Tony Sheridan passed away last week. He had the distinction of having the Beatles as his backup band in the early 1960's. They recorded the below version of Take Out Some Insurance. I included a Jimmy Reed version as well. What a great lead in to your insurance law lecture.
Friday, March 1, 2013
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Big Brother Busts Cyber Stealing
Big Brother is monitoring your illegal downloading. And starting this week, he will send you letters telling you that he knows what you are doing.
Copyright scofflaws illegally downloading music, movies and videos will receive gentle reminder letters from their internet providers that their internet activities are being monitored and they have been busted. Participating internet service providers have agreed to "punish" repeat offenders by compromising their internet speed for several days as a concrete reminder of their prior bad acts. Read all about it here.
Is this a breakthrough in policing the internet for illegal conduct? Is this an historic partnership of law enforcement and private enterprise? Is it a further clarion call for an overhaul of intellectual property law and new business models for the entertainment industry? Whatever it is, its Big Brother qualities are creepy.
Copyright scofflaws illegally downloading music, movies and videos will receive gentle reminder letters from their internet providers that their internet activities are being monitored and they have been busted. Participating internet service providers have agreed to "punish" repeat offenders by compromising their internet speed for several days as a concrete reminder of their prior bad acts. Read all about it here.
Is this a breakthrough in policing the internet for illegal conduct? Is this an historic partnership of law enforcement and private enterprise? Is it a further clarion call for an overhaul of intellectual property law and new business models for the entertainment industry? Whatever it is, its Big Brother qualities are creepy.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
We Owe a Lot to Lindsay Lohan
There are a few important contributors to the law who seem to pop up as examples or exemplars in my Legal Environment course on more than a few occasions during the semester. If I give it some thought, I can readily name a few that come to mind; Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Benjamin Cardozo and Antonin Scalia, Presidents John Adams, Woodrow Wilson and Abraham Lincoln, Economic Philosopher Adam Smith, and commentators Bill O'Reilly and Stephen Colbert and, of course, Lindsay Lohan.
With the addition of the case described below, the actress and celebrity accounts for three separate examples of legal principles applied to real facts. First, there was the lawsuit for civil assault brought against her by the passenger in a car that she apparently chased at high speeds through the streets of LA in 2007; an incident that also resulted in her arrest. It allows for explanation of all the elements of civil assault - apprehension or fear of imminent bodily harm without the element of physical contact.
Then, there was the $10M lawsuit against e-trade that was the subject of this post.
And now we have a federal court ruling in a lawsuit that Ms. Lohan brought against musical artist "Pit Bull" for the use of her name in the lyrics of his song, Give Me Everything.
This is insane: the way the name growin'
According to the complaint, the use of Ms. Lohan's name in the above quoted lyrics constituted an alleged violation of NY State Civil Rights law, and gave rise to claims for unjust enrichment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Not surprisingly, the Defendant's 12(b)(6) motion was granted. Judge Hurley's decision may be read here. The lyrics are protected from the Civil Rights claim as artistic expression and fall well below the liability threshold of "extreme and outrageous conduct."
Although he rejected the imposition of sanctions under Rule 11 for filing a frivolous claim, the judge did not let plaintiff's counsel off the hook. His order imposes a $750 fine for alleged misrepresentations in a letter to the court and an additional $750 for filing an Opposition Brief with content plagiarized from websites and prior filings and missing legal citation.
So, my thanks goes out to Lindsay Lohan. Her contributions to the law allow my students to see past the stuffy and stayed reputation of the law as the province of dead rich white guys.
Give Me Everything by Pit Bull and friends:
With the addition of the case described below, the actress and celebrity accounts for three separate examples of legal principles applied to real facts. First, there was the lawsuit for civil assault brought against her by the passenger in a car that she apparently chased at high speeds through the streets of LA in 2007; an incident that also resulted in her arrest. It allows for explanation of all the elements of civil assault - apprehension or fear of imminent bodily harm without the element of physical contact.
Then, there was the $10M lawsuit against e-trade that was the subject of this post.
And now we have a federal court ruling in a lawsuit that Ms. Lohan brought against musical artist "Pit Bull" for the use of her name in the lyrics of his song, Give Me Everything.
This is insane: the way the name growin'
According to the complaint, the use of Ms. Lohan's name in the above quoted lyrics constituted an alleged violation of NY State Civil Rights law, and gave rise to claims for unjust enrichment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Not surprisingly, the Defendant's 12(b)(6) motion was granted. Judge Hurley's decision may be read here. The lyrics are protected from the Civil Rights claim as artistic expression and fall well below the liability threshold of "extreme and outrageous conduct."
Although he rejected the imposition of sanctions under Rule 11 for filing a frivolous claim, the judge did not let plaintiff's counsel off the hook. His order imposes a $750 fine for alleged misrepresentations in a letter to the court and an additional $750 for filing an Opposition Brief with content plagiarized from websites and prior filings and missing legal citation.
So, my thanks goes out to Lindsay Lohan. Her contributions to the law allow my students to see past the stuffy and stayed reputation of the law as the province of dead rich white guys.
Give Me Everything by Pit Bull and friends:
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
"A Person's a Person . . ."
In the Dr. Seuss classic, Horton Hears a Who!, the philanthropic pachyderm proclaims that "A person's a person no matter how small." The Supreme Court version might read, "A person's a person even a corporate cabal."
To draw attention to the claimed absurdity of the notion of corporate "personhood," a Marin County California man has, for the last ten years, been driving in the "2 person carpool" lane with a stack of corporate documents in the passenger seat hoping to be ticketed for a violation. He recently got his wish and challenged the ticket in court on the "a person's a person..." theory. No, he was not successful in obtaining a court's finding in his favor. But then, I think his real object was to get bloggers like me to write about his case and suggest that it would be an amusing yet thought provoking example to use in your law classes. So, here it is.
Jonathan Frieman, JD, corporate avenger:
To draw attention to the claimed absurdity of the notion of corporate "personhood," a Marin County California man has, for the last ten years, been driving in the "2 person carpool" lane with a stack of corporate documents in the passenger seat hoping to be ticketed for a violation. He recently got his wish and challenged the ticket in court on the "a person's a person..." theory. No, he was not successful in obtaining a court's finding in his favor. But then, I think his real object was to get bloggers like me to write about his case and suggest that it would be an amusing yet thought provoking example to use in your law classes. So, here it is.
Jonathan Frieman, JD, corporate avenger:
Monday, February 25, 2013
The "Business" of Law
While students inherently "know" that lawyers in the private practice of law charge money for the legal services provided, they often do not grasp exactly what that means. The following video shows a family law attorney addressing other lawyers with advice on how to structure fee agreements and collection of fees. I find it serves as a small dose of reality for students.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Law Music Video: Prof. Steven Friedell
Who would ever have thought that singing songs in classes with adults could be an effective pedagogical method? What else can be said about watching an exceptional teacher at work? Here is Prof. Steven Friedell, Rutgers Law.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
A Gun in Every Toy Chest?
Children are precious. As a society, we employ law in diverse ways to protect children from any of a host of physical and emotional dangers. It is hardly controversial that there are laws designed to protect kids from the obvious dangers of abuse and neglect. Kids also must be in car seats, wear helmets while riding bikes, and refrain from unhealthy eating at school. Kids can't operate heavy machinery, make contracts or buy cough syrup. Why, then, do we tolerate marketing directly to children? Issues have arisen in the past with direct marketing of food, cigarettes and cars among other products. But the latest controversy involves direct marketing of guns to children in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shootings.
If law reflects our values, what conclusions should be drawn about how we value childhood vs. business profits? This direct marketing seeks to cash in on a demographic that is not experienced enough to make wise decisions. Further, these marketing programs define culture for children by creating phony "suggestions" of what life should include. The question that I find myself asking my students on an increasingly regular basis is, "Is this the best that we can do?"
Image source: NY Times
If law reflects our values, what conclusions should be drawn about how we value childhood vs. business profits? This direct marketing seeks to cash in on a demographic that is not experienced enough to make wise decisions. Further, these marketing programs define culture for children by creating phony "suggestions" of what life should include. The question that I find myself asking my students on an increasingly regular basis is, "Is this the best that we can do?"
Image source: NY Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)