law&quot; means the same as &quot;Common Law&quot; or &quot;Civil Law&quot;: it tells us nothing about whether the ancient punishments are part of that nation's law or, if such laws are on the books, whether they are enforced. All of these legal systems have, at some time in the past, had capital punishment for religious deviancy.</p>\n<p>As of <a href=\"https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2021/11/death-sentence-for-apostasy-in-nearly-a-dozen-countries-report-says\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">2021</a>, Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen have the death penalty for apostasy. In addition, Pakistan has the death penalty for blasphemy, which includes apostasy.</p>\n<p>In total, there are 17 countries where apostasy is a criminal offence and 83 which criminalise blasphemy (with 6 having the death penalty). Since only 50 countries worldwide are Muslim-majority, some of these laws are from non-Shari'a legal traditions.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, some countries where the death penalty is still on the books don't actually implement it, whether under a formal moratorium or as a de-facto policy. Even in countries that still have and use the death penalty, official execution for apostasy is rare: there have been no reported cases since 1998 and only four between 1985 and 1998. However, the mere existence of the punishment can and does lead to extra-judicial murders on that basis.</p>\n<p>Blasphemy and apostasy laws are more commonly used as tools of suppression by authoritarian regimes where imprisonment or the threat of it is usually sufficient.</p>\n", "score": 1 }, { "answer_id": 91727, "body": "<p>Solid answers by <a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/a/91710/9517\">user6726</a> and <a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/a/91711/9517\">DaleM</a> answer the first part of the question (&quot;Is this true?&quot;). This answer addresses the second part of the question:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Hypothetically if a Shari'a country also has a freedom of religion\nright (without a restrictions clause) how would the conflict be\nresolved between the two?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The death penalty is generally reserved, in places that have it, for apostasy to conversions away from Islam, rather than simply adhering to a faith other than Islam by a person who has never been a Muslim. Apostasy is conceptually similar to the secular crime of treason (which is also punishable by death), in that it can only be committed by people who owe allegiance to the sovereign against whom treason is committed.</p>\n<p>Islamic law recognizes the right of &quot;<a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_the_Book\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">people of the book</a>&quot; who have never converted to Islam, including Christians, Jews, &quot;Sabians&quot;, and in some interpretations, certain other faiths, to engage in the free exercise of their religions on a subordinate basis to an established Islamic religion in places subject to Islamic law. Not all religions are entitled to this deference. Some relevant sources in Islamic law arguably <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_the_Book\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">also reserve for god rather than men, the task of punishing people for not being Muslims</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Several verses in the Quran are commonly understood as identifying the\nJews, the Christians, and the Sabians as People of the Book. Thus for\nexample Sūrat al-Māʾida 5:68–69, which mentions these groups along\nwith the Muslims (&quot;the believers&quot;) as being safe from fear and grief:</p>\n<p><em>Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “O People of the Book! You have nothing to stand on unless you observe the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed\nto you from your Lord.” And your Lord’s revelation to you ˹O Prophet˺\nwill only cause many of them to increase in wickedness and disbelief.\nSo do not grieve for the people who disbelieve. Indeed, the believers,\nJews, Sabians and Christians—whoever ˹truly˺ believes in Allah and the\nLast Day and does good, there will be no fear for them, nor will they\ngrieve.</em></p>\n<p>Sūrat al-Baqara 2:62 is similar to this, but there is also a verse\n(Sūrat al-Ḥajj 22:17) which lists the same groups in another context,\nthat of how God will judge them on the Day of Resurrection, but now\nadding two more groups to the list:</p>\n<p><em>Indeed, the believers, Jews, Sabians, Christians, Magi, and the polytheists—Allah will judge between them ˹all˺ on Judgment Day.\nSurely Allah is a Witness over all things.</em></p>\n<p>The last named group, &quot;the polytheists&quot; (the mushrikūn, lit. 'those\nwho associate'), are the opposite of the first named, &quot;the believers&quot;\n(the Muslims). What is less clear, however, is the status of the\ngroups mentioned in between, who now also include the &quot;Magi&quot;\n(al-majūs), that is to say, the Zoroastrians (who are named only once\nin the Quran, in this verse). This was a matter of dispute among\nmedieval Muslim scholars, who questioned whether the Zoroastrians had\na clear prophet and scripture, as well as whether their doctrines on\nthe nature of God and creation were in accordance with those of Islam\nand the other religions recognized as having received a revelation.\nUltimately though, most Islamic jurists granted the Zoroastrians\npartial status as a People of the Book, while still disagreeing on the\nextent to which legal privileges such as intermarriage with Muslims\nshould be allowed.</p>\n<p>From the Quran, 98th Surah Al-Bayyina - the clear proof, those who\nreject the truth from among the People of the Book and polytheists are\ndescribed as the worst of all creatures, and are destined for hell.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Similarly, some faiths in the Middle East and South Asia with some overlap with Islamic views, that are a stretch to consider Muslim in a rigid or fair minded evaluation, are sometimes deemed as a matter of tolerance and religious convenience by local authorities as sects of Shi'ite Islam, for purposes of religious toleration.</p>\n<p>Countries in which Islamic law is enforced by the government typically enshrine it as an entrenched principle of their legal system, similar to the status of the U.S. Constitution in U.S. law, which is supreme over all other secular laws, domestic and international. This was done, for example, in the pre-2021 constitution of Afghanistan (before the Taliban regained power) and in the drafting of the current constitution of Iraq.</p>\n<p>So, the most obvious way, although not the only way, to reconcile freedom of religion found in a constitutional right or human rights treaty of a country, and the requirements of Islamic law, in a country where Islamic law is the supreme law of the land, is to allow freedom of religion as fully as possible consistent with Islamic law's requirements.</p>\n<p>In that approach, Muslims are not free to cease to convert away from Islam, or to otherwise engage in blasphemy. But &quot;people of the book&quot; are not required to convert to Islam, and differences of opinion about Islam that don't rise to the level of blasphemy such as those found in different schools of Islamic theology should be tolerated.</p>\n<p>A historical example of how this notion of religious freedom could play out in practice is the effort made by Muslim communities in France during World War II to hide and shelter Jews from the Nazis, without treating them as genuine converts to Islam for their own religious law purposes, even though the Nazis were deceived into believing that the sheltered Jews were really Muslims.</p>\n<p>Also, the death penalty that is justified for apostasy under many interpretations of Islamic law, or even any other particularly harsh penalty is not necessarily required under Islamic law, even when members of a religious faith are not &quot;people of the book&quot; with limited religious freedom under Islamic law (who <em>may</em> therefore be punished for practicing their faith in Islamic law). This is true even though an Islamic leader may be justified in conquering people of these faiths in order to convert them under Islamic law.</p>\n<p>The history of the Islamic world reflects many instances in which people who are not people of the book have been tolerated by Islamic leaders in light of practical realities and considerations, even though Islamic law did not demand their tolerance.</p>\n<p>In the same vein, while Islamic law does not forbid polygamous marriage, a couple of Islamic majority countries have forbidden it as a matter of secular law. These countries concluded that it is not inconsistent for secular law to ban conduct for secular reasons even when it is not a violation of Islamic law to do so, in much the same way that Islamic countries still have traffic laws even though Islamic law does not forbid driving though stop signs or going faster than a posted speed limit. As applied to the freedom of religion, while Islamic law does not require accommodation of the faiths of people who not &quot;people of the book&quot; it also doesn't affirmatively require that Muslims persecute such people in most cases (except some kinds of blasphemy).</p>\n<p>So there are approaches to interpreting Islamic law that can afford considerable substantive freedom of religion to non-Muslims, and to different kinds of Muslims within non-blasphemous Islam, even though it is not as expansive a view of freedom of religion as the U.S. First Amendment provides - particularly as applied to Muslims who want to convert to another faith.</p>\n<p>Another final point is that the majority view in Islamic theology is that adherence to Islamic law and the Islamic faith is a matter of overt actions and not internal sincerity. The leading view is that if you fulfill your outward religious duties like praying five times a day, observing Ramadan, honoring Islamic dietary restrictions, and not making public blasphemous statements, that you are still a &quot;legitimate Muslim in good standing&quot; so to speak. This is true in the leading view, even if in your heart of hearts and internal monologs with yourself, you have deep doubts about Islam or even actually don't believe that God exists at all. Theologically, in Islam, the leading view is that actions speak louder than words or thoughts.</p>\n", "score": 1 } ]

[ "jurisprudence", "religious-law", "freedom-of-religion" ]

[ { "answer_id": 81352, "body": "<p>In California, psychologists are regulated under <a href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xhtml?tocCode=BPC&amp;division=2.&amp;title=&amp;part=&amp;chapter=6.6.&amp;article=\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Ch 6.6</a> within Division 2 (Healing Arts) of the <a href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codesTOCSelected.xhtml?tocCode=BPC&amp;tocTitle=%20Business%20and%20Professions%20Code%20-%20BPC\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Business and Professions Code</a>. §2902 identifies the essential restriction on the business practice, stating that &quot;A person represents himself or herself to be a psychologist when the person holds himself or herself out to the public by any title or description of services...&quot; using various forms of the word 'psychologist', as well as &quot;when the person holds himself or herself out to be trained, experienced, or an expert in the field of psychology&quot;. In order to say that you are a psychologist, you have to hold a professional psychologists's license. Likewise to hold yourself out as a nurse, you need a nurse's license. A consequence of being a licensed psychologist is that under the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, you may assess a patient's mental state, and you must keep that information confidential. A life coach cannot make a diagnosis, and cannot prescribe cures for mental conditions.</p>\n<p>§2908 in particular allows other people to do some of what psychologists do:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent qualified\nmembers of other recognized professional groups licensed to practice\nin the State of California, such as, but not limited to, physicians,\nclinical social workers, educational psychologists, marriage and\nfamily therapists, licensed professional clinical counselors,\noptometrists, psychiatric technicians, or registered nurses, or\nattorneys admitted to the State Bar of California, or persons\nutilizing hypnotic techniques by referral from persons licensed to\npractice medicine, dentistry, or psychology, or persons utilizing\nhypnotic techniques which offer avocational or vocational\nself-improvement and do not offer therapy for emotional or mental\ndisorders, or duly ordained members of the recognized clergy, or duly\nordained religious practitioners from doing work of a psychological\nnature consistent with the laws governing their respective\nprofessions, provided they do not hold themselves out to the public by\nany title or description of services incorporating the words\n“psychological,” “psychologist,” “psychology,” “psychometrist,”\n“psychometrics,” or “psychometry,” or that they do not state or imply\nthat they are licensed to practice psychology; except that persons\nlicensed under Chapter 13.5 (commencing with Section 4989.10) of\nDivision 2 may hold themselves out to the public as licensed\neducational psychologists.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Analogously, we can talk about the law here without running afoul of UPL laws, because &quot;talking about the law&quot; is not the same as &quot;practicing law&quot;. It is a fairly formalistic distinction, but I or a life coach can talk about what would be good for your soul, as long as I don't claim to be a psychologist dispensing professional advice.</p>\n", "score": 4 } ]

[ "california", "professional-licensing" ]