Week 9 EOC: Used Cars

1.       Theft of intellectual property

2.       Tamper with property

Week 10 EOC: Lawyer Jokes

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

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

The Truth About Lawyers. Retrieved on December 5, 2013 from http://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Lawyer.htm

Q. What's the difference between a lawyer and a terrorist?
A. You can negotiate with a terrorist.

Lawyer Jokes II. Retrieved on December 5, 2013 from http://www.lotsofjokes.com/lawyer_jokes_2.asp

What's the difference between a good lawyer and a great lawyer?
A good lawyer knows the law. A great lawyer knows the judge.

Lawyer Jokes. Retrieved on December 5, 2013 from http://brainden.com/lawyer-jokes.htm

Week 8 EOC: Bratz Brawl

Within the Barbie vs. Bratz court cases there are tons of things to figure out. Were the designs and ideas of the Bratz doll the property of Mattel or Carter Bryant? Why did Bryant go to Mattel's competition? The list goes on and on. The employee "Carter Bryant says he made the first drawings of his multi-ethnic, hip-hop inspired doll when he wasn't working for Mattel. Mattel says he came up with the idea while he was working for it." Where as Mattel is saying that "While still working for Mattel, Bryant went to MGA with sketches and a fairly simple model of a Bratz-style doll, constructed of a head from Mattel’s inventory, a Barbie body and Ken’s boots. Less than three months later, Bryant had left Mattel and was working for MGA. Mattel sued MGA, asserting that since Bryant designed the Bratz dolls while still working for Mattel, Mattel owned the concept and right to exploit the idea." It's hard to determine who is in the right. I guess it all depends about what was written in Bryant contract. I think that the idea should be the property of Bryant but if he used Mattel's materials or software then just those should be Mattel's property, and only those, no further materials. I feel that the Bratz doll has a extremely different personality than the Barbie doll, I think that Bratz would probably have more competition with the Monster High dolls because they look very similar to their designs. Barbie didn't really have any competition until the Bratz doll came out so what I'm wondering is that if Barbie were to get the rights to the Bratz doll will they keep it or just throw it away because it doesn't have the personality that Mattel is trying to represent? Good news is that "one of the more epic IP battles has come to an end. Mattel (Barbie) and MGA Entertainment (Bratz), have spent most of a decade in various courtrooms hashing out the ultra-serious question about which of these companies is entitled to the Bratz millions." They have spent millions going back and forth trying to sue each other for numerous things, such as Bryant stole right from them and then Mattel was found to have had employees use fake business cards to get secrets from MGA. To much foolishness going on I think that they just need to focus on their customers and making them happy. Growing up I personally preferred Bratz dolls because of all of the stylish outfits they had. 

Citations:

Barbie v. Bratz: The never-ending court battle. Retrieved on November 21, 2013 from http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/barbie-v-bratz-never-ending-court-battle 

It's Finally Over: 8 Years of Mattel vs. Bratz and No One's Getting Paid but the Lawyers. Retrieved on November 21, 2013 from http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121019/17344420768/its-finally-over-8-years-mattel-vs-bratz-no-ones-getting-paid-lawyers.shtml

Barbies vs. Bratz: Billion Dollar Battle. Retreieved on November 21, 2013 from http://scvnews.com/2013/09/20/barbie-vs-bratz-billion-dollar-battle-commentary-by-carl-kanowsky-esq/ 

Week 8 EOC: 10 Questions

1. Do you think that the Fair Labor Standards Act should provide the same protection to unpaid interns as it does to entry-level employees?

2. Are designer inspired goods the same as counterfeit goods? If so do you think those retailers selling them should get the same consequences? or do you think it should be addressed as a copyright, meaning should it be licensed?

3. Gwyneth Paltrow was recently accused of child abuse for her bikini targeted at children ages 4-8. Do you think that she violated the child Abuse Prevention & Treatment Act (CAPTA)?

4. Within the modeling industry sometimes underaged models pose nude, could they be in violation of the Child Abuse Prevention & Treatment Act? If so, do you think the blame would go towards the photographer, modeling agency, or parent?

5. Recently the Humane Society of the United States has caught retailers who have labeled their fur garments as "faux" when they were actually real. Would this be considered false advertising? If so how are companies able to get around this, meaning why aren't they getting stopped before the product is available for purchase?

6. Are retail companies allowed to pay under the state minimum wage? If so, for what reason? If not, would they be considered as running a sweatshop?

7. Is there any type of limit or record being kept for how many of each type of visa a company is applying for? Because recently an outsourcing company called Infosys was caught bringing in immigrants under a visa only meant for meetings.

8. When a U.S. retail company is found to be using sweatshops in other countries do they face legal consequences in the U.S. or in the country they were conducting business in?

9. When a designer uses a celebrity as its muse, does the celebrity and designer have a contract of some sort, and does the celebrity make any money from it?

10. When a retailer files its taxes is there any why to determine if they are paying its customers fairly?

Your Own Argument and Opinions

1. Yes I do agree with the reasoning that Lawyer Todd Uglow gave. At first when I was coming up with questions to ask Todd I thought "Hey, interns should get the same protection as employees," but then when I interviewed Todd he made a great point. Interns shouldn't get the same protection, he wasn't saying that they shouldn't get any protection at all, but that they should have something separate that the state should pay for. Employers have to pay for the protection that they give to their employees so if they would also have to be responsible for paying for the interns protection, companies may not want to provide opportunities for internships anymore.

2. This subject is a bit grey for me, on one hand I agree that yes we can grab inspiration from anything, but then I don't feel that it is fair that people can just grab bits and pieces from someone else's work and it will be okay. In the Lapine v. Seinfeld case I did feel bad that Lapine who came up with the idea first didn't win. "In any event, the total concept and feel of the two books is different. Deceptively Delicious lacks an extensive discussion of child behavior, food philosophy, and parenting. Its recipes are simpler. And it uses brighter colors and more photographs than The Sneaky Chef. In short, Lapine cannot copyright the idea of the book. And because the books look so different, it is clear that Seinfeld has not stolen the expression of Lapine's idea." I think that this issue has just begun and we will eventually find better and more efficient ways to help people protect the ideas that they come up with or at least give them more credit. 

3. I agreed with Todd Uglow that Gwyneth Paltrow did not violate any kind of child abuse laws. I think that people's opinion on what is considered child exploitation is so wide that anything could be considered wrong. 

4. When it comes to under-age modeling and nudity I do agree that the modeling agency should have some fault because they are the ones that represent the model and should put the model in harms way, but I also think that some of the consequences should go to the photographer if he owns the rights to the photos or the company(brand) if they are the ones that own the rights, and to the parent. 

5. "UNFAIR PRACTICES The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) prohibits unfair and deceptive acts or practices" I also agreed with the response that I got for this question as well. Saying that real fur is "faux" fur is false advertising because there are many people out there who are opposed to hurting or the harming of animals, and for them buying "faux" fur helps keep there conscious clear. But when retailers advertise the furs as "faux" when they aren't, it's unfair to their customers. It shows the customers that all the retailer cares about is making money and that is something retailers don't want their customers to think, that is why retailers try so hard to create a brand identity for themselves so that they can connect to their customers on a more personal level. So when retailers use false advertisements just to gain more money they are just throwing all of the money that they spend on branding and marketing away.  

6. I agree that yes companies do need to pay at least at the minimum wage of the state they are in or even higher, but a question that I forgot to ask was if a company could pay at the national minimum wage if they wanted to, or if they must pay at the wage addressed by the state. "In Washington, D.C., Congress is our national legislature. Congress passes the statutes that govern the nation. In addition, each state has a legislature, which passes statutes for that state only."

7. Todd says that all visa requests have to be approved, so what I think is strange is how was the outsourcing company Infosys able to get approved for thousands of B-1 visas that are only meant for short term stays, and why wasn't there anyone coming in to check if their visas were still valet, because they had many visas that had been expired for about three years. 

8. It makes sense that an America company conducting its business in a foreign country would face consequences in that country, but I think that they should face more serious consequences in the US instead of just bad publicity. My point of view on this situation is that if they are American citizens then they should comply with American standards in all countries that it does business in. I'm not saying that they shouldn't corporate with the laws of the foreign country. For example, the conduction of sweatshops are illegal in the US but in other countries its a way of living and surviving, so what I think is that a US company shouldn't be allowed to conduct its business in sweatshops around the world just because it's cheaper, and if they do that company should also get consequences within the US, this situation should be addressed as if it was committed in the States because they are a US citizen and know that its wrong.

9. I really never thought of a muse as an endorsement but it is. When a celebrity works with a designer as its "Muse" then its also like a celebrity endorser. But designers can also just get inspiration from these celebrities styles, personalities, and looks without them being an endorser, and the designer wouldn't be at fault. "It is a fundamental principle of our copyright doctrine that ideas, concepts, and processes are not protected from copying."

10. It does make sense that you would only be able to see if a company is paying their employees fairly if they are a publicly owned company, but when it comes to privately owned companies it will be a lot harder to find out because they don't have to provide the public with these documents if they do not want to. 

Citations:
Beatty, J. F., & Samuelson, S. S. (2012). Introduction to Business Law, 4th Ed. South-Western College Pub. Pages 6, 65, 129, 329, 330, 450, 460, 506

Rule of Law

"Judges generally follow precedent. When courts decide a case, they tend to apply the same legal rules that other courts have used in similar cases."

1."Workers' compensation statutes provide payment to employees for injuries incurred at work. In return, employees are not permitted to sue their employers for negligence. " Lawyer Todd Uglow thinks that interns shouldn't necessarily get the same protection as employees, because it wouldn't be fair to the employer for having to pay for it.


2.  In the Lapine v. Seinfeld case there was an issue as to if Seinfeld had violated Lapine's copyright because Seinfeld came up with a book that was similar to hers. "Reasoning: While it is true that the two books have a similar subject matter, no one can copyright the idea of stockpiling vegetable purees for secret use in children's food. It is a fundamental principle of our copyright doctrine that ideas, concepts, and processes are not protected from copying." The judge saw that yes the books were quiet similar but any book that would be within that category would be. "These features follow naturally from the work's theme rather than from the author's creativity." 


3. In the trial of the United States of America v. Angevine, Professor Angevine was sentenced to 51 months in prison for “knowing possession of child pornography.” Although the case does not go into detail of what the photos looked like it does say that "Professor Angevine used this computer to download more than 3,000 pornographic images of young boys." And for him to be convicted of a crime the pictures must be severe. So when it comes to the situation with Gwyneth Paltrow, her advertisements only showed a young girl in a bikini and nothing provocative or exploitative of young children.


4. In the case of Hernandez v. Arizona Board of Regents a fraternity was throwing a welcome party for the new member and required all of them to drink no matter their ages. John Rayner an intoxicated under aged teen left the party and drove home, creating a collision with Ruben Hernandez. Due to the crash Hernandez became blind and paralyzed. "Hernandez sued Rayner, who settled the case based on the amount of his insurance coverage. The victim also sued the fraternity, its officers and national organization, all the fraternity members who contributed money to buy the alcohol, the university, and others. The trial court granted summary judgment for all defendants, and the court of appeals affirmed. Hernandez appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court." The final decision was "Yes, the defendants did have a duty of due care to Hernandez. Reversed and remanded."

5. "Many deceptive acts or practices involve advertisements. Under the FTC Act, an advertisement is deceptive if it contains an important misrepresentation or omission that is likely to mislead a reasonable consumer." In the Federal Trade Commission v. Direct Marketing Concepts, Inc. case the FTC was claiming that Direct Marketing Concepts, Inc. and Barefoot were broadcasting informercials that were misleading. "Direct Marketing Concepts, Inc. broadcast an infomercial for Coral Calcium that featured a spokesperson named Robert Barefoot. In the ad, his claims were as bare as his feet. He asserted that these pills could cure virtually all diseases, including heart disease, cancer, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson's. To bolster these claims, Barefoot cited unspecified articles from prominent medical journals." The decision to this case was that yes, the informercials were misleading and no trial was needed.

6. "The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)  provides that hourly workers must be paid a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, plus time and a half for any hours over 40 in one week. More than half the states set a higher minimum wage, so it is important to check state guidelines as well." If any company pays lower than the minimum wages set will be in violation of the FLSA.

7. "Employers are required to verify their workers' eligibility for employment in the United States." The government can at anytime arrest illegal employees, but can also charge the company for hiring them. In my opinion I think that the employer should also be arrested for hiring them knowing that they weren't legally allowed to work in the USA. "Once a new worker has been hired, the employer must complete an I-9 form—Employment Eligibility Verification—within three days. The I-9 must be kept for three years after the worker is hired or one year after termination."

8. "The United States will be facing nations with unlimited pools of exploited labor. These countries will dominate labor-intensive merchandise such as textiles, eliminating millions of American jobs." Many American companies do their business through what is called international subsidiaries, which are foreign companies that are controlled by them, and in many cases these subsidiaries could be in countries that deny workers the protection that would be given to employees in the US.

9. In the Lapine V. Seinfeld case Lapine said that Seinfeld stole her ideas from her book. In this case it was ruled that Seinfeld didn't violate and of Lapine's copyrights.   "In short, Lapine cannot copyright the idea of the book. And because the books look so different, it is clear that Seinfeld has not stolen the expression of Lapine's idea." This could be directly related to the situation as to if a designer can just take inspiration from a celebrity, and they can, because you can't copyright the idea. 

10. Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 public companies are required to file:
"Annual reports on Form 10-K, containing audited financial statements, a detailed analysis of the company's performance, and information about officers and directors. A public company must also deliver its annual report to shareholders. Quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, which are less detailed than 10-Ks and contain unaudited financials. Form 8-K to report any significant developments, such as a change in control, the resignation of a director over a policy dispute, or a change in auditing firms." Congress has also came up with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which requires CEOs and CFOs to prove that the information in the quarterly and annual reports are true, that the company has effective internal control, and that the officers have informed the company's audit committee and its auditors of any concerns that they have about the internal control system.

Citations:
Beatty, J. F., & Samuelson, S. S. (2012). Introduction to Business Law, 4th Ed. South-Western College Pub. Pages 6, 129, 133, 329, 330, 450, 460, 487, 506

Reasoning of the Law

1. No employers shouldn't have to provide interns with the same legal protection as for their employees. Todd feels that if employers had to protect interns then they may not want to offer any internships anymore, due to having to pay for extra costs. He thinks that the state should have a pool of money that will go to the protection for interns.

2. No designer inspired goods are not the same as counterfeit items, because counterfeit is an exact copy with the logo, where as inspired goods are of a similar design but doesn't look the same as the original. "Because intellectual property is nonexclusive, many people see no problem in using it for free. But when consumers take intellectual property—movies, songs, and books—without paying for it, they ensure that fewer of these items will be produced." He also states that companies that design inspired items aren't at fault because we can grab inspiration from anything. "The holder of a copyright owns the particular expression of an idea, but not the underlying idea or method of operation."

3. Gwyneth Paltrow has gotten criticism about her bikini targeted towards girls from ages 4-8. There were organizations that were saying that she was sexually exploiting young girls in her campaign for the kid bikini. Todd searched it up during the interview as he was not familiar with situation, and when he saw it his thoughts were "You can go to the beach and see this, there is nothing exploiting about it." People have all different kinds of opinions and views on what is exploiting to young children and this isn't one of them.

4. This question was one that I have always wondered about, during this class, Contacts, Negotiations, and Copyrights, I have learned that even if a teacher confiscates a students phone with a nude picture on it then, that teacher will get in trouble for it. It seems that this issue is that sensitive and serious. I've wondered that since it seems very serious then why is the fashion industry able to advertise images of nude underage models? Todd says that yes in some cases the modeling industry is violating child protection laws, because the models would be under-aged, and that the blame and consequences should be put on the modeling agency that represents the model.

5. Recently one of the representatives from the Humane Society of the United States came to talk at my school to inform us about what was going on in the fur trade industry. We were told that there is a problem that is becoming more popular within the fur and retail industries which dues with falsely claiming fur as "faux" fur. Todd said that yes this is considered false advertising and that it is in violation of the FTC (Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act) prohibits “unfair and deceptive acts or practices.”) because it is unfair trade practice. I also asked him how does he think these industries have been able to get away with this. He said he thinks that the problem lies within Customs. In Customs they deal with a lot of imports so they are not always sufficient when they do checks and searches.

6. No companies are not allowed to pay under the state minimum wage because it would be in violation of unfair wages.

7. Recently an Outsourcing company called Infosys was caught bringing in immigrant workers under a B-1 visa which is meant for short stays such as business meeting and they cost $160 instead of a H-1B visa that is used for long term stays which is around three years and can cost up to $5,000 per individual. So I was wondering if there was any type of record or limit that was kept for how many of each type of visa a company applies for, and Todd said that all visa requests must be approved, and the company must keep renewing the visas if they still are in need of them. So now I'm wondering why the company approving these visas didn't find it weird that Infosys was requesting so many B-1 visas, no one can have that many meetings, that should have been a red flag.

8. I have always been curious as to if a company that is based in the United States but does its business overseas would face legal consequences from the US or from the country of which they are conducting it business in, if they are caught using sweatshops. Todd says that the company would face legal consequences in the country they are doing their business in and the only negative consequences that they would receive in the States would be bad publicity.

9. Lawyer Uglow says that in some cases a muse could be considered as an endorsement, it just depends. So then the celebrity would have a contract with the designer and would be paid. But a designer can also say that they were inspired by the celebrity and that would be protected under the First Amendment.

10. Todd says that the only way you will be able to tell if a company is paying its employees well based on the companies income tax, will be if the company is publicly owned, if it is privately owned the company's files will not be able be viewed to the public.

Citations:
Beatty, J. F., & Samuelson, S. S. (2012). Introduction to Business Law, 4th Ed. South-Western College Pub. Pages 450, 502, 506