Week 8 EOC: Legal Questions

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?

Week 7 EOC: Progress on finding a lawyer

In my quest to find a lawyer I plan to ask my friends about the lawyers that they know. There is a woman at my church that is in law school studying entertainment law  she  knows quite a few people.  I also have a friend in California that is a lawyer. I am going to try and find someone locally first and if I can't I will call my friend Kara. My daughter attended Veterans Tribute Career and Technical Academy which is a high school that specializes in law enforcement and one of her teachers is a lawyer.  I will try talking to him as well. If that doesn't work then I will just start calling lawyers in the yellow pages.

Week 6 EOC: Illicit Trade

When it comes to buying knockoff merchandise I must admit that I am guilty. I never gave much thought to the original designer and how this would affect their business. My only thought was that I wanted it, but could not afford the name brand. I never gave thought I was hurting anyone, I was just trying to get something nice. When I worked as a Casino Floor Supervisor, I would have people give me gifts all the time. The gifts ranged from food to purses and jewelry. I was told that they were knockoff bags, but I didn’t really care. I didn’t carry a purse and I thought that they looked nice.

Having four children also keeps me on the lookout for deals. I want my kids to have nice things and look like everyone else, so buying knockoff items seemed ok. Sometimes the knockoffs are so well made the only indicator that they are not real is the price. Thinking about it now I can understand why the designers would be upset. Knockoffs reduce the value and water down the market for an item. 

Week 5 EOC: Apple-Samsung Patent Battle

I wasn't too familiar with this topic so I had to do a lot of reading. The fight began in 2011 when Apple began litigation against Samsung for patent infringement. Apple sued its component supplier Samsung, alleging in a 38-page federal complaint on April 15, 2011 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California that several of Samsung's Android phones and tablets, including the Nexus S, Epic 4G, Galaxy S 4G, and the Samsung Galaxy Tab, infringed on Apple’s intellectual property: its patents, trademarks, user interface and style.( Kane, Yukari Iwatani; Sherr, Ian (April 19, 2011). "Apple: Samsung Copied Design". The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company.) Apple presented side by side image comparisons of both its products and the Samsung products in question. It was later determined that the images were tampered with to make the products seem more similar. Samsung later counter-sued Apple alleging that Apple infringed their patents for mobile communications technology.

Today the U.S International Trade commission ruled that Samsung infringes on portions of two Apple Inc patents on digital mobile devices, covering the detection of headphone jacks and the operation of touchscreens. Several Samsung devices will potentially be prohibited from being imported, sold, and distributed in the Us. In this ongoing war between these two giants, we, the consumer, will suffer. The ruling was the latest in a patent battle between Apple and Samsung that has spread across several countries as the companies vie for market share in the lucrative mobile industry. Samsung and Apple are the Nos. 1 and 2 smartphone makers. But it comes less than a week after the Obama administration overturned an ITC decision from June that would have banned the sales of some older-model Apple iPhones and iPads in the United States for violating Samsung patents. (http://www.reuters.com) I believe that if they were not the top two makers this would be a non- issue.  It makes me wonder that if they could have come to some sort of agreement to share the technology instead of fighting it out in court. Samsung’s incurred costs associated with try to correct the problem so that the devices will work around the infringement will probably be passed on to consumers. The ITC banned Samsung from importing or selling some devices that infringe on the Apple patents. While the devices Apple mentioned in the case are older Samsung products -- like the Galaxy Tab 7 tablet and the Continuum smartphone -- the ITC's ruling could have implications for phones currently on the market that use the same technology. But Samsung has the chance to release software updates to work around the infringement -- for example, customers would still use multitouch the same way they always did, but Samsung would change how that worked from a technical perspective. (http://www.kvia.com/money).  I don’t think that this will ever be resolved. These two companies will always have something to fight about. I think in technology everyone takes something that has already been invented and tries to make it better. There is room for improvement in everything. That being said when an improvement is made then credit needs to be given where credit is due and get proper permissions.

Week 4 EOC: Edward Snowden

There has been a lot of controversy lately over the Edward Snowden case. There is no doubt that he leaked classified NSA documents, the question is how he should be prosecuted. Snowden has said that he just wanted the public to know what the government was doing.  "Even if you're not doing anything wrong you're being watched and recorded," he said. (http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/10/politics/edward-snowden-profile/index.html?iid=article_sidebar#cnn-disqus-area)

It doesn't surprise me to hear that the government is collecting information on everyone, but at the same time I believe that Mr. Snowden violated his contract and broke the law. In the same situation I would be very upset if I found out the information that he did, but he should have told his story in a different way. Some have called him a whistle blower, Without Edward Snowden's whistleblowing and Glenn Greenwald's reporting, NSA surveillance would still have been in the dark, protected by secrecy and bolstered by the "least untruthful" lies James Clapper delivered to Senator Ron Wyden. (theguardian.com), but is he guilty of treason? “This guy thinks he has a higher morality, that he can see clearer than other 299,999,999  of us, and therefore he can do what he wants. I say that is the worst form of treason.” — former U.N. ambassador John Bolton.

This is just one of many that have accused Mr. Snowden of treason, but there are some that don’t agree. In my quest to find out more information about this case I found an article in the Washington Post that gives a good definition of treason; Article Three, Section Three of the Constitution defines treason as follows: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.” (washingtonpost.com). Is Mr. Snowden guilty, yes, the question what will he be charged with. In my opinion if he really believes in what he did, then he needs to come home and face the consequences. He never denied what he did, so why run? 

Week 3 EOC: Rolling Stone Magazine

Looking at the Rolling Stone article about the Boston bomber the question was raised, “Can Jahar receive a fair trial?” When I heard the story about Rolling Stone on the news I formed my opinion before I actually read the article. I assumed, based on the photo on the cover that the magazine was looking to paint a glamorous picture of this guy.

After reading the article that isn't the case. So, under the law, does this article pose any issues. The author uses a lot of personal accounts from friends and neighbors of the suspect, but how accurate of a picture can we really get from these statements? Criminal law is a balancing act—between making society safe and protecting us all from false accusations and unfair punishment. ( Introduction to Business Law pg 108)

With the publishing of this article, is it possible to for the defendant to receive a fair trail with an unbiased jury. The article paints a grim picture of Jahar's family life and an even darker picture of his family. The author implies that his father was a very angry man, his mother was a religious and his once fun loving older brother that he looked up to, turned into someone that was very religious and controlling. Based on the article, the defense can say that he was afraid of  his older brother and that's why he did it. If this is true he cannot be found guilty. A defendant is not guilty of a crime if she was forced to commit it. In other words, she is not guilty if she acted under duress. ( Introduction to Business Law pg 108). The author talks to mostly people in the neighborhood and his friends. Everything that is talked about is the opinion of others based on their observations of the suspect and the side of himself that he allowed others to see. There are no interviews with the family. The defendant can argue that the article has made it impossible to find an impartial jury and he cannot have a trial by jury which is his right.  A criminal defendant has a right to a trial by jury for any charge that could result in a sentence of six months or longer. ( Introduction to Business Law pg 109)

Week 2 EOC: Stand Your Ground

Stand Your Ground

What is Florida’s Stand Your Ground law?

It is a law that allows people to stand their ground instead of retreating if they believe doing so is necessary to “prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” But what does this really mean? It means that people could defend themselves, even outside of their homes, with deadly force if necessary if they believe their life is in danger.

                In 2005 after a 39-0 vote in the state Senate and a 94-20 vote in the state House Gov. Jeb Bush signed it. The National Rifle Association lobbied hard for the measure, while law enforcement officials like Miami’s police chief opposed it. Defenders of the law often cited the 2004 case of James Workman, a retiree asleep in his RV who shot an intruder and had to wait months before prosecutors decided he engaged is self-defense. Opponents worried the law would encourage the use of deadly force. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/07/15/everything-you-need-to-know-about-stand-your-ground-laws/

                Since the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and the not guilty verdict of George Zimmerman, many Democratic leaders and protesters have urged Florida governor Rick Scott to either repeal the law or enact changes to avert more tragedies. The Zimmerman verdict demonstrated the ramifications of the 2005 law, Florida Senate Democratic leader Chris Smith said. "This bill actually encourages people to shoot their way out of situations and that's not how we live in a civilized society," Smith told a news conference. "It's a mentality that has permeated the state of Florida. It's a mentality of shoot first, and we should not have that in a civilized society." http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/19/us-usa-florida-shooting-lawmakers-idUSBRE96I05020130719
            Attorney general Eric Holder spoke at the annual convention of the NAACP and condemned “stand your ground.” The statutes, which have been enacted in more than 30 states, have become the focus of a complicated national debate over race, crime and culpability since the shooting of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old, by a neighborhood watch volunteer in Sanford, Fla. The volunteer, George Zimmerman, was acquitted of murder charges Saturday. “These laws try to fix something that was never broken,” Holder told cheering delegates of the annual convention of the NAACP, which is pressing him to file civil rights charges against Zimmerman. “The list of resulting tragedies is long and, unfortunately, has victimized too many who are innocent.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/naacp-urges-eric-holder-do-the-right-thing/2013/07/16/530425da-ee49-11e2-9008-61e94a7ea20d_story.html

I believe that this law needs to be looked at and revised to ensure the safety of all parties.