Slashdot Mirror

Here's a reference: https://www.expertlaw.com/foru...

And another: https://www.avvo.com/legal-ans...

The second thread suggests retaining a lawyer for legal protection, but at most, based on these threads, three-days' notice is sufficient, and changing the locks is within the parents' rights.

Unless there is a formal, signed lease between you and the child, you don't need a formal, signed eviction notice to kick them out. At least, you don't need such in Texas.

IANAL in TX or elsewhere, but I do not believe that you are correct. Most lawyers seem to agree that eviction is necessary, and even the person who suggested just changing the locks double-answered and said "Or, you could do the eviction route." and that answer is condoned by more other lawyers than his first answers. From a hilariously brief glance at that lawyer's reference on the issue, it seems to me that a three-day notice is required to evict, absent any other agreement. Do you have some citation which shows that simply changing the locks is legal in this scenario? I don't think it is, and that is why they went before a judge.

Unless there is a formal, signed lease between you and the child, you don't need a formal, signed eviction notice to kick them out. At least, you don't need such in Texas.

IANAL in TX or elsewhere, but I do not believe that you are correct. Most lawyers seem to agree that eviction is necessary, and even the person who suggested just changing the locks double-answered and said "Or, you could do the eviction route." and that answer is condoned by more other lawyers than his first answers. From a hilariously brief glance at that lawyer's reference on the issue, it seems to me that a three-day notice is required to evict, absent any other agreement. Do you have some citation which shows that simply changing the locks is legal in this scenario? I don't think it is, and that is why they went before a judge.

Not if both parties agree and he waives his parental rights to her and she accepts them.

this is a horrible metaphor

That doesn't actually happen. The government doesn't like getting stuck paying for your mistake.

You have to have a step-father officially submit adoption paperwork, so someone else takes the responsibility. Until then, the father is still on the hook until they're emancipated.

I'm shocked anyone has forgotten, or gives credence to anything they put out.

BUSINESS SOFTWARE ALLIANCE (BSA) AUDITS: TOP TEN THINGS TO DO IF YOU RECEIVE A BSA LETTER
Have You Received An Audit Letter From BSA - Business Software Alliance?

Oddly enough people seem suspicious of the BSA and their audits, wonder why? ;)

Except that subpoenas don't apply to defendants.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-ans...

Only to third party/witnesses

Perhaps you are not clear about what harassment is?

If you take a little bit of Google for a moment, you learn that harassment is "aggressive pressure or intimidation".

Your definition is too broad.

In a world where many young women believe if a man asks you out and you don't like him, it is sexual harassment, it gets a little hazy as to what sexual harassment is. Sometimes trying to pick up a simple friendship might be harassment. http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...

My favorite answer to the question is the attorney who answered the question starting with "There should not normally be a problem" Oy. Certainly John Edwards' former blogmaster Amanda Marcotte believes that it is http://twitchy.com/2014/04/21/...

As she wrote on Gawker after the High School boy asked out "Miss America", which was just a silly trend for a few years of your people asking celebrities to proms: "I really wish people would stop acting like it’s cute when teenage boys sexually harass older women. " http://twitchy.com/2014/04/21/...

And here is the problem. As most of us know - once accused, always guilty in many people's minds. So we can have all of the googling of law we can handle, yet there will always be people with an axe to grind, so why get caught up in that.

Any male that is remotely prudent and is career minded would be insane to get within ten feet of a woman he did not know well. He's playing roulette with his life and career. I wouldn't be too surprised if there were some women who simply don't want to be talked to by a man at all. So a prudent guy simply leaves well alone.

Filing as "single" when you're married is flat out tax fraud, and you're subject to fines up to $250,000 and years of imprisonment, so I doubt that is a common method of filing. http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...

Note that you do NOT purchase the movie on the disk, you purchase the physical media and a license to view the disk in any manner the studio decides as terms of the license.

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...

The first few support my stance, and the last two do not seem to, however I think they're wrong in that renting out a movie does not constitute 'disposal' of the DVD. BTW IANAL, YMMV.

I found some posts from intellectual property attorneys and they seem to be saying that you can't just buy a DVD at Walmart and rent it out:
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...
Interestingly though the answers from the IP lawyers seem to be split.

Yes. Netflix can rent physical DVDs without negotiating with studios or distributors. In theory, they could run to Walmart and buy DVDs to mail out. They need nobody''s permission to do this.

I'm pretty sure this is incorrect. The consensus among lawyers here for example:
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...
is that it's not legal to buy a DVD from Walmart and rent it out. The movie rental companies that rent out DVDs have to pay a special higher price to buy the DVDs from the studios.

Just Google "movie theaters confiscating cell phones" and read all about it. It was a pretty common thing to do around and before 2009, apparently it's still a common thing to do for special screenings. From 2009 http://gizmodo.com/5314778/no-... http://boingboing.net/2009/07/... And these were from just 2012 http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards... http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...

Sure, DexterIsADog.

Some of these are security videos. Some are just videos people shot. They all involve civil cases.

Question answered by lawyers about release of security footage

Texting Woman Who Fell Into Fountain May Sue Mall . The video in the story has been removed, probably as part of a preemptive agreement.

Kanye West suing YouTube co-founder for uploading footage of his proposal

Peninsula card room sues over violent YouTube videos

Couple sues subway over YouTube post

NJTA sues YouTube over the posting of a video that had been shot with an NJTA camera.

And this link may provide you with lots and lots of articles to read on the subject.

That's nothing.

In Alabama, you're guilty of DUI if you are simply in possession of car keys while intoxicated:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/alabamas-dui-offense-what-exactly-is-actual-physical-control

Try asking anyone under 30 if they know what the phrase "Papers Please!" denotes

It's just two words... It's a lot of things.

It's when the Military place soldiers in a natural disaster area such as New Orleans after Katrina requiring you to show military ID or proof of government authorization, to avoid arrest, or having vehicles impounded

It's an attack onAmerican birthright citizenship

It's two words that succinctly describe America's dark future.

Personal and Professional Encounters with Surveillance

anti-state.com: May I See Your Papers Please?

It's what Mr. Hiibel of Nevada went to jail for refusing to comply with

It's what police do now to ordinary people minding their own business.

It's congress work on the REAL ID act

It's a name given to a section of an Arizona law upheld by the Supreme court.

It's the name of a complaint against changes the US is making starting this Fall 2013 to further restrict the free travel of Americans and greatly increase the difficulty of US citizens getting passports

It's the name of a dystopian video game about communist immigration control.

It's the name of an anti-TSA blog

It's a request you comply with when asked by the police; otherwise, you face immediate arrest.

• Texas 77 year old Grandmother arrested after refusing to show ID
• Police arrest for refusing to show ID while on private property
• Exhibit 1
• Exhibit 2: According to the Supreme Court, the police may arrest for failure to identify
• Arrested at Circuit City for refusing to show ID: "It all started when I refused to show my receipt to the loss prevention employee at Circuit City, and it ended when a police officer arrested me for refusing to provide my driver's license."
• I follow the blog of a guy who walked across the country (California to New York) last year. He was arrested in Greencastle, Indiana last summer, after a prison worker called the police to report him as a suspicious person after they exchanged words while he was walking past the prison complex.
• Florida Cops Tase man for refusing to show ID
• Refusal to show id in Georgia (arrest)
• Man in Arizona arrested for refusing to surrender firearm to officers who refused to show their own ID

By forcing Risen to answer these questions, we may find out he was actually a co-conspirator or an accomplice (or perhaps even the source of the leak itself). And thus forcing him to answer now has trampled his fifth amendment rights.

and we come full circle ... if risen is asked questions that may incriminate him, then he should plead the 5th.

"To invoke the privilege, a witness need not be guilty of any offense; rather, the privilege is properly invoked whenever the witness's answers 'would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute' the witness for a criminal offense."

http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/california-law-when-can-a-witness-invoke-the-fifth-amendment-privilege-not-to-testify-1

"intellectual property lawyers" handle both kinds of cases. just providing relative costs as aside.

the claim stands, simple copyright claim is expensive legal endeavor in these united states

ooo looky: answers by actual intellectual property lawyers:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/what-is-the-average-cost-to-litigate-a-patent-or-c-411859.html

The fact that there was a court case filed on this topic is not much of a news story.

But it proves the court case exists, which disproves GP's assertion that nobody could possibly verify that the allegations were alleged. (We could hold a separate debate on whether allegations should be enough to write an article, but look through any newspaper today and you'll see that most articles are based on allegations alone, usually with a lede stating the allegation as a plain fact.)

The real mystery is how a run-of-the-mill everyday nutcase filing gets to the front page of Slashdot.

Robert E. Barnes is a tax attorney with 12 years' experience who is most well known for his defense of Wesley Snipes on tax evasion charges. Please present your evidence that he is a run-of-the-mill everyday nutcase.

From what I could find, clauses prohibiting employees from discussing pay outside work are probably not likely to be upheld and also violate NLRB rules. IMO it would be extremely unfair for any employment contract to disparage freedom of speech outside the workplace in some way.

http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/freedom/can-you-be-fired-for-discussing-your-salary.html

Anyone who thinks this sounds good should have a look here first:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-my-employer-force-me-to-sign-something-stating-619319.html

Your employer can fire you if they think your less than sunny attitude is responsible for the weather, let alone if you refuse to sign a document. Your only question is whether the consequences of refusing to sign are worse than the consequences of signing but yes your employer can make there be consequences for not signing.

Stipulated. You get what you pay for

:)

"boy discovers he's a wizard, has adventures" is not copyrightable.

but try writing a non-parody book about a boy wizard Larry Cotter who's parents are killed by Lord Woldemort who himself was almost killed in the attempt to kill that boy who now lives with non-magical step parents who hate magic who is then on his xth birthday suddently visited by a large and imposing groundskeeper who delcares that he's a wizard and whisks him off to a magical school where he quickly makes 2 friends and had adventures involving a magical train, a flying car, a tree which hits people, werewolves,giant spiders, dragons, a touranemt with a couple of others schools, some version of rugby/football played on broomsticks etc along with the evil overlord returning every book or so to try to kill him....

then you might be in trouble.

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/how-closely-can-my-novel-follow-the-plot-of-a-copy-141663.html

There's massive leeway given to being "inspired by" other work but if you rip someone's story off wholesale then you can end up in trouble.

"boy discovers he's a wizard, has adventures" is not copyrightable.

but try writing a non-parody book about a boy wizard Larry Cotter who's parents are killed by Lord Woldemort who himself was almost killed in the attempt to kill that boy who now lives with non-magical step parents who hate magic who is then on his xth birthday suddently visited by a large and imposing groundskeeper who delcares that he's a wizard and whisks him off to a magical school where he quickly makes 2 friends and had adventures involving a magical train, a flying car, a tree which hits people, werewolves,giant spiders, dragons, a touranemt with a couple of others schools, some version of rugby/football played on broomsticks etc along with the evil overlord returning every book or so to try to kill him....

then you might be in trouble.

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/how-closely-can-my-novel-follow-the-plot-of-a-copy-141663.html

The problem remains where to draw the line. The orphan who discovers that her parents were murdered by a villain and sets out to avenge their death is an unprotectable cliche. But every copyrightable work is a compendium of uncopyrightable components -- namely, words.

So looking at what you've written, those are such broad strokes that I would expect any US court to hold that it does not infringe JK Rowling's copyrights. Then again, if you were to keep to the outlines of what you describe, but were to divide and sequence the chapters precisely as JK Rowling did, I wouldn't be surprised if the court went the other way. Clearly on the other side of the line, if you were to scan and OCR a Harry Potter book and find and replace "wizard" with "solar knight" and "Voldemort" with "Galactina," you'd probably end up paying the fees of Ms. Rowling's lawyers.

there's massive leeway given to things being "inspired by" previous work but if you go too far you end up at the bad end of a copyright suite.

These are hoaxes of course. But your willingness to believe them proves how far we came...

Real ones:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/06/frivolous_lawsu.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/us/14pants.html (because he was offered 15k.)

List:
http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/2010/04/the-7-most-absurd-lawsuits-of-all-time/

The Mp3.com case did handle this specific situation:

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in In re Aimster, also discussed (hypothetically) the propriety of space shifting:

Someone might own a popular-music CD that he was particularly fond of, but he had not downloaded it into his computer and now he finds himself out of town but with this laptop and he wants to listen to the CD, so he uses Aimster’s service to download a copy. This might be a fair use rather than a copyright infringement, by analogy to the time shifting approved as fair use in the Sony case. . . . The analogy was rejected in UMG Recordings v. MP3.com, Inc. . . . on the ground that the copy on the defendant's server was an unauthorized derivative work; a solider ground, in light of Sony’s rejection of the parallel argument with respect to time shifting, would have been that the defendant’s method for requiring that its customers "prove" that they owned the CDs containing the music they wanted to download was too lax.

(Emphisis mine)

It is not legal to torrent a CD (or game, or whatever) you own. You have to make the copy yourself. Which is why things like the DeCSS case are so problematic--they took away the only legal way for you to exercise certain fair rights.

Texas
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-there-a-3-day-cooling-off-period-after-a-car-ha-5545.html
THERE IS NO 3 DAY CHANCE TO GET OUT OF A CAR PURCHASE IN TEXAS

http://www.weblocator.com/attorney/ca/law/c05.html
California
Finally, consumers should be aware that the three-day "cooling off" period that allows a buyer to cancel a contract within three days does not apply to the purchase of new or used cars. Because the contract cannot be canceled under this consumer protection provision, a buyer should exercise caution before signing any contract for the purchase of a used car.

However... if it is not a car... and at your home... and worth over $25...

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/products/pro03.shtm
If you buy something at a store and later change your mind, you may not be able to return the merchandise. But if you buy an item in your home or at a location that is not the seller's permanent place of business, you may have the option. The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC's) Cooling-Off Rule gives you three days to cancel purchases of $25 or more. Under the Cooling-Off Rule, your right to cancel for a full refund extends until midnight of the third business day after the sale.

The Cooling-Off Rule applies to sales at the buyer's home, workplace or dormitory, or at facilities rented by the seller on a temporary or short-term basis, such as hotel or motel rooms, convention centers, fairgrounds and restaurants. The Cooling-Off Rule applies even when you invite the salesperson to make a presentation in your home.

Under the Cooling-Off Rule, the salesperson must tell you about your cancellation rights at the time of sale. The salesperson also must give you two copies of a cancellation form (one to keep and one to send) and a copy of your contract or receipt. The contract or receipt should be dated, show the name and address of the seller, and explain your right to cancel. The contract or receipt must be in the same language that's used in the sales presentation.

(lists of various exceptions).

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080806085036AAUQ7oh

Are United States Citizens required to carry an ID at all times?

No.

However, it references to john gilmore case which shows you either do or do not need an ID to fly because of some secret laws and the mood of the TSA at that particular airport.

Interesting comments here-- a statement that you don't have to have id and some commentary on how the police can pull you over legally in a car for no reason at all and the court even says that the laws are now so complex that you can't obey them all- but "a violation is still a violation".
http://www.thewashcycle.com/2009/02/possible-police-harassment.html

okay... finally a legal site,
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/probable-cause-under-wa-state-laws--can-police-ask-7100.html
this may be valid in washington only not in some states... but for what it's worth...

Question police stop: do the police have a right to stop me and ask for Identification while I am walking down the street
Lawyer's answer: Yes they do and you have the right to say no and walk away. Unless they have reasonable suspicion you have committed a crime they have no legal basis to stop you.

But note John M. Kaman's reply...
The cops nightsticked his client from behind as he walked away and then charged him with resisting arrest.

---

On a related note (and a relational note), I had a younger cousin who became a cop. I got to see a nice young man turn into a thug with "funny" stories about abusing his authority over civilians.
power corrupts.

We've just about sold ourselves down the river where we can't fight back any more. It's come so far since the 1950's.

Ketosis. You might be on atkins, you might be diabetic.
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/uncategorized/low-carbers-beware-the-breathalyzer/
http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/diabetes-and-the-counterfeit-dui

Under your fictitious system, there could be no such thing as defamation. Anyone could say "Snaller is the biggest idiot on earth" and produce a "ranking system" which resulted in that conclusion. If that ranking system is specifically targeted so as to reduce your standing (i.e. reputation), that's libel. It can be as blatant as a system which targets you as an individual (-1500 starting score for "Snaller") or as subtle as a system which targets your attributes selectively (without basis or relevance to the scoring system).

Furthermore, any system which uses a "rank" system is assumed to be fair and appropriate, absent any publicized bias. A ranking system is no good if it is one-sided, and not disclosing that the system is in fact skewed misrepresents the service's stated. As for "they don't say factually accurate," guess again, dexter: http://www.avvo.com/avvo_guide/avvo_rating.

You've strayed from the original point, so I'll just accept that you are no longer arguing about the relevance of the inputs and are now just scrambling to be contrary. You lose. Better luck next time.