Week 9 EOC: Wall Street Journal Opinion

The subject of marijuana legalization is a big issue. In this article I feel as if the writers tone says that he is not a supporter of the President and no matter what he does there will be an issue. I don’t think the article has anything to do with the legalization of marijuana, but what the writer feels is an injustice by the President. “Not since Nixon have we seen a Presidency so disdainful of the law, but at least Nixon had enough respect for legal appearances to break the law on the sly. This Administration simply declares it won't enforce the laws it doesn't like and calls it virtue. The media then give this a pass because Mr. Obama's decisions mesh with their own policy preferences.” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323324904579044771286022400.html. The writer believes that marijuana legalization is more political than personal. ”The Administration's motivation on marijuana is politics, not the law. The politics of pot is changing, but more rapidly in Democratic-leaning states than across the country. It may be that a majority of Americans would favor decriminalizing the individual possession of small amounts of marijuana, but then Congress ought to debate and vote on it.” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323324904579044771286022400.html I agree. I believe that all politicians do whatever it takes to win votes and win over the people. They are going to do and say whatever is necessary to make themselves and their party look good. In my opinion, Politicians are also out to try and make history. They don’t want to be known for things that are negative in public opinion. I believe that this issue is a waste of time and there are more important pressing issues that we could be focusing on. I do agree that you can’t change laws that you don’t like for some while making them apply to others. I believe that if they are going to make it legal then it needs to be legal for all. Congress needs to vote on it and change the 1970 law. “All states are explicitly barred from regulating the possession, use, distribution and sale of pot and narcotics under the federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Like it or not, Congress declared marijuana to be a dangerous drug that should be banned.” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323324904579044771286022400.html

Week 10 EOC: Lawyer Jokes

http://www.iciclesoftware.com/LawJokes/IcicleLawJokes.html

·         Q: What do you call a smiling, courteous person at a bar association convention?
A: The caterer.

·         Q: What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 100?
A: Your Honor.
Q: What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50
A: Senator.

·         Q: What's the difference between an accountant and a lawyer?
A: Accountants know they're boring.

·         Q: How can a pregnant woman tell that she's carrying a future lawyer?
A: She has an uncontrollable craving for bologna

·         Q: How does an attorney sleep?
A: First he lies on one side, then he lies on the other.

·         Q: How many lawyer jokes are there?
A: Only three. The rest are true stories.

·         Q: How many lawyers does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: Three, One to climb the ladder. One to shake it. And one to sue the ladder company.

·         Q: What do you call a lawyer gone bad.
A: Senator.

·         Q: How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?
A: Their lips are moving.

http://www.jokes.com/funny-lawyer-jokes/ant3u4/50-50

·         Q: What do you get when you put 50 lawyers in a room with 50 lesbians?

A: One hundred people who don't do dick.

http://mason.gmu.edu/~rrotunda/lawyer.htm

A man nervously dialed the office of his attorney.  "I'd like to speak to my lawyer," he told the secretary who answered the phone.

"I'm sorry, sir," the secretary told him, "but he has passed away.  He's dead."  The man hung up with a mumbled "Thank-you."

A week later, though, he called back.  "Could I talk to my lawyer?" he asked.  "Haven't we spoken before, sir?"  the secretary inquired.  "I could have sworn I talked to you last week. He's dead."  "OK," said the caller.  "Sorry to bother you."

Only seven days afterward, though, the secretary heard a by-now-familiar voice at the other end of the line. "Is there any chance

you could connect me with my lawyer?" the man wanted to know.

By now, the secretary was exasperated.  "I know we've spoken before, sir. I've told you: he's dead!  Why do you keep calling back?

Don't you get it? He's dead!"

The man paused before he answered.  "I know, I know . . . . I just enjoy hearing it so much!

·         A man and a woman were conversing at a party. The woman said: "Lawyers are jerks." The man responded: "I take offense to that remark." "Why," said the woman. "Are you a lawyer?" "No," he responded: "I'm a jerk."

·         A man woke up in a hospital bed and called for his doctor. He asked, "Give it to me straight. How long have I got?" The physician replied that he doubted that the man would survive the night. The man then said, "Call for my lawyer." When the lawyer arrived, the man asked for his physician to stand on one side of the bed, while the lawyer stood on the other. The man then laid back and closed his eyes. When he remained silent for several minutes, the physician asked what he had in mind. The man replied "Jesus died with a thief on either side. I just thought I'd check out the same way."

Your Own Argument and Opinions

I agree with the rulings because I feel that everyone should be given credit for their work. “ It is illegal to delete copyright information, such as the name of the author or the title of the article.” In order to insure that people are given credit for their work it is important to make sure that artists, author, creator, etc. takes the time to copyright and/or trademark their work. The trademark can also be used internationally. “The Berne Convention requires member countries to provide automatic copyright protection to any works created in another member country.”  It is not fair to a creator for someone to claim an artist’s work or use the work for their own personal gain. However, it is the responsibility of the creator to ensure that their work is protected, and it is the responsibility of the other person to make sure they have obtained the necessary permissions and consents to use that particular work. Although as a consumer I didn't see the harm in copying a cd, or downloading a song, now that I am beginning to produce works of my own I understand why artists are upset. No one likes to work for free. “The doctrine of fair use permits limited use of copyrighted material without permission of the author for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, scholarship, or research. Courts generally do not permit a use that will decrease revenues from the original work by, say, competing with it. A reviewer is permitted, for example, to quote from a book without the author's permission, but could not reproduce so much that the review was competing with the book itself.” Beatty, J. (2012) Going forward I will be more careful in what I share, post, or use in a public setting. 

Rule of Law

When naming your business a name search should be done so that you can avoid copyright infringement. “A trademark is any combination of words and symbols that a business uses to identify its products or services and distinguish them from others.” Beatty, J. (2012). According to the lawyer “In short, the answer is yes, this is a problem of trademark infringement. There are typically four issues to consider in trademark issues: whether the two companies are in the same industry, whether they overlap geographically, who was using the name first, and who registered the trademark first. Here, you and the competitor are clearly in the same industry and, as you described the other party as “established…in the US”, it is likely that your geographic markets will overlap. Your best bet is to select a different name for your production company and be sure to do your due diligence in ensuring it is original and available for your production company to use.” 

                Copyrights seemed to be a common theme in my questions. “It is illegal to delete copyright information, such as the name of the author or the title of the article. It is also illegal to distribute false copyright information." Beatty, J. (2012) It is illegal to take the work of another and remove their name and use it as your own. “It is illegal to circumvent encryption or scrambling devices that protect copyrighted works” Beatty, J. (2012) This means that you cannot say, remove the encryption from things like dvds because they are copyrighted. This is a good thing to remember as I begin to make my films.There is also protection for films and works that are shown overseas.”The Berne Convention requires member countries to provide automatic copyright protection to any works created in another member country. The protection expires 50 years after the death of the author.” Beatty, J. (2012) This will be useful information for me to know as the church begins to grow and expand. 
It is really easy to find used cds at garage sales and this is perfectly legal. “Under the first sale doctrine, you have the legal right to sell that CD. The first sale doctrine permits a person who owns a lawfully made copy of a copyrighted work to sell or otherwise dispose of that copy.” Beatty, J. (2012) I often wondered about this. 

“Also under the fair use doctrine, faculty members are permitted to photocopy and distribute copyrighted materials to students, so long as the materials are brief and the teacher's action is spontaneous.” Beatty, J. (2012)

“Under common law, the first person to use a mark in trade owns it. Registration under the federal Lanham Act is not necessary. However, registration has several advantages:

• Even if a mark has been used in only one or two states, registration makes it valid nationally.

• Registration notifies the public that a mark is in use, which is helpful because anyone who applies for registration first searches the Public Register to ensure that no one else has rights to the mark.

• The holder of a registered trademark generally has the right to use it as an Internet domain name.” Beatty, J. (2012)

Reasoning of the Law

I believe that the answers I received were very straight forward and to the point. All of the answers were explained the way that they were in class and don't stray from what I read in the book. I believe that if i do what she told me I will be protected. Having the answers written down gives me a good reference point to go back to. I think she gave some sound advice. ”Anyone who uses copyrighted material without permission is violating the Copyright Act. To prove a violation, the plaintiff must present evidence that the work was original and that either: the infringer actually copied the work; or the infringer had access to the original and the two works are substantially similar.” Beatty, J. (2012)

1.            I've asked one of my friend's kids to act in my film and the parents have given permission. Do I need to get the license from my local authority?

In addition to securing a personal release from the child’s parent or legal guardian, you will need to ensure that the child has obtained an entertainment work permit through the state department of labor. The personal release should provide you all rights to use, edit and own all rights to the film. The work release requires an application to be completed by the parent or guardian and may require the parent or guardian to work with the school district to meet the educational obligations of the state during filming.

2.            My documentary doesn't show the contributors I filmed in a very favorable light. I have got all the contributor clearances but could they sue me for the way I presented them?

Technically, people can file a lawsuit (“sue you”) with or without a legitimate reason, so your objective as a filmmaker is to ensure all available legal protections are in place to protect yourself from any potential liability. That said, your best protection is to present all information truthfully and accurately because a claim of defamation requires the aggrieved party to prove the falsehood of the information presented. It is critical that you present the information within your documentary truthfully and accurately and maintain copious notes (and film clips, interviews, articles used for background research, etc) regarding the sources of your information in order to provide yourself the greatest protection against accusations of defamation.

3.              I've recently discovered that the name of my production company is also being used by an established feature film production company in the US. Is this a problem? What can I do about it?

In short, the answer is yes, this is a problem of trademark infringement. There are typically four issues to consider in trademark issues: whether the two companies are in the same industry, whether they overlap geographically, who was using the name first, and who registered the trademark first. Here, you and the competitor are clearly in the same industry and, as you described the other party as “established…in the US”, it is likely that your geographic markets will overlap. Your best bet is to select a different name for your production company and be sure to do your due diligence in ensuring it is original and available for your production company to use.

4.            A character in a film is reading a novel by a famous author. Do I need to get clearances for this?

Anything in your film not created entirely by you or part of the public domain will have to be accompanied by the appropriate clearances before your film may be copied, distributed or sold. This includes the script itself, any music, locations, products, contributors or logos that might appear or be used in making your film. In some cases, you may be able to find what you need through a Creative Common License, a system under which the artist retains copyright but allows use of his or her works as long as you give credit (some additional conditions may apply as well).

5.             I have used a brand logo in my film but have disguised it by calling the company a different name (a pun on their name). The design is otherwise identical though. Does this count as a breach of copyright?

If the faux logo simply appears in the background of your film, you will likely not encounter any trademark issues. However, if the brand is a plot point and/or disparages the actual brand in any way, you may run into issues of trademark infringement or libel.

6.            I made a film whilst at film school. It was not part of my course but I did use the school facilities. Does this mean they own the copyright?

Generally, the copyright is owned first by the author or creator of the product, but many film schools have established policies that provide the institution first copyright based on the use of the school’s resources. It is essential that you review your school’s policy on use of school resources and copyright before attempting to distribute your film.

7.            My film is loosely based upon a short story that I read. I've credited this in the film but I haven't purchased any adaptation rights. Do I need to?

Unless the story is in the public domain, you will likely need to obtain the rights to adapt the story for your commercial film.

8.             How can a filmmaker ensure her film doesn't end up being used without her permission, such as being posted by others on YouTube or screened at a festival without having applied?

Ensuring complete protection of your film is a nearly impossible task, especially with the opportunities for uploading and sharing over the internet…as evidenced by the struggle the music industry has had in controlling the distribution of their products. However, it is nevertheless essential that you take all precautions to protect your products, including registering trademarks and being vigilant when and if you do find unauthorized uses of your product. That is, be prepared to back up your copyright through the work of your Intellectual Property attorney as necessary.

9.               Music licensing is another big issue for a lot of filmmakers. Are there major differences between clearing archival rights for images and music rights?

Essentially, the process for obtaining rights to use music and images is quite similar – find the owner, ask for permission to use their product, get the permission in writing. However, it is often more difficult to track down the owner of a particular image, especially if you found it on the internet. However, once the actual owner of the image is found, it should be fairly easy to obtain permission (or discover that they won’t allow your use of their image). Finding the source of the music might be easier, but there may be a number of people/entities that have rights to the same piece of music. That is, you may have to obtain permission to use the music from the performer, the writer of both the lyrics and music, the producer, the musicians, and any number of other folks involved in the process who retain right to that particular piece of music.

10.          When it comes to archival material, many filmmakers use a combination of resources with some coming from professional sources with fixed rates and standard contracts (such as news archives or footage houses) and others from non-professional sources (such as home movies or photos from the characters in the film). Does a filmmaker need to clear those rights too? What kind of agreement is needed for non-professional sourced material?

Technically, there is no distinction in the copyright protection between “professional sources” and “non-professional sources” – you need the same permissions to use anything that you did not create yourself. While a “non-professional source” may be less likely to seek damages due to your use of their product, it is still in your best interest to obtain all permissions and clearances for every source used in your film. “For much of history, the copyright term was limited to 28 years. Now it is as long as 120 years.” Beatty, J. (2012)

The Questions

When choosing my questions I tried to find situations that I might find myself in. I intend to work in the video ministry of my church and there are a few situations that can occur. Churches use music by different artists, services are recorded and sometimes televised, and at times, the congregation is used in advertisements. I fell that these questions are relevant for me both while in school and after I graduate. 

1.            I've asked one of my friend's kids to act in my film and the parents have given permission. Do I need to get the license from my local authority?

2.            My documentary doesn't show the contributors I filmed in a very favorable light. I have got all the contributor clearances but could they sue me for the way I presented them?

3.              I've recently discovered that the name of my production company is also being used by an established feature film production company in the US. Is this a problem? What can I do about it?

4.            A character in a film is reading a novel by a famous author. Do I need to get clearances for this?

5.             I have used a brand logo in my film but have disguised it by calling the company a different name (a pun on their name). The design is otherwise identical though. Does this count as a breach of copyright?

.

6.            I made a film whilst at film school. It was not part of my course but I did use the school facilities. Does this mean they own the copyright?

7.            My film is loosely based upon a short story that I read. I've credited this in the film but I haven't purchased any adaptation rights. Do I need to?

8.             How can a filmmaker ensure her film doesn't end up being used without her permission, such as being posted by others on YouTube or screened at a festival without having applied?

9.               Music licensing is another big issue for a lot of filmmakers. Are there major differences between clearing archival rights for images and music rights?

.

10.          When it comes to archival material, many filmmakers use a combination of resources with some coming from professional sources with fixed rates and standard contracts (such as news archives or footage houses) and others from non-professional sources (such as home movies or photos from the characters in the film). Does a filmmaker need to clear those rights too? What kind of agreement is needed for non-professional sourced material?

Legal Authority

The person that I chose to contact is my friend, Kara Mackillop. I met Kara in 2007 when I worked as a pit supervisor at Texas Station. She had just moved to Las Vegas with her family and liked to play craps. Although I didn't like to get personal with the players, we would always talk when her and her partner came to play craps. In March of 2008, my oldest son went into cardiac arrest while he was in school and I missed a month of work. When Kara and her partner heard what happened, they called me and said they wanted to do something for me and my family. I was shocked that people that I had just met showed that much concern for us. They bought us a month’s worth of groceries. We began to talk more and more and I learned that Kara was a lawyer and she was working on getting licensed in Nevada. She is such an intelligent and good hearted person and I trust her. I know that she will give me the correct advice for whatever situation I am in. She has since moved to California, but didn't hesitate when I asked her for help with this project. She even told me that if she didn't know the answer she knew other lawyers that would. I think Kara was the perfect choice for me because I know she will always be completely honest and will always have my best interests at heart.