Week 10 EOC: Lawyer jokes

What do lawyers use for birth control?
. . . Their personalities.
Why does California have the most lawyers and New Jersey the most toxic waste dumps?
. . . New Jersey had first choice!
http://www.extremelysmart.com/humor/lawyerjokes.php


When do you know a lawyer is telling the truth?  When his lips are shut.
At the rate law schools are turning them out, by 2050 there will be more lawyers than humans.
http://www.jokes.com/funny-lawyer-jokes


Q: What's the difference between a porcupine and a Mercedes Benz full of lawyers?
A: The porcupine has pricks on the outside.
Q: What do have when a lawyer is buried up to his neck in wet cement? 
A: Not enough cement. 
http://www.ahajokes.com/lawyer_jokes.html

Week 8 EOC: Questions

1.      What is the difference between a Provisional Patent Application and a                         Non-provisional Patent Application (Regular Patent)? 

2.      Are downloaded works over peer-to-peer networks violating Copyright law?

3.      How "original" does my work have to be to merit copyright protection?

4.      How do I know if I can protect my business information as a trade secret?

5.      How can I prove that there has been an infringement on my copyright?

6.      Are there any legal problems with using a specific product in my film?

7.      If I show my character watching TV, do I have to get permission to show whatever is on the screen?
8.      If I use fake guns in a public place am I legally obligated to inform the local police?
9.      Should I be concerned about filming a famous building? 

10.  I’m shooting my film in another state. Do I need to set up a limited liability company (LLC) in that state? 

WEEK 7 EOC: LAWYERS

 

Anthony Ciulla

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              720 S. Fourth Street
Suite 300
Las Vegas, NV 89101

Phone: 702-382-6911

Shemilly A. Briscoe

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              1060 Wigwam Parkway
Henderson, NV 89074

Phone: 702-944-9781

Melissa L. Waite

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              3800 Howard Hughes Parkway
Suite 1600
Las Vegas, NV 89169

Phone: (702) 699-7500

Gordon E. Bywater

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              3636 N. Rancho Dr.
Las Vegas, NV 89130

Phone: 702-656-2355

Dimitri P. Dalacas

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              3275 S. Jones Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89146

Phone: 702-307-9500

Christopher R. McCullough

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              601 S. Rancho Dr.
Suite A-10
Las Vegas, NV 89106

Phone: 702-385-7383

Airene Williamson

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              1060 Wigwam Parkway
Henderson, NV 89074

Phone: 702-823-3311

Neil E. Colmenares

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              6149 S. Rainbow Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89118

Phone:702-629-6666

John P. Aldrich

Area of Law: Small Business Law and Litigation

Location:              1601 S. Rainbow Blvd.
Suite 160
Las Vegas, NV 89146

Phone: 702-853-5490

Pamela Gavin

Location:            500 Gaskins Road,Suite B, Richmond, VA, 23238    

Phone: 804-784-4427

WEEK 6 EOC: Supreme Court Prayer

Our topic today comes to us from Greece, New York, where town meetings have been opened with Prayer for well over a decade. It became an issue when two attendee’s, Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens, thought “They should not have to be subjected to sectarian prayers.”

Now, personally, I agree with them. There is no possible way to make a prayer, vocally, to an audience of all different faiths and religions, that will NOT offend someone. An easier method which would allow each and every one to have their own moment to pray, or not to pray, would be a “moment of silence”. Which the town had in place up until 1999. When they started to allow prayer.

Just recently I was asked to stand while a college read a prayer, I’m told it was the same prayer brought up in this topic. Several others refused to stand, and personally I felt extremely awkward while standing, as I am agnostic. I don’t formally recognize any faith as my own, yet I stood to avoid drawing attention. In the back of my mind I was a bit upset. Why should I have to be subjected to this? My faith might not even be the same as the speaker. How does he feel knowing that there are some in his audience that don’t believe him? Later we were told the “Why” to his prayer, and then I was more understanding, but that doesn’t change the fact that I was surprised it happened at all.

Of course, the first amendment, freedom of speech, as well as freedom of religion, could be used to defend the prayers. However, with how much the country has changed in the 200 years since its establishment, should we really use prayer in a public setting outside of designated area’s such as a church?

An interesting quote I found from Douglass Laycock, a defendant of the prayers, was

"Well, if devil worshippers believe the devil is the almighty, they might be OK with it,"

I suppose that’s true enough, but what of Atheists, Agnostics, or even Jedi? Whom seemingly have no rights to preach their religion?

With all these factors in mind, it seems the justices of the supreme court are unmoved, as reported from NBC, “It seemed certain, after courtroom arguments in a case brought by two women from upstate New York, that the justices had no interest in eliminating prayer at government meetings.”

WEEK 5 EOC: Changes with Internet law.

                How has the internet changed legal issues?

Well, a great example is the entire concept of “Piracy”. For those who don’t know, Piracy is when you download a product, such as a movie or song, without buying it. You don’t have a license to that product. A problem occurs when someone who DID license the product, decides to share it online, with a mass number of people. Many of whom the user doesn’t know, and probably never will.

Now, Piracy has been dealt with over the years, companies and artists are trying to make their copyrights harder and harder to steal or upload. Yet it can still happen. Because just as quickly as the new protections come out, so do those who know how to get around it. 

Piracy has been made illegal in the United States, however the problem occurs, how do we know someone took something? Well, We can track the I.P. Addresses of those whom download a product. Which will track them down to the location of the router the device used was connected to. But here, a new issue occurs. Not everyone who owns a wireless modem knows how to set protection on themselves from this issue. People can connect to a modem, owned by someone else, and illegally download products. Yet at this point, as soon as they disconnect, they can’t be found, and have made off with the product.

The Supreme Court has tried to make Piracy harder with the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA. However, if you looked closely at the bill, SOPA wasn’t exactly the best idea. You would never actually need to appear in court.

                “Perhaps the most galling thing about SOPA in its original construction is that it let IP owners take these actions without a single court appearance or judicial sign-off. All it required was a single letter claiming a "good faith belief" that the target site has infringed on its content.”

Another problem this makes, is it holds the sites that are basically run by users, (facebook, youtube, tumblr, blogger, etc…) accountable for anything their users submit as a “status, tweet, or comment”.

Did you know that a fine for an illegally downloaded song can be as much as $220,000? One case actually ended up costing someone 1.92 Million dollars. The accused had downloaded 24 tracks of music, and then was charged 80,000 for each track. That was basically one CD. And it cost the accused nearly $2,000,000.

Am I saying Piracy is good? Or that we should be allowed to do it? No. You are still stealing someone’s intellectual property. However, the laws haven’t exactly caught up to how it should be handled. And even though we have systems in place, they aren’t exactly what I’d call trustworthy.

Week 4 EOC: Copyrights.

What is the definition of a copyright?

according to Webster,

copy·right

noun \-ˌrīt\

: the legal right to be the only one to reproduce, publish, and sell a book, musical recording, etc., for a certain period of time.

The next question, was "When is a copyright made?"

Some will tell you, "at the point of creation", but what qualifies as "creation"?

A photographer takes a photograph, and then they own that picture, BUT they go in and alter it before releasing it to the public. In this case, creation would be "upon release".

However, if this same photographer, does not claim the work to be theirs, with the copyright symbol, © and their name, and someone else takes their work and monetizes it, you're not actually breaking the law. Weird isn't it? Especially with the way today's creative minds work, many of them don't even have the thought of trying to protect their work in this way. Many young artists are simply creating their own works, without trying to protect it. Such is the case with many young Deviant Art users.

A copyright is a very complex thing, it is created instantly, yet if the work is unclaimed by the original creator, anyone can monetize their idea, or work. Now, you could hit them with a "Cease and Desist" order. but, if you, and they continue to monetize your work, it can lead to a court case.

I know I'll be utilizing this information to help protect myself from here on. Especially since I know a few people dealing with these issues right now. Some of the Deviant users I mentioned earlier, one of which is having her work stolen, as well as the person starting to claim they are her. Crazy world huh?