On the morning of June 4, 2008, James Higginbotham ("Appellant") and his wife, Darleen Higginbotham, were struck by a car driven by Jason Steven Hampton, killing Darleen and leaving James with serious injuries.
The primary lesson to be learned from these cases is that in a collaborative production, everyone involved must be in agreement over who holds ownership of the material. And in addition what changes, if any, can be made to it and how it should be documented in writing.
I am the defendant of professor Faden in this trial. I would like to start off this trial by saying my client is innocent and is being wrongly accused of infringement. Now let me explain to my peers and the judge why i think this.
The case of McKennon vs Nashville Banner Publishing Co. raised an important question that past courts fail to accurately rule on. The problem at hand is whether an employee who has been dismissed from their job because of age, but whom is also been found to have committed a serious misconduct while they were previously employed, a misconduct that would have normally resulted in the immediate termination of the employee, is in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. The question presented to the court was - is the employee allowed any relief from the employer who wrongly terminated them in the first place, even though a wrongdoing was discovered during the discovery period? In previous cases, such as the Summers vs State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co, the courts ruled in favor of the employer and dismissed the discrimination of the employee and did not offer any type of relief to the employee over their wrongful dismissal (Hoffman, 1996). In 1995, the case of McKennon vs Nashville Banner Publishing Co challenged the status quo of these types of court cases.
Samuel Roth, a literary business owner, was convicted in a District Court on charges of violating the federal obscenity statute by advertising an erotic novella. Roth’s first conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On a similar note, David Alberts, who ran a mail-order business in Los Angeles and, was charged for violating the California Penal Code after a complaint that he was selling obscene books. His conviction was also affirmed by an Appellate Department of the Superior Court of the State of California.
According to case law, a person is allowed to use “reasonable force” to protect his property but it cannot be force that will take someone’s life or inflict injury. In the case of Tony Roberts, he is not allowed to use force against Peter Christopher, the man stealing his sports car, according to the case law of “Prosser on Torts, Third Edition”. The law states that “the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property, it is the accepted rule that there is NO privilege to use any force calculated to cause a death or serious bodily injury to repel the threat to land, unless there is a threat to the defendant's personal safety as to justify a self defense situation.” Tony was not in any danger when Peter was stealing his car; he never infringed any harm on Tony in order for him to act on self defense. Also, according to the Castle Doctrine, you must be in your home or at your place of business in order to use “deadly force” upon a Peter. In this case, Peter was not in his home or opposing harm on Tony. (Hodge, pgs 81-83)
There also has unsuccessful case in issue of fair use exception, the Harper & Row v Nation Enterprises case, Gerald Ford, a former president wrote memoir contain decision which related to Richard Nixon and provide a license of publication to Harper & Row which agree to condition that the excerpts of the memoir have to be published in Time magazine. The Nation magazine printed several verbatim phrase directly from the book without permission of the author, Harper & Row or even the Time magazine. Hence Harper & Row sued The Nation for copyright infringement. The Nation claim that Ford’s opinion and reasons related to Nixon not only were a major interest of the public and Ford was also a public figure. Therefore, the publication of The Nation should be consider as fair use. The District Courts held that publication of The Nation cause damages to Harper & Row and did not considered as faire
The ability to create, publish, and produce creative material is one of the most complex and beautiful gifts around and those who do so should have faith in the protection of their work. Copyright laws are the broadest of laws out there and are even harder to understand. Even still, they were put into place to protect the creative works of the public and punish those who infringe upon them. New technological advances are making theft of these products easier for those who participate in it and harder for creators to protect and benefit from their work. Maximum punishments are available in situations such as infringement, but few courts favor that decision. Copyright infringement is just like any other form of stealing,
The purpose of the Honor Code and Honor Council is to instill ownership and integrity into
Since Professor Faden is taking small clips from the movies that shouldn 't count as copyright because when looking at what can be counted as copyright its says that taking huge clips off of a movie can count as copyright, but as you can see Professor Faden took and used small clips to make something entirely different. I bet you are asking though doesn 't any amount of work shown count as copyright? Well not really because fair use says taking small clips from movies, podcasts, or book as long as
Intellectual property is one of the most challenging and prolific subjects of all legal matter. In general, Intellectual property is made up of four separate fields of law: trademarks, copyrights, patents, and trade secrets. More specifically, the United States has a long history of dealing with issues of copyright laws. America has been deliberating on issues concerning copyright law since the birth of the constitution in 1787, when James Madison requested that a provision be added to the constitution that would provide protection to literary authors for a determined time. However, copyright laws are not just limited to the United States it applies to 168 nations. These nations enjoy protections of the set forth in the Berne Convention which
The case of Keeling and Hars, brought about a great debate. Intellectual property may involve the creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce. It is very important to know and understand laws as it relates to intellectual property. In this particular case, Keeling won the case because she brought new ideas to the original film that stayed true to the film’s baseline, while adding new things. When books and movie scripts are written, the idea almost always comes from an author who has written something similar. It is about using your creative ability to swift it into a new direction. Hars and her company was only a production company. They did not write
The Copyrights Design and Patents Act 1988 gives creators of literacy, musical, dramatics and artistic works the right to control how their creations may be used. This also applies for source code for software. The act essentially protects the creators of these works from theft of their ideas, designs or patents.
CLONE / Word-for-Word: An act of submitting another’s work, also known as word-for-word copy, as one’s own.
This study paper entitled “The Copyright Modernization Act: A Guide for Post-Secondary Instructors that published in 2013. Devin Soper as the author of this paper is not a legal professional but publishing this paper in a personal views and opinions. The copyright act was invented in order to protect the original idea or works of owner, the new product and other substances by using an act to make better provision in the laws. This act may relief the first inventor of new innovation in the industry from being imitative by others people or an organization for their own interest such as to make profit. If there anyone who want intrude any of the rights that