Law Firm Claims Rival Sucked Up Business
By Copying And Hijacking Their Website
We are taught not to copy a person’s work since it can get us in trouble. According to an article by Above The Law, a law firm is suiting another firm on the basis of copying and hijacking their website.
In Illinois, Motta & Motta is suing Dolci & Weiland over the alleged hijacking and plagiarism. The suit claims that Dolci capitalized on Motta’s reputation by using website hashtags and headers to mislead search engines into believing Motta’s website is Dolci’s website. According to the suit allegations, Dolci & Weiland’s website mirrored Motta’s copyrighted design and content and even copied (verbatim) articles and blogs on Motta’s website.
In school, we are taught many basic principles such as reading, writing, mathematics, but we also introduced into many ethical values as well, such as responsibility, quality, leadership, respect, and honesty. One way these ethical values are exercised is through integrity and not committing plagiarism. This article brings up some interesting points relating to privacy, defamation, and fraud and how Dolci’s law firm was acting unlawfully. Instead of Dolci taking the time to create their website and content, they are now facing a lengthy legal process that is going to cost them a lot of money!
————————– Questions:
1) In what situations is it against the law to impersonate someone online?
2) When would impersonating a person online be a form of fraud, or why would it not be a fraud?
3) The law firm that claimed to be victimized specifically mentioned hashtags in their complaint. Hashtags are basically hyperlinks: text that results in being connected to related information. If the law firm sued only over the plagiarism of the hashtags on their website, why do you think they would or would not have a good chance of winning their case in court? Be specific by using other lawsuits or trademark and copyright news articles as examples when creating your response.*
*Hint #1: Are companies guaranteed websites with their names?
*Hint #2: What are some examples of trademarks, copyrights, and the differences between the two?
Be sure to provide full explanations for each of your answers. For more details, you can read the article this piece was sourced from here:
Golden Answers & Golden Knights:
Questions About Laws and Fighting!
When two players get into fight in hockey, when two boxers hit each other during a boxing match, and when two UFC fighters engage in combat during a bout, they have all agreed to participate in the fight. When they are done fighting, no one is arrested.
If two people at a social gathering start to argue and agree to ‘step outside’ to fight each other, the police may be called and each of the combatants may end up facing charges including assault, battery, malicious mischief, breach of peace, challenges to fight, or provoking assault. ————————– Question:
1) What laws or policies allow for two people that fight during sporting events to not face criminal charges (even though the fights are witnessed by thousands of people), yet two people who consent to fight each other and engage in violence outside of a sporting event will probably face many different criminal charges for their fight?
2) What policies exist specifically in Nevada related to the last question about fighting in sports?
Be sure to provide full explanations for each of your answers. For more details, you can read the article this piece was sourced from here:
Seriously Stupid:
Swatting a School Shooting Survivor
A quick note for the olds: Swatting is when emergency services (like 911) are called by someone who hides their identity and falsely claims an incident that requires an immediate and armed response from law enforcement is taking place at an address. Swatting is a way to harass – and possibly harm – an intended victim by fraudulently provoking a police raid at their location.
During Spring 2018 in Parkland, Florida, local police responded to a call that claimed Parkland shooting survivor and anti-gun activist David Hogg was being held hostage. The caller claimed Hogg and his family were being held hostage by someone armed with an AR-15. Police showed up to his house “prepared for a shootout with an armed menace”. Shortly after arriving at the scene, the responding officers discovered that not only had the caller been lying, but that Hogg was actually out of town at the time.
On social media Hogg downplayed the incident, describing it a poorly-thought-out prank. Hogg had a reason for playing it cool though – after surviving the slaughter at his school on Valentine’s Day in 2018, he’s been a target for harassment from gun rights activist and conspiracy theorists. By downplaying the swatting incident and acting like it’s no big deal, Hogg was communicating to swatters that they are wasting their time trying to provoke fear or anguish in him.
Despite how Hogg reacted to the incident publically, swatting is an extremely dangerous act that needs to be taken seriously. It wastes police resources that might be needed somewhere where a real emergency is taking place, and the so-called prank can even result in death.
In December 2017, a 28 year old was killed by police that were responding to an emergency call. In a call to 911, a swatter claimed that a man had killed his father and was holding the rest of his family hostage in their home. When a young man opened the door at the house that was being ‘swatted’, police shot him thinking he was the gunman that had been reported. He died shortly after that. Given that the December 2017 swatting death was national news at the time, the person who attempted to swat David Hogg just a few month later knew there was a chance Hogg (or a member of his family) could have been inadvertently shot or injured by police.
————————– Questions:
1) Though the specific definition changes by jurisdiction, generally speaking ‘attempted murder’ is when someone has intent to carry out a murder or takes a substantial step towards committing a murder. Considering the circumstances of the attempted swatting of David Hogg, do you believe the swatter – if he or she were ever identified – could be convicted of attempted murder? Why or why not? What other charges might a person face if they were identified as being a person behind a swatting call to police?
Terror & Tyranny at the Theme Park:
Family Assaulted at Six Flags
Amusement parks go above and beyond to entertain their guests during Halloween each year. In Fright Fest at Six Flags, everyone is up for a good scare. The extra scares are appreciated, but the fall season also seems to bring an increase in bad behavior by some park attendees. What nobody wants is to come home injured or assaulted, but unfortunately, that fear became a reality for one innocent family.
The family – an elderly couple and their 12 year old son – was attempting to ride one of the thrill rides at the park. While waiting in line, a group of friends cut in front of the family. Skipping over the fact that the group had cut in front of them, the woman asked the group to at least stop using unpleasant language around her child.
That is when an attack began.
The 12 year old boy was physically seized upon by the group that had cut in front of his family. The mother and father attempted to intervene, but were quickly overwhelmed by the sizable group. The family continued to be assaulted with punches, kicks, and stomps by their attackers until they submitted to the violence and fell to the ground.
Security at Six Flags broke up the attack quickly after a passersby reported the incident. The attackers spread out in an attempt to escape, but fortunately most of them were prevented from getting away after security cornered them in the parking lot.
Local police reported to the scene, and a total of nine suspects were arrested & charged. Later on, the city’s police chief commented that more suspects may have gotten away. With this concern in mind, the police urged anyone with evidence to submit it to them. As the police chief explained “We know there’s a video out there. People had their phones out, but we have not gotten any additional video yet.”
Following the incident the family was rushed off and received care for their injuries, though eventually all three of them were discharged.
———————— Questions, Part 1:
Amusement parks have a lot of discretion in deciding what they allow to occur on their property. They have a duty to protect those who come, which is why they deal with high safety standards and inspections for their rides. The parks also allow a wide range of people to come in and enjoy themselves though.
1.1) Is the process to enter an amusement park too easy?
1.2) Should Six Flags be held financially or criminally responsible for the family’s injuries? What makes them responsible or not responsible?
1.3) If you think Six Flags is responsible, what can they do to prevent attacks like these in the future? If you don’t believe they’re responsible, what laws absolve them of that responsibility?
Questions, Part 2: Research your response!
2) The family of the incident experienced emotional and physical damage from the attack. What consequences will the assailants that were caught face?
Questions, Part 3: According to the park, attacks like these are uncommon, “This is rare.” was the official line from park representatives, yet still the park was prepared for possible incidents like these, having doubled security patrols during holiday seasons. Meanwhile, even with the double patrols, not all of the assailants were detained. Consider the fact that some of the suspects were able to get away and that police are hoping cell phone footage will help identify the remaining suspects. That means the park didn’t have sufficient security camera coverage to identify all of the assailants. With that in mind….
3.1) Should the family place blame on Six Flags for negligence based on the failure of it’s video security?
3.2) Should seasonal events like this continue when the parks know they pose a risk of an increase in violent or otherwise troubling incidents?
3.3) Some of the attackers in the incident were minors. Assuming their parents weren’t with them in the park, should the park be held responsible for allowing large groups of minors to be there without proper supervision?
3.4) What rules should be made for youth at parks, and should there be laws establishing standards for these rules (explain your answer – why or why not)?
3.5) Should security keep a closer eye on young adults at parks? What would lead them to be to strike out like this in such a large force?
Be sure to provide full explanations for your answers. For more details, you can read the articles this piece was sourced from here:
https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/frightening-fest-family-attacked-beaten-by-teenagers-at-six-flags/
– Submitted by J. Floyd
Did Russia Consider Returning Snowden to the US?
We May Never Know…
In February 2017, reports were circulating that Russia was considering sending Edward Snowden back to the US “as a gift for President Donald Trump” as reported by NBC. At the time, NBC cited an unnamed senior US official who has reviewed intelligence on the matter.
Edward Snowden has lived in Russia since 2013 and recently launched a campaign with his legal team to get him pardoned. Snowden still faces being charged with leaking classified information and treason for his pivotal role in the months-long releases of information about America’s digital surveillance programs, should he return to the United States.
In April 2017 however, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said publicly that Edward Snowden can stay in Russia until he decides to leave for himself. When asked, Zakharova did not clarify on if Russia would consider extraditing Snowden to the U.S. at a later point in time.
This post is about more than just an update to a news story about privacy law and policy. The difference in tone, content, and conclusion (or lack thereof) between the stories should lead readers to question the reliability of news stories that speculate. In an age where people of all political leanings and affiliations make claims of fake news, we encourage the students we connect with to consume all media – no matter the source – with critical eyes.
————————– Questions:
1) Why do you believe Edward Snowden’s Leaks were a good or bad thing?
2) Why do you believe Edward Snowden’s should or should not be punished for leaking the information that he did?
3) Why do you believe Edward Snowden’s should or should not be pardoned?
Be sure to provide full explanations for each of your answers. For more details, you can read the articles this piece was sourced from here:
Man Drags Unconscious Passenger Off
Blue Line Train in Long Beach, CA:
Witness Said He Wanted to Avoid Delay
On August 3rd of 2018, a video surfaced from California as a man in a suit drags an unconscious man off the train to avoid delay.
Controversial as this incident may be, the video depicts a white male in a suit dragging an unconscious black man. During the incident, the white male was recorded by a passenger on the train. The passenger explained how the unconscious man was wearing a medical bracelet, had metal staples in his skull, and threw up before going unconscious. In the video, onlookers expressed their anger towards the man in the suit by saying he had no right to assume he was partying, per an eyewitness. As an act of retaliation towards the man in the suit, the passengers held the train doors open, to prevent the train from leaving while they phoned the paramedics.
Once paramedics and officers arrived on the scene, the unconscious man was taken to the hospital, but the man in the suit was not investigated or a point of interest in this case. The video of this incident was posted on Youtube and gained momentum by its audience and local news stations. This is still an ongoing investigation.
————————– Questions: 1. Just because someone broke a law, that doesn’t mean they’ll always be prosecuted for it, so was it lawful for the man in the suit to drag the unconscious man to train platform, and would it lawful for him to leave the man behind?
2. In this case, the man in the suit will not be charged with this act, explain why you agree or disagree with this decision.
3. ‘Duty to rescue’ laws require people to help others if they witness someone in trouble and are able to help without endangering themselves. Are there ‘duty to rescue’ or similar laws where you live, and do you agree with your community having or not having them?
Be sure to provide full explanations for each of your answers. For more details, you can read the article this piece was sourced from here:
Salt Bae Gets Salty After
Health Code Violation Accusations
The man known as Salt Bae’s technique for salting steaks captivated the world, quickly elevating him to meme-status. After he opened his new restaurant recently however, some people weren’t so quick to ‘like and share’. A few sticklers for the law were quick to point out that he might be violating New York City’s health code.
Salt Bae’s critics pointed out that by salting steaks without gloves, this living meme appeared to be breaking clause 81.07 of the NYC health code. That clause states that there must be use of tools of ‘sufficient length to prevent bare hand contact with ready to eat potentially hazardous food’.
After being called out he started wearing gloves. With his salting technique which employs significant amounts of flair, pomp, and circumstance though, salt may still hit his bare forearm before reaching his customers’ plates.
A common condiment isn’t the only legal matter keeping Salt Bae so salty these days though.
According to videos he’s posted to Instagram, he had been slicing steaks at customers’ tables without gloves and while wearing a flashy watch – 2 more possible violations of NYC health code! In addition to the first violation, by wearing a watch he’s also violating a rule stating ‘food workers may not wear jewelry on their arms unless it’s a medical bracelet or smooth ring’..
New York City’s Department of Health said they would be launching an investigation into the violations. The restaurant opened earlier this year and has received mixed reviews over price, food quality and the overall experience. Sounds like this Salt Bae could use a little sweetness these days!
————————– Questions:
1) What consequences could the restaurant face if it is found to be violating NYC health code?
2) Can videos posted to social media be used as admissible evidence if charges are filed?
3) Do you think the case is being handled differently, or should be handled differently since a celebrity is involved?
Criminal Complaints From
Villainous Avengers Fans!
Directors Anthony and Joe Russo received death threats for not putting the character Hawkeye in “Avengers: Infinity War.” His absence was first noticed when the first movie trailer was released in November 2017. As time got closer to the movie release date, it became clearer that Hawkeye wasn’t going to be featured in the movie. As a result, some of Hawkeye’s fans revealed that even villains love superheroes.
Actor Jeremy Renner, who plays Hawkeye, revealed that the director brothers were receiving death threats because his character was not included in the movie. When asked how he felt about the dedication being shown by some of his less respectable fans, Renner said “It’s a nice feeling I suppose. I think the Russo brothers got way too many death threats. I’m like, ‘Wow, dude, that’s intense. I’m sorry.”
Looking at Nevada Revised Statute 202.448, these threats appear to be criminal. The statue defines “making threats or conveying false information regarding acts of terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, lethal agents or toxins” as a criminal act.
NRS is a Nevada statute, but certain acts of issuing a threat are also federal crimes! United States Code Title 18 Chapter 41 Section 875 states that “whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”
————————– Questions:
1) What are the maximum amount of penalties could be faced by the people who made the death threats to The Russo Brothers?
2) Explain the different legal penalties for threats made in person in comparison to threats made over the internet?
3) List 3 other laws regarding threats (other than NRS 202.448 and USC.18.41.875, and report what the maximum penalty for each one is.
When it comes to meat products, this is a major market within the United States. Not Counting Lady Gaga wearing a slab of red meats, Americans on average consume over 100 pounds of meat per year. But, what does meat have to do with law?
On August 29th, 2018, a Missouri law was passed to require that only products that come from slaughterhouses, once-breathing animals can be marketed as meat. Specifically, the law labels meat as something that is harvest from production livestock or poultry. The law is intended to inform the public on what exactly is in the product.
For instance, in cases in which plant-based products (soy, eggplant, etc.) are made into burgers, they cannot be labeled as such since they did not come from a slaughterhouse and were not “once-breathing animals.”
A similar bill is currently being reviewed within the Senate. The US Department of Agriculture is considering to establish beef and meat labeling requirements and to exclude products not derived directly from animals raised and slaughtered from the definition of “beef” and “meat”.
The reason for this law, on a federal level, is to better inform consumers and there are no labeling requirements currently for labeling beef or meat. The major concern is from a non-profit corporation from Montana called the “United States Cattlemen’s Association” and are concerned with the ‘synthetic products’ being introduced into the market and being marketed as ‘beef’.
The controversy over this case comes from people who consider plant-based products as ‘meaty’ or ‘soy roast beef’. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit say that this categorizing infringes on the First Amendment rights and prevents the clear and accurate labeling of plant-based and clean meat products. The plaintiffs claim that this is a way for them to stifle plant-based meats in grocery stores.
A similar lawsuit was filed in Florida. A state law required milk product to be labeled as “skim milk” only if it had the same level of Vitamin A as whole milk. Dairy farmers begged to differ and sued, saying that their product was skim milk and should be deemed as such. Ultimately, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in the dairy farmer’s favor since the farm’s “use of the words ‘skim milk’ to describe its skim milk is not inherently misleading.”
————————– Questions:
1) What does the US Department of Agriculture do?
2) How do you feel the First Amendment does or does not apply to this case?
3) Should plant-based products be allowed to use the word ‘meat’ in their name, and why do you feel that way?
4) Missouri limiting what can be labeled as ‘meat’ is not the only example of ‘restricted speech’ on food products. Either Federally and nationally, or even just in a single state, list one other example of food having law-based requirements about how it can be named and labeled (or alternatively, one kind of food label that has NO legal requirements, even though you think it should have some!)
Be sure to provide full explanations for each of your answers. For more details, you can read the article this piece was sourced from here:
The Patents Behind Facebook’s
Scary Accurate Friend Suggestions…
Have you ever heard of people receiving Facebook “friend suggestions” that were so accurate that they were creepy? Maybe one night they attended a party and only talked to one person, then somehow woke up the next morning to find that Facebook had suggested the person friend-request them!
It happens more often than you think, and there is a perfectly legal reason for it! The social media site uses technology to connect two people based on the metadata from cameras used to upload photos and the data embedded into those pictures (data like GPS coordinates where the picture was taken). Even scratches and dust marks in the pictures could be used to identify a specific camera that was used to take the picture.
Facebook is legally allowed to do all of this, but people only know that the company even had the idea to do that because of a series of patents they filed in 2014 and 2015. If someone else uses their invention (in this case the technology) without permission, they can be taken to court and sued!
One of the patents is titled ‘Systems and methods for utilizing wireless communications to suggest connections for a user’ and explains how logged smartphone data can be used to make friend recommendations. The algorithm incorporates other information as well, like the amount of time between two wireless communications (uploading and receiving a photo) or the signal strength at the time of the data exchange. With those seemingly impersonal bits of information, Facebook is able to recognize and identify when two people are walking together or facing each other.
Another of the patents is titled ‘Associating cameras with users and objects in a social networking system’ and highlights how data from photos uploaded to the site can be used to connect people. The ‘data’ that is compared isn’t just 1s and 0s… The patent details how the information used to identify the photographer could be as simple as a file name or as complex as a dust particle on a camera lens that appears in the same place in multiple photos (which suggest they were taken by the same camera, like a photographic fingerprint).
————————– Questions:
1) Even if the processes Facebook patented are lawful, what are the implications for non-users that get identified by the algorithm?
2) Imagine this: You’re a privacy hound who doesn’t use social media sites because you like to control the use of your data simply because you don’t like mega corporations. Let’s say you’re also a photographer, and you post photos to a website. If a fan of yours shared a photo on Facebook and labeled you as the photographer, would Facebook have a legal right to identify other pictures you’d taken with the same camera even if you weren’t the person uploading them to the website?
3) What could a non-user do to fight this system?
Be sure to provide full explanations for each of your answers. For more details, you can read the article this piece was sourced from here:
Thank you for letting us experience court for the first time. It was the best experience ever, thank you for everything. You really made me think about being a judge. Thank you
-Mina L [ Twitchell Elementary - Grade 5]
Project Real
2020-12-16T22:04:09+00:00
Thank you for letting us experience court for the first time. It was the best experience ever, thank you for everything. You really made me think about being a judge. Thank you -Mina L [ Twitchell Elementary - Grade 5]
Thank you for letting us watch the civil case! It was cool because it was a real case and not one played out. I had a lot of fun watching the other kids act out a session. Thank you for your time.
- Kaylie [Hewetson Elementary - Grade 5]
Project Real
2020-12-11T20:39:35+00:00
Thank you for letting us watch the civil case! It was cool because it was a real case and not one played out. I had a lot of fun watching the other kids act out a session. Thank you for your time. - Kaylie [Hewetson Elementary - Grade 5]
My favorite part of the fieldtrip to the courthouse is when I got to play the part of Ron. I got to go on the witness chair and speaking. I helped Potter to be not guilty. Thank you for the great opportunity.
- Johnathan M [Harmon Elementary - Grade 4]
Project Real
2020-12-16T21:47:04+00:00
My favorite part of the fieldtrip to the courthouse is when I got to play the part of Ron. I got to go on the witness chair and speaking. I helped Potter to be not guilty. Thank you for the great opportunity. - Johnathan M [Harmon Elementary - Grade 4]
