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
For Your Glory Productions Law Blog
Friday, September 20, 2013
Friday, September 13, 2013
Week 10 EOC: Lawyer Jokes
·
Q: What do you call a smiling, courteous person
at a bar association convention?
A: The caterer.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
A: Senator.
·
Q: How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?
A: Their lips are moving.
A: Their lips are moving.
·
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.
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."
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)