Week 7 EOC: Progress towards finding a lawyer

With my background in computer technology, I have had the opportunity to pick up side jobs every now and then doing computer work, be it building, repairing, database work, and even web development. I left the industry basically because I was becoming bored with it, but I still enjoy doing computer work as long as it's not all the time. Several weeks ago, I picked up a quick afternoon job helping a friend of a friend with some networking issues. It turned out that her husband was a lawyer. The timing of this could not have been better, due to the final for this class. I talked to him about the upcoming project and he stated that he would be more than happy to help me out with my final project.

Week 9 EOC: Wall Street Journal Editorial

Just recently, Eric Holder, the current Attorney General of the Obama administration, stated that the U. S. will not enforce the federal marijuana laws in the states that have legalized the drug (WA, CO). He did add some stipulations to this, basically saying that if things got out of hand the feds would step in. “Justice warns that it will intervene if it discovers that marijuana is flowing to children or being trafficked to states where it is still illegal, though under federal law it is still illegal in all states “(link).  

One can find similarities in prohibition in the early part of the 1990s. Alcohol really wasn't that severe of a problem outside of the moral stance by many religious factions around the United States. Part of what it ended up doing was creating an easy building block for organized crime, and it also had the side effect of glamorizing alcohol. If we legalize pot, it will be much easier to regulate, and while it will still filter down into the younger age bracket, a lot of the glamor of the illicitness will be removed. "If we remove marijuana from the criminal market and have the market run by responsible business people that have an incentive to check IDs and not sell to minors, then we might see those rates drop again." (link)

Finally, I think something like this can be handled better at a state level, rather than at the federal level. As several political factions have stated, the amount of power at the federal level is way too strong as they have slowly been usurping the states powers over the years.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Week 8 EOC: Legal Questions

1.      If no model release is signed for a portrait session, and the client tells you a year later that they don’t want their photos used in your website anymore, do they have that right to dictate when/where their images can be used even though no model release form was signed?

2.       Is it OK to photograph subjects at public events, such as festivals, parades, and rallys, then post them on an internet gallery for sale? I was thinking of taking photographs at a local festival, then selling them on my website. Is it OK to post photos on the net of people that anyone else could purchase for themselves?

3.      Who owns the copyright if a client pays you to take the picture

4.       Who owns the photo if my assistant/associate photographer takes the picture?

5.    What does registering a copyright do for me?

6.    If someone does sue me (or the LLC in this case) what could they get? If I distribute most if not all of the cash to myself during the course of the year, the business then really has no assets to get? Can they collect previously stated earnings?

7.       Is my camera considered an "asset" of the business? I have a nice camera. However, I may use these cameras for personal use as well But, is there a way to distinguish whether it is an "asset of the LLC" or a "personal" asset used in the business. I am just wondering if someone could take it in a lawsuit or something.

8.    Is an LLC drastically more complicated to create than just a sole proprietorship? Are there any state reporting requirements other than filing?

9.   Somebody infringed my copyright. What can I do?

10.      What does a model release protect me from, and is it needed.

  

Week 5 EOC: Apple - Samsung Pattent Battle

Dating back to April of 2011, the patent war between Samsung and Apple has been fierce and vicious.  “This whole patent war is one that Apple, and Steve Jobs in particular, started, upending a long-standing "gentleman's agreement" between U.S. mobile phone companies; all had competing patents but were generally happy to license them to each other. “ (link) Together, the two electronic behemoths account for well over one half of the phones sold worldwide, with Samsung claiming over 31% of the market in 2013 compared to Apple’s 14%. The damages claimed by both sides’ numbers in the billions, with one patent suit by Apple alone originally claiming 2.75 billion in damages.  The outcome of this trial in August of 2012 was in Apple’s favor, “After 21 hours of deliberation, a nine-person jury has sided with Apple on a majority of its patent infringement claims against Samsung Electronics. The jury also awarded Apple more than $1 billion in damages” (link). Just a few months earlier, Samsung had won a victory with the International Trade Commission that could have resulted in a ban on Apple selling the iPhone 4 and 3G-capable iPads.  This decision was recently vetoed by President Obama’s administration. “U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman made the decision to veto the ban on the Apple devices, citing concerns about patent holders gaining "undue leverage" as well as potential harm to consumers and competitive conditions in the U.S. economy.” (link) This is the first time in over 26 years that a President has overruled the ITC. Just a week later, the ITC ruled in favor of Apple, limiting imports on certain of Samsung’s products, but the odds of that ruling being overturned are probably very slim.  To me this seems to be the Obama administration playing favorites with a U. S. based company.

WEEK 4 EOC: Edward Snowden

The case of Edward Snowden has been a very interesting case to follow. I am torn in both directions on this issue. On one hand, what he did is quite illegal. But on the other hand, he has uncovered some very questionable practices conducted by the NSA, with their constitutionality to still be determined. We still don’t know the true scope of what Snowden has unearthed, and there might be a chance we will never find out exactly how much information he has. I am also quite surprised that Snowden managed to make it out of the country alive, unlike Michael Hastings, a journalist who was supposed to being an exposing story about the NSA. Hastings died in a car crash, but many suspect foul play by the American government. http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/ethan-cox/2013/07/was-journalist-michael-hastings-murdered. Another interesting twist to the entire saga is President Obama canceling a meeting with Russia’s Prime Minister Putin, basing his refusal to meet on the fact that Russia granted Snowden asylum for at least one year’s time. Again, this really makes me wonder what type of information that Snowden has that would make Russia give him asylum and risk severely angering the United States. I look forward to watching the NSA and other secret parts of our government, to see how they react, to see if they retract statements as they have about the scope of PRISM and other NSA workings. How much freedom and privacy do we really have from our government? It almost feels like we’re living in a finely crafted illusion to keep us happy, but in reality our privacy is about the same as the Soviet Union’s was during its communist times.

Week 3 EOC: Rolling Stone Magazine

The recent Rolling Stone article entitled Jahar’s World about the Boston Marathon bombing was an amazing in-depth article.  The article went into great depth and managed to create an almost three dimensional picture of the bomber himself, delving into almost every aspect of his and his family’s life.  The cover, on the other hand, managed to cause some very negative feedback. Many thought that the image was glorifying the bomber, saying that they posed him like a rock star. Never mind that the image was the same one that was used in an article by the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/us/dzhokhar-tsarnaevs-dark-side-carefully-masked.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 ), because it was used by a “popular culture” based music magazine, all of a sudden it is a huge controversy; one that caused several businesses, like CVS, to take Rolling Stone off of the shelf for that issue.

While the article had an amazing depth to their insight into the life of the Boston Marathon Bomber, one has to wonder not only how accurate all this information is, but how will this affect the trial, once things reach that stage. It seemed that quite a bit of the article was based on second-hand knowledge, which can be quite distorted by time and other factors. Is it possible that if the article does get things right, that this information, coming from one of the larger pop culture and music based magazines, might have an adverse affect on the trial? And with all the media reports and updates about this tragedy, how hard will it be to actually fill an impartial jury for the trial, should things finally come to that end?