# embedding_metadata

key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>There are also animal-welfare related laws to consider, such as:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data?actid=AC_CEN_5_23_00037_186045_1523266765688&amp;sectionId=46050&amp;sectionno=289&amp;orderno=323" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Section 289</a> IPC:</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p>Negligent conduct with respect to animal.</p>
<p>Whoever knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any animal in his possession as is sufficient to guard against any probable <strong>danger to human life, or any probable danger of grievous hurt from such animal</strong>, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.</p>
</blockquote>
<ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data?actid=AC_CEN_16_18_00001_196059_1517807317734&amp;sectionId=4023&amp;sectionno=3&amp;orderno=3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Section 3</a>  Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act:</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p>Duties of persons having charge of animals.</p>
<p>It shall be the duty of every person having the care or charge of any animal to take all reasonable measures to ensure the well-being of such animal and to prevent the infliction upon such animal of unnecessary pain or suffering.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><strong>United Kingdom</strong></p>
<p>In UK there are many areas where 'owned' grazing animals roam freely: the New Forest, moorland, mountain roads etc. If you hit one, it's not the fault of the person who owns it, although someone <em>with</em> the animal(s) must take proper control of them. Compare this with hitting a wild creature such as a deer - who are you going to sue?</p>
<p>Section 170 of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170" rel="noreferrer">Road Traffic Act 1988</a> requires that if the animal is a <strong>horse, cattle, ass, mule, sheep, pig, goat or dog</strong> the driver must stop and provide their identity, details of insurance, etc. to any involved party.</p>
<p>If you can't do that, you must report the accident at a police station.</p>
<p>For that list of animals, the requirements are the same as causing damage to a person, to another vehicle or to property.</p>


Tags: india, traffic, animals, safety


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it illegal for websites to host children fighting with the purpose of humiliation

Question Body: <p>A video recently came to my attention that involved two children ages approximately 5,and 6, or so and the video consisted of the boy and girl wrestling - but not in a fair competition, but to humiliate the little boy. He was called a sissy and similar derogatory terms, and it was posted on a website that hosts some adult/pornographic content as well as discussion groups/forums.  There was no question about the intent of the video because the voice-overs flat out said it was to show the little boy what a worthless sissy he was. Obviously, this can be emotionally dangerous to a first or even second grade child who is just realizing the reality of societal definitions of masculinity/femininity. And I have another aspect to consider. What can happen legally to the promoters/parents for promoting and distributing on the internet</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>In the US, derogatory speech is protected under the First Amendment. There have been <a href="https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/966/harmful-to-minors-laws" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a number of attempts</a> to limit internet speech that is deemed to be &quot;harmful to minors&quot; which have not been successful, and at that the laws have based the characterization of harm as &quot;being obscene&quot; pursuant to the <a href="https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1585/miller-test" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Miller test</a>. Moreover the law were limited to commercial dissemination to children, whereas your scenario is <em>about</em> children.</p>
<p>It is possible that a parent of a participant would get into child-welfare type legal trouble for encouraging their child to assault another child, but that would not include encouraging a child to use unkind words against another child.</p>


Tags: internet


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does receiving an email informing me of a change in policy mean I automatically agree with it, unless I object?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Several years ago I bought a domain name. I have never really used it, and have been wanting to get rid of it for quite some time now, but every year the hosting service finds another trick to make me pay for another year. (I admit: I'm playing a bit into their hand by being forgetful from time to time)</p>
<p>This year I again get an invoice. I thought I cancelled through email or their ticketing system last year, but I can't find anything that confirms my memory. However, I did find something else. I found an email in which they said that up until now, their service is always prepaid. They will only extend the domain name after you pay the invoice. However, starting from  that will change. From then on, their service will be subscription based. Which means that they will automatically extend the domain name, even without your approval, to avoid losing it.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>And honestly, I kinda get their change. I understand why many people would be happy with this, and I don't have a hard time believing that they made this change with the best intentions. And normally I wouldn't want to abuse this. But in this case, due to other unethical things they do and did in the past, I would like to get rid of them ASAP.</p>
<p>So I wonder... does merely receiving this email mean that I am bound by their new policy? Or can I expect to still be under the old regime, where the service was prepaid?</p>
<p>Note that this is (imho) different from services such as e.g. Facebook, where you actively <strong>use</strong> the service, so you agree to their ToS every time you log in. With domain names, you only use it passively. And in my case I didn't use it at all. The domain name hasn't been in use for years, and I haven't logged in on the webpage since last time I got an invoice.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>What does the contract say?</h2>
<p>If it says that they have the right to unilaterally alter the terms by providing you with notice by email, then they have the right to unilaterally alter the terms by providing you with notice by email.</p>
<p>These types of service contracts typically have such terms.</p>


Tags: contract-law, netherlands, domain-name, belgium


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Are there examples of companies suing regulators for selective enforcement?

Question Body: <p>My hypothetical scenario is roughly like this:</p>
<ul>
<li>Company A has product X in circulation</li>
<li>The relevant regulator, after scrutinizing X, issues a ban and/or fines company A for their product X</li>
<li>Company A claims that their competitor, company B, has a product Y that is very similar to their own product X, which (Y) has nevertheless not gone into any scrutiny by the regulator, and it remains in circulation</li>
<li>Hence, company A sues the regulator for unfair selective enforcement against their competitor, company B</li>
</ul>
<p>Are there any such examples, or even legal provisions for such cases?</p>
<p>I am particularly interested in the US, but any examples or legal provisions from a state with a market-based economy (G7, EU, Australia, New Zealand etc) would suffice.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></p>
<p>Generally speaking, selective enforcement by a regulator is not actionable in U.S. law, nor is it a defense to a prosecution.</p>
<p>A regulatory agency has no legally enforceable duty to enforce the law in the same way against every possible violator of the law. <em>See, e.g., Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York</em> 336 U.S. 106 (1949) (It is no requirement of equal protection that all evils of the same genus be eradicated or none at all.)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is fundamental that selectivity in the enforcement of criminal laws
is subject to constitutional constraints. Nevertheless, the conscious
exercise of some selectivity in enforcement is not in itself a federal


key: chroma:document
string_value:
is subject to constitutional constraints. Nevertheless, the conscious
exercise of some selectivity in enforcement is not in itself a federal
constitutional violation so long as the selection was [not]
deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard . . . . [t]here is a
presumption that prosecution for violation of the criminal law is in
good faith.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>United States v. Amon</em>, 669 F.2d 1351, 1355-56 (10th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 825 (1982) (citations and some punctuation marks omitted).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To support a defense of selective or discriminatory prosecution, a
defendant bears the heavy burden of establishing, at least prima
facie, (1) that, while others similarly situated have not generally
been proceeded against because of conduct of the type forming the
basis of the charge against him, he has been singled out for
prosecution, and (2) that the government’s discriminatory selection of


key: chroma:document
string_value:
been proceeded against because of conduct of the type forming the
basis of the charge against him, he has been singled out for
prosecution, and (2) that the government’s discriminatory selection of
him for prosecution has been invidious or in bad faith, i.e., based
upon such impermissible considerations as race, religion, or the
desire to prevent his exercise of constitutional rights.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>United States v. Berrios</em>, 501 F.2d 1207, 1211 (2d Cir. 1974).</p>
<p>A review of challenges to selective enforcement of statutes raised as a defense to a selective prosecution in the tax area, with related case law, can be found <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/aba_tax_times/08win/07-ptr.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>There is such a thing as &quot;group of one&quot; discrimination under the equal protection clause, but it requires a showing a personal animus unrelated to any regulatory purpose and a singling out of someone for enforcement that is literally enforced against no one else. <em>See Village of Willowbrook v. Olech</em> 528 U.S. 562 (2000) (The Equal Protection Clause gives rise to a cause of action on behalf of a &quot;class of one&quot; when the plaintiff does not allege membership in a class or group, but alleges that they have been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for such treatment.)</p>
<p>The typical &quot;group of one&quot; equal protection clause case involves a local government enforcing a zombie law against someone that a local official has a grudge against for some unrelated reason like the regulatory target's son being unfaithful to the local regulator's daughter.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Are emojis acceptable in contracts?

Question Body: <p>If I ✍️ a 📄 using emojis instead of words, does that affect the validity of the 📄?</p>
<p>Example:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mary will only use the 🔑 to open the front 🚪 of John's 🏡 in order to feed his 🐈. Mary will feed the 🐈 three times every day for one 🗓️. John will pay Mary 💯💲.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What if an emoji is ambiguous? A contract to sell a 🔫 could involve a firearm or a water gun, depending on fonts.</p>
<p>Of course, this isn't a good idea.</p>


Answer 1: <h2>Yes</h2>
<p>Written contracts do not have to be written in any particular language or character set. <a href="https://researchimpact.uwa.edu.au/research-impact-stories/comic-book-contracts/" rel="noreferrer">Purely visual</a> contracts are used and are legally binding.</p>
<p>If a pictorial term is ambiguous it is resolved by the court the same way as a textual term would be.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>Thumbs up emojis are equivalent to signatures in Canada.</h2>
<p>Recently, a <a href="https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/06/canada-judge-thumbs-up-emoji-sign-contract" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Canadian judge ruled</a> that a thumbs-up emotional was legally equivalent to a signature.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This court readily acknowledges that a 👍 emoji is a non-traditional means to ‘sign’ a document but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a ‘signature’,” he wrote.</p>
<p>Keene also dismissed defence concerns that allowing the thumbs up emoji to signify acceptance “would open up the flood gates” to new interpretations of other emojis, including the ‘fist bump’ and ‘hand shake’. In finding that the thumbs-up can be used to enter into contracts, Keene said the court “cannot (nor should it) attempt to stem the tide of technology and common usage” of emojis.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>“This appears to be the new reality in Canadian society and courts will have to be ready to meet the new challenges that may arise from the use of emojis and the like.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It also appears that other emojis thst convey acceptance of a deal such as the fist bump or handshake would also qualify as being equivalent to a signature.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Form L-8 and Death in New Jersey

Question Body: <p>Consider the following hypothetical case. A parent dies, in 2023, leaving all his money to his daughter in the state of New Jersey. His sole assets are two brokerage account worth 2 million dollars each.</p>
<p>Here are my claims:</p>
<ol>
<li>There is no estate tax or inheritance tax due to New Jersey on the estate.</li>
<li>Two copies of form L-8 needed to be filled out. One for each brokerage account.</li>
</ol>
<p>Who is required by law to file out form L-8? Is it the broker?</p>
<p>If the assets are inside a living revocable trust would that get rid of the requirement to file form L-8?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Per <a href="https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/other_forms/inheritance/itl8.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/other_forms/inheritance/itl8.pdf</a></p>
<p>The forms may be filed by the executor of the estate, the Administrator of the estate/brokerage accounts, or a Class A beneficiary (spouse, domestic partner, child, parent, etc.)</p>
<p>Unless the broker is also managing the estate (unlikely), they are not responsible for filing L-8. Either the executor of the estate or the daughter's attorney needs to complete the form and file it with the state.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If the daughter is 18 or older, &quot;Assets that are owned by or in the name of a trust do not require a waiver or L-8, but must still be reported on any return filed.&quot; In that case, the daughter's attorney should file a return with the Inheritance Tax Branch. However, if the daughter is under 18 and the trust is structured such that she will not receive some or all of the money until she is an adult, the daughter's attorney does need to file L-8 in addition to the return.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What is an “estate,” as in a “housing estate” or “council estate”?

Question Body: <p>Also, how does this sense of the word differ from those used in other jurisdictions, and how are any of the senses of the term derived from one another if at all?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Also, how does this sense of the word differ from those used in other jurisdictions, and how are any of the senses of the term derived from one another if at all?</p>


Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>What is an “estate,” as in a “housing estate” or “council estate”?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>See <a href="https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/88956" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Oxford English Dictionary</em>: &quot;housing, <em>n.1</em>&quot;</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>housing estate</strong> <em>n. British</em> a residential area in which the houses, streets, etc., have all been planned and built at the same time.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And see <a href="https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/42589" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;council, <em>n.</em></a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>council estate</strong>, <em>n.</em> (also <strong>council housing estate</strong>) a group of houses erected by a council</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it legal for a brick and mortar establishment in France to reject cash as payment?

Question Body: <p>Alice’s Restaurant or Bob’s corner shop in Paris or anywhere else in France wishes to go “card only”. Is this legally allowed?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><strong>France: No</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://cashessentials.org/french-authorities-remind-merchants-that-accepting-cash-is-obligatory/" rel="noreferrer">CashEssentials</a> writes</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>French Authorities Remind Merchants that Accepting Cash is Obligatory</strong></p>
<p>France practices what is sometimes referred to as a hard version of legal tender. That means that the acceptance of cash is compulsory by law. According to <a href="https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000022375969&amp;cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070719&amp;dateTexte=20100621" rel="noreferrer">article R642-3 of the penal code</a>, the refusal to accept coins and banknotes which are legal tender is punished by a second-class fine, which is currently set at €150.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Edit: another source of information is in <a href="https://www.connexionfrance.com/article/Practical/Money/Can-shops-in-France-refuse-to-take-payments-in-cash" rel="noreferrer">Can shops in France refuse to take payments in cash?</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Some exceptions remain</strong><br />
There are some circumstances, however, where shops are not legally required to accept cash payments.</p>
<ul>
<li>If coins or banknotes are in poor condition, shops can refuse to take them</li>
<li>If you try to use more than 50 coins to make a single payment</li>
<li>If a shop does not have the correct money to give you change</li>
</ul>
<p>Finally, some shops are authorised not to accept cash payments for safety reasons (such as shops that open late at night). This extends to objects, such as parking meters, which are allowed to be fully cashless to limit cases of vandalism.</p>
</blockquote>
<HR>
<p><strong>Canada: Yes</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<HR>
<p><strong>Canada: Yes</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/cash-coronavirus-questions-answered-1.5609691" rel="noreferrer">CBC News</a> writes</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Is it legal for a store to refuse my cash?</strong></p>
<p>The Bank of Canada says it's up to sellers to determine what kinds of payment they will accept for transactions, and there is &quot;no law&quot; that would require anyone to accept bank notes or any other form of payment for a commercial transaction.</p>
<p>However, in certain circumstances, refusing to take cash in a store may actually violate provincial human rights codes.</p>
</blockquote>
<HR>
<p><strong>UK: Yes</strong></p>
<p>The <a href="https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/605030" rel="noreferrer">UK Parliament</a> reports on a <em>petition</em> that they debated</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Make it unlawful for shops to refuse cash payments.</strong><br />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Make it unlawful for shops to refuse cash payments.</strong><br />
Make it illegal for retailers and services to decline cash payments.</p>
<p>The government does not plan to mandate cash acceptance. While the government recognises the ability to transact in cash remains important to millions of people across the UK, particularly those in vulnerable groups, it remains the choice of individual businesses as to whether to accept or decline any form of payment, including cash or card. This may be based on factors such as customer preference and cost.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: is uncensorship in japanese porn illegal

Question Body: <p>According to some laws in japan censorship is a must for adult films but why does uncensored porn in JAPANESE ADULT VIDEOS ,PORNHUB,ETC exist is that legal? of not what charges they could be facing?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Article 175 of the <a href="https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/3581/en" rel="noreferrer">Criminal Code</a> says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A person who distributes, sells or displays in public an obscene document, drawing or other objects shall be punished by imprisonment with work for not more than 2 years, a fine of not more than 2,500,000 yen or a petty fine. The same shall apply to a person who possesses the same for the purpose of sale.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This has been interpreted to require pixelization, blurring, censorship bars, or other means of obscuring genitalia.</p>
<p>See the <a href="https://cbldf.org/2013/12/core-magazine-pleads-guilty-in-japanese-obscenity-case/" rel="noreferrer">2013 guilty plea by publishers of Core Magazine</a> for an example prosecution under art. 175 for insufficient censorship.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The law apparently does not reach material that is produced and edited and sold outside of Japan (even if filmed in Japan). See e.g. the discussion of <em>Realm</em> (1976) in Kirsten Fischer, <em>The Art of Censorship in Postwar Japan</em>, p. 198-199:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[the film] was not prosecutable because of Ōshima’s innovative production strategy ... He had imported the film stock from France, shot the film
in Kyoto, and then exported the undeveloped film back to France, where
he developed and edited it and finally distributed it internationally, including importing it back to Japan.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A &quot;heavily cut form [was] eventually screened in Japan.&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Capital Gains: If I loan Bitcoin to my LLC, can the LLC sell it to pay for expenses, and later repay the loan in USD tax free? (USA Law)

Question Body: <p>I understand that taking a credit line against Bitcoin collateral is not capital gains event because there is no sale.</p>
<p>However,</p>
<ol>
<li>If a party, such as a company, is lent Bitcoin (BTC), sell it to pay expenses, and then pays back the loan in USD would that be a taxable event for the lender?</li>
<li>If so is there any way to avoid that-- perhaps by paying back the loan back equivalent amount of Bitcoin?</li>
<li>Is a Bitcoin denominated capital contribution ever not a taxable event?</li>
</ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>No, a loan is not taxable to the borrower and the repayment of principal is not taxable to the lender. Interest paid is a deductible expense for a business borrower and interest received is income to the lender.</p>
<p>The form of the lent property and repaid property is irrelevant; each will be valued at fair market value. (Quirks are possible if amounts borrowed and repaid don't actually match.)</p>
<ol start="3">
<li>If it's a capital contribution to a partnership, it's not taxable.</li>
</ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<ol>
<li>If a party, such as a company, is lent Bitcoin (BTC), sell it to pay expenses, and then pays back the loan in USD would that be a
taxable event for the lender?</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes.</p>
<blockquote>
<ol start="2">
<li>If so is there any way to avoid that-- perhaps by paying back the loan back equivalent amount of Bitcoin?</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>No.</p>
<blockquote>
<ol start="3">
<li>Is a Bitcoin denominated capital contribution ever not a taxable event?</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>A capital contribution (i.e. a transfer of property, in kind, to a company in exchange for equity in the company) of Bitcoin is usually not a taxable event until the Bitcoin is sold.</p>
<p>The sale is income to the company, although most closely held companies have pass through taxation, so it is taxed to the owners of the company on a pass through basis.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The sale is income to the company, although most closely held companies have pass through taxation, so it is taxed to the owners of the company on a pass through basis.</p>
<p>In a C-corporation, however, the conversion of Bitcoin to anything else would be a taxable sale of the C-corporation to which the Bitcoin was contributed upon which corporate entity level income taxes would be due.</p>
<p>In general, the answer for Bitcoin is generally going to be the same as the answer would be for pork bellies or bushels of wheat or barrels of oil.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Parliament tomorrow passes the Arbitrary Bullocks Removal Act 2023, entitling (but crucially not obliging; in other words, bestowing a power though not a duty) the minister of Justice to arbitrarily select individuals to be castrated at his will. In order to do so he must sign a warrant of  a certain prescribed form, and upon the act taking effect minister of Justice Alex Avery exercises his power to condemn citizen Bob Bolger to removal of his bollocks. He does everything exactly to the letter of ABRA 2023, but in exercising the power created and granted to him by ABRA, he is clearly violating several of Bob’s human rights, not least Articles 3&amp;6.</p>
<p>(Note that HRA 1998 is a constitutional act.)</p>
<p>Is there not some doctrine which suggests that Minister Avery as a government official must not act in ways which contravene citizens’ human rights?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Is there not some doctrine which suggests that Minister Avery as a government official must not act in ways which contravene citizens’ human rights?</p>
<p>Bob applies thus for judicial review of Minister Avery’s decision to issue the ABRA warrant for his arbitrary castration, on grounds that his decision to exercise the power given to him by ABRA has the effect of violating Bob’s human rights.</p>
<p>Yet, one may also perhaps quite easily argue that the power bestowed on the government by ABRA inherently violates, and cannot but violate, its subjects’ human rights, and so it cannot be exercised without violating subject citizens’ human rights.</p>
<p>Perhaps, as per a different answer by Dale M., the UK judiciary may not nullify ABRA itself, but can it reverse any particular decisions by relevant government ministers to actually exercise the powers bestowed to them by the Act’s provisions?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>Human rights are not inviolate</h2>
<p>Even the <a href="https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021/03/udhr.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Universal Declaration of Human Rights</a> recognises this in Article 29.</p>
<p>This is obviously true when you think about it: there will be circumstances where the human rights of two individuals are in conflict - one of them must lose. Ongoing debates in the USA on abortion are an example of this.</p>
<p>Accepting that the proposed law is hyperbolic (in the current political climate - many laws passed in Nazi Germany were equally hyperbolic), there is no conflict with the Human Rights Act.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/section/6" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s6</a> deals with this head on:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(1) It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>(1) It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, we start from the happy place that the Minister can’t have Bob’s balls. However it continues:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to an act if—</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, it looks like Bob’s balls might still be on the block.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(a) as the result of one or more provisions of primary legislation, the authority could not have acted differently; or</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Fortunately for Bob, the ABRA primary legislation gave the Minister discretion so he <em>could</em> have acted differently.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(b) in the case of one or more provisions of, or made under, primary legislation which cannot be read or given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights, the authority was acting so as to give effect to or enforce those provisions.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Assuming the court accepts that the provisions “ cannot be read or given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights” which seems to be the case: you can’t remove an unwilling person’s testicles without violating their rights, the court must accept that the Minister “ was acting so as to give effect to or enforce those provisions.”</p>
<p>Too bad for Bob.</p>
<p>You seem to be struggling under the misapprehension that human rights can never be violated by the government. This is not the case.</p>
<p>Even in nations with Constitutional protection of rights, the law allows for the government to restrict or limit them where appropriate. For example, even in the USA, my freedom of expression does not extend to sharing top secret information with a journalist.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>I'm in Colorado (USA)... in case it varies by state, which I suspect it does.</p>
<p>Long story short is that I have 2 options for repairing the hail damage done to my car in a recent storm, for which I have filed a claim on my comprehensive insurance. One shop is telling me they'll waive my $750 deductible, saying that it's completely legit because they're just absorbing the cost and are free to do so at their discretion and the other is telling me that by definition, the deductible is the 1st amount paid to the garage before insurance makes any payment to them and that any savings incurred (such as the garage reducing my bill by $750) belongs to the insurance company.</p>
<p>They both make a little sense to me, and I'm not really convinced that 1 shop is lying while the other is being truthful. i'd like to think 1 is just less informed... or that it's not a black and white answer, but maybe not.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>I know the true answer probably lies with my insurance company and policy, but I don't trust them not to be misleading (without actually lying) any more than I do a business. BEFORE i listen to wha anyone else has to say, I'd like to know the actual law, then read through my policy and see what seems like the right answer to me AND THEN run it by both garages AND my insurance company to see what each has to say.</p>
<p>Anyone with any knowledge in this realm or who can help me find where in the books this thing is covered would be greatly appreciated.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Suppose the shop bills you $2000 and you have a $750 deductible.  You pay them $750, your insurance company pays $1250.  Now suppose instead that the shop purports to waive the deductible.  In order to get the insurance company to pay $1250 they still have to bill $2000.  Then they don't collect the $750 from you.  Presumably they write it off as bad debt.</p>
<p>It smells like insurance fraud to me, on two counts: first, the shop expects to receive $1250 for a service but they produce a bill of $2000 for the insurance company's benefit and then do not seek payment  from the insured party for any balance purportedly due beyond $1250.  Second, the insured party has a contract with the insurer undertaking to pay the first $750 of the claim but has conspired with the shop to avoid paying that amount through deception.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Had the shop played by the rules, they would have billed $1250 and the insurer would have  paid $500.  The shop isn't waiving your deductible; it's getting it out of the insurance company by fraud, with your collusion.</p>
<p>Another way of handling this is that the auto body shop submits an estimate for the cost necessary to restore the car to a certain degree but then restores the car to a lesser degree.  If everyone is aware that this is happening then it might be acceptable, depending on the terms of the insurance policy.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>This is legitimate because the insurance company is unilaterally determining the value of the repair.</p>
<p>What happened when you got into an accident? You reported the claim and the adjuster inspected your vehicle. The adjuster then used parts price lists, standardized labor guides and a locale-specific labor rate to come up with a value of the repair and hence loss. You may dispute the insurer's assessment, but note that no body shop has become involved yet. You then took the insurance estimate to a body shop.</p>
<p>A body shop, barring specific &quot;one-stop&quot; contracts with the insurer, has no obligation to accept the estimate and repair work. I could open a shop that charged $1000/labor hour, which would blow past any insurance. More realistically, this occurs when an owner wants factory parts and the insurer is only willing to pay for aftermarket parts, so the owner is billed the difference.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Conversely, they could charge less than what the insurer estimates, which is what happened here. For example, a shop could use aftermarket or junkyard parts.</p>
<p>In fact, if you completely own the car, you may choose to spend the money on a vacation instead of repairing the car. Or perhaps you may choose to sell the car as-is or junk it and use the money towards a new one. Another option that people take is to repair the car themselves and keep the difference. In this case, you get the same check.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>This doesn’t directly answer the question for Colorado, or address specific claim procedures your policy may require, but every time I have made an insurance claim, (in Washington state) my insurance company, (USAA) has paid me, not the repair shop.</p>
<p>Each time they have asked me to submit 3 written estimates, determined a fair payment amount, and cut me a check minus the deductible.  I believe that early claims in decades past the amount was an average, while the last claim I submitted they paid me the full amount of the most expensive estimate.</p>
<p>I was then free to negotiate with whichever shop I chose to do the work, make the repair myself, or choose to not repair the vehicle.  I have exercised all three options at various times and never had a reason to question whether or not this was legal.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 4: <p>Although this is expressly prohibited in the case of <a href="https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-6-consumer-and-commercial-affairs/co-rev-st-sect-6-22-105.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">hail-caused roof damage</a>, Colorado has not enacted any such prohibition w.r.t. car repairs. A shop might have a direct contractual relation with an insurance company and their contract might preclude waiving the deductible, so if they did it would be breech of contract on their part (illegal). If they have no direct relation with the insurance company, then they can do as they see fit, except fraud is not legal.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The repair shop can submit a damage analysis estimating that the cost to restore will be $2,000, and the insurance company will pay them $1,250. Whether or not the insurance company requires the customer to pay $750 is up to the repair shop. There is no fraud if they do not demand the $750, since $2,000 was the true, actual and honest cost of repair. The customer has no contractual obligation with the insurance company to pay $750, the only potential obligation is with the repair shop, for the particular level of repair done on the car. It <em>would</em> be fraud if the insurance company falsely claimed that the cost of repair would be $2,750. The repair shop's statement is simply &quot;this is how much it costs to restore the vehicle to pre-damage condition&quot;, so the insured can get a cheaper repair job and not be fully-restored – that is their right.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><a href="https://www.bodyshopbusiness.com/is-it-legal-to-waive-a-customer-s-deductible/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">This analysis</a> may be useful to understanding the legal issues.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: UK GDPR Transcribing calls

Question Body: <p>I'd like to understand the rules around automated transcribing calls in the UK, from a B2B perspective.</p>
<p>GDPR seems quite clear that if you are recording calls, video and/or audio, you must get consent. However, what about just transcribing, and not recording?</p>
<ul>
<li>I can't seem to find any resources on this, so any advice on how to find more out would be great.</li>
</ul>
<p>Many thanks</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>GDPR seems quite clear that if you are recording calls, video and/or audio, you must get consent.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Wrong.</strong></p>
<p>The GDPR requires that your have a legal basis for processing personal data. Consent is a legal basis but there are others.</p>
<p>With respect to note taking, the GDPR only applies to “personal data wholly or partly by automated means and to the processing other than by automated means of personal data which form part of a filing system or are intended to form part of a filing system.”</p>
<p>So, if they notes are not about an individual (and many B2B phone calls will not be) or are neither automated nor filed, the GDPR does not apply. If they are captured by the GDPR, you need to have a legal basis for the notes. Again, consent is one but it is not the only one.</p>


Tags: united-kingdom, gdpr, recording


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Selling a house inside an estate

Question Body: <p>The XYZ person dies and the will says that all the assets of XYZ goes into a trust. The estate of the XYZ person includes a house. Under what circumstances, if any, can the executor of the XYZ estate sell the house?</p>


Answer 1: <h2>In accordance with the terms of the trust deed</h2>
<p>Those terms of the will that are related to the trust will become the trust deed in the absence of one included for the purpose.</p>
<p>The trustee(s) can administer the trust on behalf of the beneficiaries in accordance with the terms. Unless the deed expressly prohibits the sale (either in total or subject to conditions) the trustee(s) can do what they think proper.</p>


Tags: united-states, new-jersey, trusts-and-estates


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Can&#39;t find an attorney to represent us

Question Body: <p>I've literally called over 300 plus attorneys and know for fact my wife and I have multiple that will pay out huge, one being Walmart, the other being a municipality for the corruption and malicious prosecution,and the other being a s.o. that told me on camera it was a landlords right to tell me he would kill me and my wife the day before we had eviction court.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>If 'literally 300' attorneys declined your case on the basis of a phone call, without looking into the details, I can see three options:</p>
<ul>
<li>You are unable to communicate the nature of your case clearly.<br />
In this posting, you mentioned complaints against a company, a municipality, and a landlord, plus being evicted. Focus on explaining <em>one</em> case.<br />
If you think you 'know for a fact' that you have several big payouts coming, there is the first problem. <em>Nobody</em> knows what a jury will decide. An attorney might hesitate to work for a client who does not understand this. Litigation is always a risk.</li>
<li>All your cases actually lack merit, a lawyer sees this and you do not. Not knowing the cases, I cannot tell. (And no, you should not explain them in detail on the web. If they do have merit, posting your strategy hurts the cases.)</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>Your state has a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation#United_States" rel="noreferrer">vexatious litigant</a> list and you are on it. That would not prevent an attorney from taking your case, but it might make them hesitate.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: legality behind the copyright of adagio in g minor

Question Body: <p>sources claim it is still under copyright yet Artists continue to simply borrow from it or copy the piece.</p>
<p>Does this mean that the fragment stolen by giazotto is copyright free?</p>
<p>is it safe to cover giazotto's work without getting sued for it?</p>
<p>I am composing a piece that uses this but I refuse to continue because that last thing I want is some guy in India try to sue me because they managed to buy the rights to adagio in g minor</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>Does this mean that the fragment stolen by giazotto is copyright free?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No.  If people are using the work, they may be paying a license fee for the privilege, or they may be violating the copyright.  The behavior of others is not a good way of judging how you should behave.  For example, in many cities in Europe you can see people boarding trams or buses without buying tickets, but that doesn't mean that public transportation is free of charge.  Some of those people are breaking the law, but most of them bought a ticket on the previous tram or hold a monthly pass.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If there was in fact a fragment, it wasn't &quot;stolen,&quot; and even if the piece was based on a fragment, whether that fragment was in the public domain or not, and whether Giazotto used it legally or not, that would not allow others to use the work without permission.  The parts that he composed are protected by his copyright even if the fragment is in the public domain.  But if the fragment were more recent and therefore also under copyright, well then you would risk infringing <em>two</em> copyrights instead of just one.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>is it safe to cover Giazotto's work without getting sued for it?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Assuming you mean &quot;without obtaining a license,&quot; it depends on what you do with the cover.  If you only play it for your closest friends without giving them a copy, it's probably safe.</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>I am composing a piece that uses this but I refuse to continue because that last thing I want is some guy in India try to sue me because they managed to buy the rights to adagio in g minor</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You have a couple of other options.  You can find out who actually owns the rights and ask them for permission, or you can hire a lawyer in the hope of determining that your proposed composition does not actually require a license.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adagio_in_G_minor" rel="nofollow noreferrer">work</a> is under copyright</h2>
<p>Giazotto died in 1998 so copyright will last until 31 December 2068. Giazotto originally claimed that he transcribed and arranged a work by Albinoni - an 18th century composer whose work would have been in the public domain. However, this is what is legally known as a “lie” and the work is, in fact, an original work by Giazotto; as he subsequently admitted.</p>


Tags: copyright, music


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: I am being threatened for defamation for sharing an article about an alleged scammer which was published in local news site

Question Body: <p>There is an alleged scammer in my community. An article about him was published by our local news site.</p>
<p>As I have a lot of contacts, I shared the article to all my contacts and it became viral. He is now threatening to sue me for defamation. He is well versed in legal matters and have taken people to court several times.</p>
<p>The article about him is definitely true, but obviously he can deny them all in court.</p>
<p>Should I be concerned?</p>
<hr />
<p>Thank you for all the answers. I am in Australia. To be precise, I said 'Please be aware of this alleged scammer' + link to the article. It was published by <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au" rel="noreferrer">www.theaustralian.com.au</a>, a top news outlet. I was careful to not indict. He has only threatened me.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>Repeating a defamatory statement is itself defamatory</h2>
<p>This is known as the repetition rule and is illustrated in <a href="https://www.5rb.com/case/brown-v-bower-another/" rel="noreferrer">Brown v Bower &amp; Another  [2017] EWHC 2637 (QB)</a>. In essence, the &quot;local news site&quot; is responsible for the reputational damage suffered by their publication and you are responsible for the damage caused by your amplification of that publication. So if the local news article was seen by a few dozen people locally, the damages might be relatively modest. If your publication caused it to be seen by millions of people and caused nationwide or worldwide damage to the person's reputation so that they are at risk of losing income or opportunities in the future, the damages can be vast.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>How you shared it is important. If you endorsed it, which includes forwarding it without commentary, then it is likely defamatory. If you were more circumspect and said something that shows an open mind to the allegations like &quot;This is an interesting story, I can't wait to see how it plays out&quot;, then it's likely not defamatory.</p>
<p>Of course, if the allegations are true then you have nothing to worry about; truth is a complete defence to defamation. You can prove that they are true, right? I mean with real evidence like a conviction for fraud. Or, at the very least, pending or actual charges from the police. Or, failing that you have good evidence that you yourself have been scammed specifically by this person. Or that you have had people who have been scammed tell you personally exactly how it happened?</p>
<p>No? Well, I wouldn't count on a truth defence if I were you.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<p>Should I be concerned?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thats not a question about the law, and this site is off topic for actual legal advice questions, but there is an answer which is on-topic, not legal advice and worth saying.</p>
<p>The person you have described is litigious in nature - they use the courts for their own ends, perhaps even for bullying.</p>
<p>Should you be concerned?</p>
<p>Yes - not that the person has any case against you, but because they can cost you time, money and reputation even without a case.  All they have to do is make it costly for you to fight a case against them - they can draw out the legal process so you have to retain legal assistance for longer, they can make disparaging remarks and claims about you, and they can withdraw the case at a later date with little negative outcome unless you sue them back.</p>
<p>Get a lawyer, now, and see what you can do to head this off.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>If the article on the &quot;local news site&quot; was false, or cannot be proved true and if it harmed, or was likely to harm, the reputation of the alleged scammer, it was probably defamatory. Repeating a defamatory statement <strong>can</strong> itself be defamation. Whether it is in fact defamation depends on whether the repetition was done in a way likely to be seen as endorsing the original story, or in a way that contests it, or in a way that neutrally analyzes it without either endorsing or contesting the original story.</p>
<p>Posting a link to a news story is less likely to be held to be defamation than would repeating the whole story, or its defamatory statements. However, if the link was so distributed that it significantly spread defamatory statements, it might itself constitute defamation.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In any case, even if the statements can be proved true, or the poster has another clear defense to an accusation of defamation, defending a suit can be costly and troublesome.</p>
<p>In some jurisdictions there are so-called &quot;anti-SLAPP&quot; laws. These can be invoked when a defamation suit is used to unduly burden speech that is of public value, sch a news reporting  or comments on current public issues. (SLAPP stands for &quot;strategic lawsuit against public participation&quot;.) Such laws can be used to have an improper suit dismissed at an early stage, before  undue burdens are imposed. Exactly how and when such laws may be invoked varies depending on the jurisdiction, and they do not exist at all in some jurisdictions. One would be wise to consult a lawyer knowledgeable in defamation law to see if a anti-SLAPP law, or some other tactic, could avoid a burdensome suit.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>A threat to sue from a person noted from having sued others with some frequency would usually be grounds for concern.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 4: <p>Jurisdiction: <a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag">england-and-wales</a></p>
<p>I'm posting this to add to the other answers, so I won't go into details on the defence of truth other than to say that in England and Wales this can be found in <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/2" rel="noreferrer">section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013</a>.</p>
<p>However, that is not the only defence. There are also the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/3" rel="noreferrer">honest opinion</a> and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/4" rel="noreferrer">public interest</a> defences. Either of those could be applicable in this case depending on the facts.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>It may also be helpful for you to be aware of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations" rel="noreferrer">limitation period</a> in your jurisdiction for defamation. In England and Wales it is much shorter than for most other causes of action (which is most commonly 6 years). While not helpful if the claimant issues a claim in time, it can relieve the pressure somewhat once the period has expired.</p>
<p>A claim must be brought within 1 year of the date on which the defamation ocurred, pursuant to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/4A" rel="noreferrer">section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980</a>. This is subject to the court's discretion to permit defamation cases to proceed outside the limitation period pursuant to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/32A" rel="noreferrer">section 32A</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In cases of re-publishing, the clock starts running on the date of the <em>first publication</em> as provided for in <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/8" rel="noreferrer">section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013</a>, unless the re-publication is &quot;materially different&quot;, including the level of prominence and extent of the re-publication. So any gap in time between the first publication and your re-publication may work to your advantage.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>If I understand correctly, when a party to a contract breaches the terms in a material way (i.e., repudiation), the non-breaching party can, at its discretion,  terminate it, cease performance under it and seek damages, if desired.</p>
<p>If the innocent party expressly acknowledges the breach and considers the contract terminated (but hasn’t, yet, sought damages), and the breaching party files a petition in pursuit of a contractual right which they forfeit by breaching the contract, would the outcome, likely, turn on whether or not the innocent party expressly communicated their decision to terminate the contract to the breaching party (or their failure to seek damages, assuming no “affirmation” had occurred)?</p>
<p>Would there, likely, be any bearing upon the outcome if that decision was communicated, and damages were sought, after their petition was filed?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Would there, likely, be any bearing upon the outcome if that decision was communicated, and damages were sought, after their petition was filed?</p>
<p>Would a motion to dismiss or stay the action, for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted” or a motion to dismiss or stay the action, along with motion for declaratory relief be appropriate, in lieu of filing a response/answer? Would the right to seek damages for the breach still be preserved if not sought concurrently?</p>
<p>Could filing an answer be considered an “affirmation” of the contract or create issues that would have, otherwise, been avoidable if any of the above listed action, or a different course of action was taken instead?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>Termination is a matter of fact</h2>
<p>That is, it has either happened, or it hasn’t. Whether it has or hasn’t depends on a multitude of factors including the terms of the contract, the actions of the parties, and communication between them. These factors are so case specific that it is impossible to generalise.</p>
<p>Further, within a given case, reasonable parties may differ on if a contract has been terminated, which party initiated the termination, and if that termination was lawful. Usually, these cases involve mutual allegations of repudiation by the other party and rightful termination in response by our side. These issues are likely to be the major ones that the court or tribunal will have to determine.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>A claim for damages would need to be pursued as part of the overall case but the deadline for raising them is a procedural matter for the court or tribunal. Failing to raise them as an issue in pre-litigation correspondence would not be a bar to raising them in a claim or counter-claim.</p>
<p>However, failing to raise them at the earliest opportunity denies the offending party the opportunity to mitigate the damage and, if they can show that there were actions they could have reasonably taken to mitigate but couldn’t because they weren’t informed, then that may reduce or eliminate the damages payable.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What is the story with declarations of incompatibility and the otherwise ostensible binding Ness of the human rights act?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>My understanding was always the governments couldn’t actact contrarily to HRA rights.</p>
<p>On the other hand there is this regime of judicial so called “declarations of incompatibility” which are albeit apparently non-binding.</p>
<p>But suppose the rights violations act 2023 grants government minister X a power to undertake a certain procedure against people that clearly violates their rights. Like for example summarily and arbitrarily summon them for immediate maiming or castration.</p>
<p>The law grants a power to the government which is clearly in contradiction with individuals’ HRA rights, yet, it was passed into law by an act of Parliament.</p>
<p>Suppose that Minister Alex exercises this power against citizen Bob and selects him to report to the Wapping Docks at dawn tomorrow for unanaesthetised castration.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Suppose that Minister Alex exercises this power against citizen Bob and selects him to report to the Wapping Docks at dawn tomorrow for unanaesthetised castration.</p>
<p>Usually it seems that Bob can apply for judicial review against such conduct of government officials, and it seems to me that usually in such cases the judicial result would be binding.</p>
<p>So where does the conversely non-binding regime of declarations of incompatibility figure into this mix?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>The UK has <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty#Recent_developments" rel="nofollow noreferrer">parliamentary sovereignty</a>, not <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers" rel="nofollow noreferrer">separation of powers</a></h2>
<p>Unlike, say, the United States, where the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive have co-equal power in their respective spheres, in the UK, the judiciary and the executive are subordinate to Parliament.</p>
<p>The courts have no power to nullify an Act of Parliament  for being unconstitutional like they do in jurisdictions where a written constitution gives them such a power like the USA, Canada, or Australia. The purpose of the Declaration of Incompatibility is to advise Parliament that the law they have passed contradicts the HRA and they should think about that and decide if that’s what they really wanted to do.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>That means that the UK Parliament could pass the <em>Arbitrary Bollock Removal Act</em> 2023 (ABRA) tomorrow and it would be valid law.</p>
<p>The courts can still provide judicial review of the actions of the executive under ABRA but they cannot declare the law a nullity. That is, the Minister’s actions can be scrutinised to ensure they followed the ABRA and other established principles such as procedural fairness and, if they didn’t, declare the executive actions void. However, if they did follow the law, off come your nuts.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>When I was a child I turned on the TV and decided to watch cartoons. I found out <em>Pat and Mat</em> has not been on the conductor for a while. So I called the call center of the state broadcast. I didn't know the name of the animation series at those times, except for an old name, <em>That's it</em>. So I told the operator: &quot;Please broadcast &quot;That's it&quot;. It is a beautiful cartoon with two foolish characters.&quot; Also I gave my name and last name to him.</p>
<p>The operator didn't understand which cartoon I'm talking about. So he replied to me: &quot;I'm telling this to higher staff. They will show it for you to watch.&quot; Then he said bye and hung up the phone.</p>
<p>Some months later, I was watching the TV and the children's program presenter said: &quot;There will be a new children's TV series called &quot;That's it&quot;. It is now being produced and will come soon.&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>However, the first episode of the series got aired. But I didn't see my name nor in the opening neither the closing theme as the person who got the idea of making it.</p>
<p><strong>My question</strong>: Now that about 20 years have been passed can I sue the producer of the series an/or the state TV for not acknowledging me?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>No</h2>
<p>Let’s assume the most generous interpretation: you came up with a fully fleshed-out idea for a television show - name, characters, plot, scene-setting - the lot. You told this idea over the phone to someone else who made this show incorporating every single part of your idea.</p>
<p>Here’s the rub: <strong>nobody owns ideas</strong>.</p>
<p>Unless you had them sign a non-disclosure agreement before you told them (which you didn’t), they are free to use your ideas however they like.</p>


Tags: acknowledgement


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does Volenti non fit injuria work?

Question Body: <p>There is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volenti_non_fit_injuria" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Volenti non fit injuria</a>.</p>
<p>I'm confused whether if there is app where users can offend each other (what is illegal), but it requires user consent while registering that he accepts all things that can be done here to him (hate etc.), then can that app work legally? Could offending in such an application be legal and without consequences?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <ul>
<li>Some people seem to believe that just because something happens 'in the internet' it is somehow outside normal jurisdictions.<br />
<strong>Wrong.</strong><br />
In may be harder to investigate and prosecute crimes in the internet, but the laws apply all the same. There are some problems when it is unclear 'where in the world' something did happen -- in the jurisdiction of the perpetrator, the victim, or the service provider? But problems of jurisdiction apply e.g. to international fraud cases in the non-web-world as well.</li>
<li>In many jurisdictions, the informed and voluntary consent makes <em>some</em> things legal which would otherwise be illegal.<br />
For instance, if two boxers get into the ring, it is understood that each of them did consent to be hit by the other. But usually two fighters could not legally agree to a fight to the death, because even if there are laws on assisted suicide, they do not apply to a fight.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>Insults, libel, and slander are not on the same level as homicide. There are jurisdictions where they are not prosecuted without the request of the victim. But an insult might also violate other laws, e.g. disturbing the peace. So don't bet on such an app unless you know <em>for sure</em> which jurisdictions are involved.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>I'm using a dataset of imagery that is provided by Open Aerial Map. Their license terms are:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>All imagery is publicly licensed and made available through the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team's Open Imagery Network (OIN) Node. All imagery contained in OIN is licensed CC-BY 4.0, with attribution as contributors of Open Imagery Network. All imagery is available to be traced in OpenStreetMap.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>By submitting imagery to OpenAerialMap, you agree to place your imagery into the Open Imagery Network (OIN) through OpenAerialMap. The original copyright remains with the original source or holder of the imagery but you grant OAM to license the imagery as CC-BY 4.0, with attribution as contributors of Open Imagery Network. All imagery is available to be traced in OpenStreetMap.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Each image, as provided to Open Aerial Map, also comes with its additional licensing metadata which varies between CC-BY, CC-BY-NC and CC-BY-SA.</p>
<p>Here's an example of such a conflict: <a href="https://api.openaerialmap.org/meta/5ce4b726acfb8e0006396f98" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://api.openaerialmap.org/meta/5ce4b726acfb8e0006396f98</a> (top level metadata says CC-BY 4.0, while the image is CC-BY-NC).</p>
<pre><code>{
  &quot;meta&quot;: {
    &quot;provided_by&quot;: &quot;OpenAerialMap&quot;,
    &quot;license&quot;: &quot;CC-BY 4.0&quot;,
    &quot;website&quot;: &quot;http://beta.openaerialmap.org&quot;,
    &quot;page&quot;: 1,
    &quot;limit&quot;: 100,
    &quot;found&quot;: 12614
  },
  &quot;results&quot;: {
    &quot;_id&quot;: &quot;5ce4b726acfb8e0006396f98&quot;,
    &quot;acquisition_end&quot;: &quot;2019-05-15T16:00:00.000Z&quot;,
    &quot;acquisition_start&quot;: &quot;2019-05-15T15:00:00.000Z&quot;,
    &quot;contact&quot;: &quot;-&quot;,


key: chroma:document
string_value:
&quot;acquisition_end&quot;: &quot;2019-05-15T16:00:00.000Z&quot;,
    &quot;acquisition_start&quot;: &quot;2019-05-15T15:00:00.000Z&quot;,
    &quot;contact&quot;: &quot;-&quot;,
    &quot;platform&quot;: &quot;uav&quot;,
    &quot;provider&quot;: &quot;-&quot;,
    &quot;properties&quot;: {
      &quot;license&quot;: &quot;CC BY-NC 4.0&quot;,
      &quot;sensor&quot;: &quot;RGB&quot;,
      &quot;crs&quot;: &quot;EPSG:3100&quot;,
      &quot;dimensions&quot;: [
        26451,
        41263
      ],


key: chroma:document
string_value:
...
</code></pre>
<ul>
<li>Are these licenses effectively converted to CC-BY 4.0 by the terms of submission?</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Edit:</strong></p>
<p>I contacted OAM with no response.</p>
<p>See also the upload form, where this is explained to users:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/NbO6Y.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/NbO6Y.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>No</h2>
<p>CC is set up in a way, that you can not put any item acquired under one license under a more permissive license set in any way without breaching the license terms.</p>
<p>A work that is CC-BY-NC can not become just CC-BY under the terms of the CC-BY-NC, as the -NC does not allow that part to be dropped as the CC-BY-NC license text demands you can't license the new work in any fashion that allows commercial use.</p>
<p>It's only allowed to transmit into a more restrictive license scheme (e.g. adding -NC, -ND, or -SA), and never possible to drop a -NC, -ND or -SA.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>It's only allowed to transmit into a more restrictive license scheme (e.g. adding -NC, -ND, or -SA), and never possible to drop a -NC, -ND or -SA.</p>
<p>There is one exception: if something is already under a Share Alike license, you can not tack on any limitations either! <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">A ...-SA license can not be changed to <strong>any</strong> other license type <strong>at all</strong></a>, not CC-BY-NC-SA, not more permissive, not less permissive, not even an equivalent license scheme. The license terms on such a work is permanently fixed if you get it under that license.</p>
<h2>Which license applies?</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>Which license applies?</h2>
<p>It is unsure if the author or someone that received the work under a more permissive license than CC-BY-SA/CC-BY-NC did grant <strong>just OAM</strong> a license under CC-BY. In case there is a claim against OAM, it would be the duty of OAM to prove that they had received the work under this license and thus <em>could</em> grant it under CC-BY.</p>
<p>The diligent thing for someone receiving the work down the line from OAM would be to presume the work to be under the most restrictive license that can be found in the metadata. In case those are incompatible with the proposed use, then the item can't be used.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How many witnesses’ testimony constitutes or transcends reasonable doubt?

Question Body: <p>Alice punches Bob. Or stabs him. Either way it was from behind and he did not see who did it before going unconscious, but the entire thing was witnessed by Charles. However there was no other evidence of Alice’s crime like video footage or the like.</p>
<p>Charles testifies as to what he witnessed. Is Charles’s word enough to convict Alice of a crime?</p>
<p>What if it was also witnessed by Diana and they both testify, what then?</p>
<p>———</p>
<p>Or, Generally speaking, if someone presents to police and then court saying with a consistent narrative of events “this person hit me at the place and this time,” and there is perhaps a bruise to back it then that is often enough to convict the accused?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>One might be enough, 10,000 might not be enough</h2>
<p>In some cases, no eyewitnesses may be enough.</p>
<p>The trier of fact (the jury if there is one, the judge if there isn’t) decides what weight to give to the evidence or any part of it (including the testimony of any given eyewitness) and decide if that is enough to meet the prosecution’s burden of beyond reasonable doubt on each of the elements to be proven.</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>From the outset, however, you should understand that you are the sole judges of the facts. In respect of all disputes about matters of fact in this case, it will be you and not I who will have to resolve them. In part, that means that it is entirely up to you to decide what evidence is to be accepted and what evidence is to be rejected. For that reason you need to pay careful attention to each witness as their evidence is given. You should not only listen to what the witnesses say but also watch them as they give their evidence. How a witness presents to you and how he or she responds to questioning, especially in cross-examination, may assist you in deciding whether or not you accept what that witness was saying as truthful and reliable. You are entitled to accept part of what a witness says and reject other parts of the evidence.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Recommended instruction to the jury from the <a href="https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/criminal/the_jury.html" rel="noreferrer">NSW Criminal Trial Bench Book</a></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<p>Is Charles’s word enough to convict Alice of a crime?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Usually yes unless his is discredited or found unreliable.</p>
<p>He may be discredited if he has history of being dishonest, especially if convicted for it.</p>
<p>He may be found unreliable if he is inconsistent about details of what he saw (e.g. tells different stories at different times), if he has had some conflicts with Alice, if he is on Bob's payroll and so on.</p>
<p>All those are just factors that the trier of fact may/will consider. There can't be an unequivocal yes or no.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>The number of witnesses does not mathematically add up to reasonable doubt or not.  It all depends on what the jury finds credible.  Dozens of witnesses who hated Alice would not be so credible as one witness who hated David, another suspect, and loved Alice but said that Alice had done it.</p>
<p>This is because what is required is to convince the jury.  <a href="https://www.torontodefencelawyers.com/beyond-reasonable-doubt-canadian-criminal-law/" rel="noreferrer">Toronto Defense Lawyers</a> explains it:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The judge/jury does not need to be “absolutely certain” that the defendant is guilty to satisfy the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution need not prove guilt beyond any doubt whatsoever. Moreover, the judge/jury cannot acquit based on an imaginary or frivolous doubt.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>However, the reasonable doubt standard requires more than simply that the jury be convinced that the defendant “probably” committed the crime or “likely” committed the crime.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Just as you would probably believe some things on few witnesses and disbelieve others with more witnesses because you find them less credible, so too with the jurors.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 4: <blockquote>
<p>How many witnesses’ testimony constitute or transcend reasonable doubt?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Reasonable doubt is assessed based on the totality of the evidence (<em>R. v. McClure</em>, <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2001/2001scc14/2001scc14.html" rel="noreferrer">2001 SCC 14, para. 60</a>). <strong>There is no formula</strong>. See <em>R. v. Lifchus</em>, [1997] 3 SCR 320, <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/1fqzt#par36" rel="noreferrer">para. 36</a>:</p>
<ul>
<li>the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is inextricably intertwined with that principle fundamental to all criminal trials, the presumption of innocence;</li>
<li>the burden of proof rests on the prosecution throughout the trial and never shifts to the accused;</li>
<li>a reasonable doubt is not a doubt based upon sympathy or prejudice;</li>
<li>rather, it is based upon reason and common sense;</li>
<li>it is logically connected to the evidence or absence of evidence;</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>rather, it is based upon reason and common sense;</li>
<li>it is logically connected to the evidence or absence of evidence;</li>
<li>it does not involve proof to an absolute certainty; it is not proof beyond any doubt nor is it an imaginary or frivolous doubt; and</li>
<li>more is required than proof that the accused is probably guilty ‑‑ a jury which concludes only that the accused is probably guilty must acquit.</li>
</ul>
<p>As part of that analysis, it is up to the trier of fact (judge or jury, depending on the trial) <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/85118/how-is-a-judge-to-evaluate-a-witnesss-credibility">to assess each witness's credibility</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 5: <p>You would need some things to add up for “guilty beyond reasonable doubt”.</p>
<p>First, did the police see Bob lying on the ground, stabbed in the back, in a way that he couldn’t do himself and that couldn’t be an accident? Without an injured Bob, there is reasonable doubt that a crime happened at all.</p>
<p>Could Charles by mistaken? If Alice is one of 100 customers to enter Bobs store that day, then it could easily be a person who looks similar to Alice. If Bob, Alice and Charles have been coworkers for years, it is most likely no mistake. Unless Alice has an identical twin.</p>
<p>Could Charles be lying? With your story, I’d have the very reasonable doubt that Charles might be the attacker, and trying to put the blame on Alice. So your facts wouldn’t be enough.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Could Charles be lying? With your story, I’d have the very reasonable doubt that Charles might be the attacker, and trying to put the blame on Alice. So your facts wouldn’t be enough.</p>
<p>Now another witness who saw what happened from a distance and could see it was a person with long hair like Alice and not a bald person like Charles, even though they can’t identify Alice, that would make a difference.</p>
<p>In the end a jury decides. It is not necessary that there is no other possibility than Alice being the attacker, but just finding it likely or highly probable that she is the attacker is not enough.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 6: <h2>0 <em>direct</em> witnesses can be enough</h2>
<p>It is upon the trier of fact to evaluate what happened. A case can be held <strong>entirely</strong> based on evidence with 0 witnesses that actually saw the act to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. However, all those analysts and investigators, and other experts are to be called to explain the evidence and their significance... as witnesses. Not calling them as (<em>indirect</em>) witnesses means, the evidence should not come in under <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/557/305/" rel="noreferrer">Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009)</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Any number of witnesses - be they experts, investigators or direct eyewitness - that can make the finder of fact believe that it is beyond a reasonable doubt is enough. Any number can be 0 eyewitnesses, 0 experts, and the one 1 investigator saying &quot;I met Alice an hour after the incident and she was acting strange when I told her Bob is dead.&quot;</p>
<h2>A million people agreeing (based on hearsay) might not be</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>A million people agreeing (based on hearsay) might not be</h2>
<p>Since you need to convince the finder of fact that someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you could have millions of people that all claim Alice did it, maybe because of the news reports, but because nobody of them has more information than the news reporter, who invented half his story, all of their testimony is hearsay and worth nothing. They can not testify. Not even the investigator can testify about things told to them, as established by <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/541/36/" rel="noreferrer">Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)</a>, overruling <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_v._Roberts" rel="noreferrer">Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980)</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What was the substantive issue in Halborg V Apple?

Question Body: <p>The case has become overshadowed by a procedural issue about solicitors’ agency which was prominently appealed with the result that I cannot find anything describing the original substantive dispute in search results.</p>
<p>Procedural appeal: <a href="https://www.lpc-law.co.uk/media/no2bbwlr/f4qz598c-halborg-v-apple-approved-judgment-3-5-22.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.lpc-law.co.uk/media/no2bbwlr/f4qz598c-halborg-v-apple-approved-judgment-3-5-22.pdf</a></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>According to the linked judgment dated 3 May 2022, the underlying small claim was listed for 30 May that year. The issue is described in paragraph 3 as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The underlying claim is in relation to a mobile phone which Mr Halborg purchased from the Second Defendant and which he alleges was defective.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(the Second Defendant is O2)</p>
<p>As a small claim, we would not expect there to be a published judgment or any media coverage, which accounts for the lack of information on search results.</p>
<p>As a non-party to the case it is possible to request certain details from the court, including the statement of claim and the text of any orders. There is also the possibility of obtaining a transcript of the proceedings, since there apparently was a hearing and these are routinely recorded. Note that although the linked document says a hearing was meant to happen on 30 May, it's also possible that this was abandoned, rescheduled, etc.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>It would probably be more effective - certainly faster and cheaper - to contact the claimant directly and ask about it, if you are really curious.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How similar do trademarks have to be to be infringement?

Question Body: <p>I received a marketing email from Lenovo with the slogan &quot;Different is better.&quot; This seems quite similar to Apple's &quot;Think different,&quot; to the point that had I seen the slogan out of context, I would have thought it was Apple's; however, I'm sure Lenovo cleared it with their legal department.</p>
<p>How similar do two slogans have to be for trademark infringement?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>They have to be <a href="https://www.baxterip.com.au/trade-mark-infringement#:%7E:text=Under%20Section%20120%20of%20the,trade%20mark%20is%20registered%20for" rel="nofollow noreferrer">substantially identical or deceptively similar</a></h2>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-australia-tooltip-container">australia</a></p>
<p>Substantially identical is a side-by-side comparison noting the similarities and differences.</p>
<p>If they are not substantially identical, then the deceptively similar test is “ between, on the one hand, the impression based on recollection of one mark that a person of ordinary intelligence and memory would have and, on the other hand, the impressions that such a person would get from looking at the second mark.”</p>
<p>Are they substantially identical? No.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does 2 party consent apply if the data is anonymized?

Question Body: <p>If I have a text conversation between myself and another party, both of whom reside in 2 party consent states in the US, if I remove all reasonably identifying information, do I still need consent from the other person to use the data? Does this change if I am using it to fine-tune an LLM for public use?</p>


Answer 1: <h2>Consent only applies to audio recordings</h2>
<p>Written communication (and, usually soundless video recording) is not covered.</p>


Tags: united-states, data-protection, personal-information, artificial-intelligence, data-protection-act


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Does the following definition of harassment have any legal basis?</p>
<p>The gym’s <a href="https://Do%20these%20definitions%20have%20any%20legal%20basis?" rel="nofollow noreferrer">dignity and inclusion policy</a> states:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Harassment is a form of unlawful discrimination. It is unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic which includes sex, gender reassignment (or transgender status), race (which includes colour, nationality and ethnic or national origins), disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity and age.
This unwanted conduct either has the purpose of, or is reasonably considered by the person on the receiving end to have the effect of violating their dignity or otherwise creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.”</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Is this definition consistent with the legal definition of harassment, and what is the basis in law?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Almost. Under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/26?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 26</a> Equity Act 2010, the offence of harassment does not include discrimination based on &quot;<em>marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity</em>&quot;:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Harassment</strong></p>
<p>(1)A person (A) harasses another (B) if—</p>
<ul>
<li><p>(a)A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, and</p>
</li>
<li><p>(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect of—</p>
</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p>(i)violating B's dignity, or</p>
<p>(ii)creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(2)A also harasses B if—</p>
<ul>
<li><p>(a)A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, and</p>
</li>
<li><p>(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect referred to in subsection (1)(b).</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(3)A also harasses B if—</p>
<ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</li>
<li><p>(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect referred to in subsection (1)(b).</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(3)A also harasses B if—</p>
<ul>
<li><p>(a)A or another person engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature or that is related to gender reassignment or sex,</p>
</li>
<li><p>(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect referred to in subsection (1)(b), and</p>
</li>
<li><p>(c)because of B's rejection of or submission to the conduct, A treats B less favourably than A would treat B if B had not rejected or submitted to the conduct.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(4)In deciding whether conduct has the effect referred to in subsection (1)(b), each of the following must be taken into account—</p>
<ul>
<li><p>(a)the perception of B;</p>
</li>
<li><p>(b)the other circumstances of the case;</p>
</li>
<li><p>(c)whether it is reasonable for the conduct to have that effect.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(5)<strong>The relevant protected characteristics are—</strong></p>
<p><strong>age;</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</li>
<li><p>(c)whether it is reasonable for the conduct to have that effect.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(5)<strong>The relevant protected characteristics are—</strong></p>
<p><strong>age;</strong></p>
<p><strong>disability;</strong></p>
<p><strong>gender reassignment;</strong></p>
<p><strong>race;</strong></p>
<p><strong>religion or belief;</strong></p>
<p><strong>sex;</strong></p>
<p><strong>sexual orientation.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>However...</p>
<p>There is also the  Protection from Harassment Act 1997 which, at <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/1?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 1</a> and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/2?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 2</a> creates the offence without a requirement to show any discrimination based on protected characteristics.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<p>Harassment is a form of discrimination prohibited by the <a href="https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/00_96210_01" rel="nofollow noreferrer">B.C. Human Rights Code</a>. See British Columbia, &quot;<a href="https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/law-crime-and-justice/human-rights/human-rights-protection/what-you-need-to-know.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Human Rights in British Columbia: What You Need to Know</a>&quot;:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Harassment is a form of discrimination. It can be words or actions that
ofend or humiliate you. It is harassment when someone repeatedly says
or does things to you that are insulting and offensive. The Code protects
you when harassment is based on a protected characteristic listed under


key: chroma:document
string_value:
or does things to you that are insulting and offensive. The Code protects
you when harassment is based on a protected characteristic listed under
“How am I protected”. There are many types of harassment.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>See also <em>Oger v. Whatcott (No. 7)</em>, <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/hzdgk#par52" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2019 BCHRT 58, para. 52</a> (citations omitted):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>speech which adversely impacts a person in connection with a characteri[s]tic protected by the Code is prohibited in all the social areas which the Code regulates. Sexual and racial harassment are the most obvious examples of this. Whenever people use words in a way that substantively attacks and undermines a person's dignity in connection with their work, housing, or access to public services, because of personal characteristics protected by the Code, they run afoul of human rights law.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does a person on probation have to legally identify themselves to police officers without reasonable articulable suspicion of a criminal offense

Question Body: <p>Is there a New Hampshire RSA regarding persons on probation having to by law identify themselves as being on probation and provide their name and identification to an officer, when stopped even if it’s only for civil infraction</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>New Hampshire has published restrictions for persons on probation:  <a href="https://www.nh.gov/nhdoc/divisions/victim/pandp_offender.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.nh.gov/nhdoc/divisions/victim/pandp_offender.html</a></p>
<p>These restriction include agreeing to searches by the Probation-Parole Officer (&quot;PPO&quot;), but do not mention identification to a general peace officer.  New Hampshire law allows the police to request the identity of person the officer has reason to suspect is committing or may be about to commit a crime (this is less of a standard than probable cause).  Failure to identify is a crime, and a subsequent arrest would require notification of the PPO, though the requirements above state that the PPO must be notified of even mere questioning by a law enforcement officer.  The identification requirement applies to everyone.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>I can find no requirement that the identification requires the person to mention that they are on probation.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is there a law that regulates charging an online account to which the owner has no access?

Question Body: <p>Is it legal for an online service to charge an account holder credit card for services that are contingent on the account holder being able to manage their account if the account holder's access has been restricted?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Depends on what terms of service the account holder signed up to.</p>
<p>For instance, one could run a website at a cloud provider, configure it so that it <em>automatically</em> scales up when the traffic grows, and then mishandle the credentials so that one cannot shut it down quickly. By the time access is restored, there might be quite some bill.</p>
<p>As it recently made the news, when a business deliberately makes it easier to <em>sign up</em> than to <em>cancel</em>, the <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/06/ftc-takes-action-against-amazon-enrolling-consumers-amazon-prime-without-consent-sabotaging-their" rel="nofollow noreferrer">FTC</a> may step in. But that was an extreme case.</p>


Tags: united-states, internet, online, indiana, credit-card


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What does Enurement mean in a contract?

Question Body: <p>Example:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Enurement: This Agreement will enure to the benefit of and be binding
  on the Parties and their respective heirs, executors, administrators
  and permitted successors and assigns.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I do not get what any of this means. Can someone give a simple example when this may come into play?</p>


Answer 1: <blockquote>
  <p>What does Enurement mean in a contract?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Black's Law Dictionary defines <em>enure</em> as "<em>To operate or take effect. To serve to the use, benefit, or advantage of a person</em>".</p>

<p>The clause in your contract means that both entitlements and duties as provided in the agreement affect the parties but may be transfered to their heirs, successors, etc. In other words, that the death of a party does not extinguish the provisions in the contract.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>Remember there are usually two parties to an employment contract, an employer and employee. An enurement clause in the contract also protects the employee if their employer merges with another entity, a corporation winds up, etc.</p>


Tags: contract-law


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does attorney-client privilege apply when lawyers are fraudulent about credentials?

Question Body: <p>If a person goes to another person for legal advice and the person is deceitful in some way about being a lawyer, does attorney-client privilege still apply?</p>
<p>For instance, maybe the person does not quite know what a real diploma from Harvard Law School looks like, or that the piece of paper on the office wall saying the person passed the New York Bar Exam is not actual New York Bar correspondence.</p>
<p>I'm specifically wondering whether the person who is not a real lawyer can be compelled to give testimony on matters that his client thought were confidential, and would have been confidential if not for the deceit.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></p>
<p>A similar issue came up in my answer to <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/89766/can-a-private-person-deceive-a-defendant-to-obtain-evidence/89791#89791">Can a private person deceive a defendant to obtain evidence?</a>.  I don't think the question itself is a duplicate, so instead I'll just copy the relevant section from my answer with minor edits.</p>
<p>The short answer is yes, the privilege applies.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The short answer is yes, the privilege applies.</p>
<p>The case of <a href="https://casetext.com/case/us-v-tyler-12" rel="noreferrer">US v. Tyler, 745 F. Supp. 423 (W.D. Mich. 1990)</a> matches your hypothetical almost exactly.  The defendant, James Tyler, shared a prison cell with Melvin Deutsch, who said that he was a lawyer, had what appeared to be a law school diploma on the wall of his cell, and was addressed as &quot;counselor&quot; by other inmates; but in fact was not a lawyer.  Nevertheless, correspondence between Tyler and Deutsch regarding Tyler's legal issues was held to be privileged and inadmissible.</p>
<p>Tyler was held to have had a reasonable belief that Deutsch was a lawyer, despite that Deutsch had never been licensed to practice law in any jurisdiction, and that the law school diploma was (presumably) fake.  Tyler evidently didn't check on either of those things, and the court did not seem to think that he reasonably should have.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Also, Tyler apparently did not know the seemingly obvious fact that a convicted felon cannot practice law, let alone while actually in prison.  However, this was not felt by the court to be &quot;ingenuous&quot;: &quot;To expect a layperson to be familiar with the internal discipline procedures of the Bar is unreasonable.&quot;</p>
<p>There is also a discussion of such situations in the following article:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Grace M. Giesel, <em>Upjohn Warnings, The Attorney-client Privilege, And Principles Of Lawyer Ethics: Achieving Harmony</em>, 65 U. Miami L.
Rev. 109 (2015).  Available at <a href="http://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol65/iss1/5" rel="noreferrer">this link</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>See Section IV.D.2 on page 140:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In addition to applying the honest-and-reasonable-belief analysis in
the attorney-client privilege setting to the question of representational


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>See Section IV.D.2 on page 140:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In addition to applying the honest-and-reasonable-belief analysis in
the attorney-client privilege setting to the question of representational
relationship, courts have also applied the analysis when the person consulted is not, in fact, a lawyer. The courts addressing this issue have
stated that the privilege applies to a communication even if the person
consulted is not admitted to any bar and has enjoyed no legal training. <strong>If
the putative client honestly and reasonably believes that the person consulted is a lawyer, and if the other requirements of the privilege are
satisfied, the privilege applies even though the person consulted is, in
fact, not a lawyer.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>See the article for additional citations.</p>
<p>The article also mentions that certain states make this principle explicit by statute.  For instance, the <em>Kentucky Rules of Evidence</em>, Rule 503(a)(3):</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The article also mentions that certain states make this principle explicit by statute.  For instance, the <em>Kentucky Rules of Evidence</em>, Rule 503(a)(3):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;Lawyer&quot; means a person authorized, <strong>or reasonably believed by the client to be authorized</strong> to engage in the practice of law in any state or nation.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>Yes, it does, in any reasonable jurisdiction. The argument is as follows.</p>
<p>I sometimes find it helps me understand the legal reasoning if I reverse the actual practice. So let's suppose that attorney client privilege doesn't apply with a fake lawyer. John Doe is arrested, he doesn't have a lawyer, until someone enters his cell and offers to represent him. After an interviewer, it turns out that the &quot;lawyer&quot; is actually a fake,  could use who was put up to the job by dodgy police. They debrief their stooge, and now have information that they could use against Mr. Doe...</p>


Tags: attorney-client-privilege


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it legal for a business to deny me access to their store on the basis of how I look?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Is it legal for a business to use discriminatory (and notoriously false-positive) fingerprinting algorithms that prevent me from loading their website purely on the basis of <em>how I look</em> (as opposed to <em>how I act</em>)?</p>
<p>Some time ago I opened an account on a website. For <a href="https://tor.stackexchange.com/a/23778/31208">security reasons</a>, I used Tor Browser. I loaded money onto my account and purchased their services. I used their services several times without issue.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Recently I tried to log-into my account, but I got stuck in an <a href="https://superuser.com/questions/1795620/cloudflare-infinte-loop-checking-if-the-site-connection-is-secure/1796006#1796006">infinite loop on CloudFlare</a>, so I could never access their website. It should go without saying that I'm not doing anything malicious, but I'll say it: this is reproducible when launching a fresh version of TAILS, opening the browser, typing the naked domain into the address bar and pressing <code>&lt;enter&gt;</code>. I'm never allowed into the store.</p>
<p>So it appears to me that this website is denying me access to their business services, my account, and the funds on my account for one reason: because they don't like the way I look.</p>
<p>Is this legal for them to do to their customers? I'm also curious if the same thing would be legal in the IRL analog, for example:</p>
<ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Is this legal for them to do to their customers? I'm also curious if the same thing would be legal in the IRL analog, for example:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Would it be legal for a brick-and-mortar store to deny me from entering their shop purely on the basis of the way that I look?</p>
</li>
<li><p>Would it be legal for a bank (with whom I already have an open account in good-standing) to prevent me from accessing my safety deposit box because they don't like the way that I look?</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Or, perhaps for a closer analogy:</p>
<ol start="3">
<li><p>Would it be legal for a brick-and-mortar store to deny me from entering their shop because their SaaS CCTV facial recognition software (falsely) said that I &quot;look&quot; like a shoplifter?</p>
</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</li>
<li><p>Would it be legal for a bank (with whom I already have an open account in good-standing) to prevent me from accessing my safety deposit box because I'm wearing the same T-Shirt from JC Penny that someone else wore who robbed their bank yesterday (and they do not permit me to attempt to prove my identity)?</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>I'm primarily interested in US and EU law, but I would be interested in any countries with strong consumer and data protection laws that would provide consumer protection from discrimination on the basis of &quot;looks&quot; on the Internet.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>You are mistaken: they deny you on your act</h2>
<p>When you use Tor, your browser is not sending a lot of information. That makes Tor browsers hilariously easy to detect: nobody knows where the real browser is, but it is hilariously easy to block all Tor users for using Tor, or at least those that the server knows are Tor IPs. <strong>Using Tor is an action,</strong> not how you look.</p>
<p>The closest Brick and mortar equivalent would be &quot;Show me your ID please&quot; and you show them a paper cutout of something that has Sample stamped over it.</p>
<h2>&quot;No shirt, no shoes, no service&quot; in the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Yes, most places can deny service based on how you dress or your state of hygine. These two would in most cases not extend to the protections under the <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/statutes/civil-rights-act-of-1964" rel="noreferrer">Civil Rights Act</a>, which protects some characteristics like race and sex, but not visual factors like &quot;being dressed&quot; or &quot;smelling of cow&quot;. There can be a fine line where religious dress code is concerned, but in general and broad strokes, the restaurant can deny you for wearing the wrong clothes.</p>
<p>Actually, the slogan is much broader than it appears: as long as an establishment's dress code is not violating discrimination law (like the CRA), they can enforce it under their freedom to contract.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<p>&quot;Looks&quot; are not a protected characteristic in any anti-discrimination regime in Canada. It is not a violation of any provincial or federal Human Rights Code to deny services on the basis of looks <em>per se</em>. Only when this serves to discriminate on the basis of a protected characteristic would this discrimination be prohibited.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>For example, under the <a href="https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/FullText.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Canadian Human Rights Act</a>, these are: &quot;race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.&quot;</p>
<p>Under the <a href="https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/00_96210_01" rel="nofollow noreferrer">B.C. Human Rights Code</a>, in relation to services, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are: &quot;Indigenous identity, race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or age.&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Of course, if the way one is being discriminated on the basis of &quot;looks&quot; is to actually result in discrimination on the basis of &quot;race&quot; or &quot;colour,&quot; for example, this would be prohibited discrimination.</p>
<p>These codes apply no matter whether the prohibited discrimination is due solely to the actions of a person, or mediated by the operation of an algorithm. They are written and applied in a technologically neutral manner.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>The State of Florida seems to be in a protracted battle with Disney.  The state has legislated in the direction of Disney, and continues to do so
(<a href="https://www.wfla.com/news/florida/desantis-speaking-at-reedy-creek-administration-building/" rel="noreferrer">https://www.wfla.com/news/florida/desantis-speaking-at-reedy-creek-administration-building/</a>).</p>
<p>Despite the fact that there might be real arguments that such legislation is for the well-being of the state, the dialog surrounding Reedy Creek issues, including statements coming out of the State, seems to provide a solid argument that the motivation for such legislation is to punish Disney for voicing objection to recent policy decisions in the State.</p>
<p>Assuming that as a given, for the moment (though that's, at the least, arguable), doesn't that provide Disney with the argument that these are Bills of Attainder?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Legislatures are free to declare illegal whatever they want (within Constitutional limitations, obviously).  A bill of attainder declares a defendant guilty without trial.  Targeting a company with laws isn't particularly noteworthy, this is done all the time, usually to the company's benefit.</p>
<p>Nothing Florida is doing would be considered a bill of attainder.  Special conditions that have been set by the state are always available to be re-legislated.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>At question here is whether Disney was punished by an act of the Florida Legislature.  Lets look at basically how this happened.  At first the legislature voted to strip Reedy Creek of its special designation.  Once they realized that this would shift the burden of bond payment to the local counties to the tune of billions, they repealed the law that stripped Reedy Creek of its special designation.  They then passed a law dissolving the Reedy Creek Board that was appointed by Disney.  Before that board was seated, Disney held public meetings in accordance with Florida transparency laws and changed their by-laws as to what power the board would have.  Again this was done above board just no one seemed to notice.  This was signed off on by the former board which was still legally the board for Reedy Creek.  Now that we know this, did the legislature make <em>all</em> the boards of special tax districts submit to a board appointed by the Governor to make business decisions?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
the board for Reedy Creek.  Now that we know this, did the legislature make <em>all</em> the boards of special tax districts submit to a board appointed by the Governor to make business decisions?  No, just Disney.  Also, the Governors own words show that this was a retaliatory action.  Disney has an incredibly strong case here and if I had to chose which one to represent...it would easily be Disney.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Roommate accusing me of theft in Germany

Question Body: <p>my stuff kept going missing and when I asked my roommate they denied but later I looked through their bags and found out it that they were stealing my stuff and hiding it in their bag. I took a picture of my stuff that I found in the bags. then I packed my things and left cause I was scared from them. when they called me I confronted them and they denied and accused me of putting my stuff in their bag to falsely accuse them of stealing from me, but now I am suspecting that they are gonna call the police accusing me of stealing their stuff can they do that? and what will the police do? how does the police system in Germany works in such situations?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/germany" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-germany-tooltip-container">germany</a></p>
<ul>
<li>Anybody <em>can</em> call the police and file charges. The police will probably ask both sides to make statements for the record. If you are potentially accused of a crime, they will inform you of your right not to testify, which can be scary if you are not familiar with the legal language.<br />
You can file charges against the other side at this point, too. Police are familiar with situations where two sides accuse each other.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
You can file charges against the other side at this point, too. Police are familiar with situations where two sides accuse each other.</li>
<li>Having collected evidence and statements, the police decide if there is enough of a case to present it to the prosecutor's office. That's not yet a determination of guilt, it merely means that they will look into it further. The prosecutor decides if there is enough of a case to bring it to court. (The prosecutor must see a likelihood of success.)</li>
<li>If the case goes to trial, there will probably be a single judge, no jury. You are not required to have a defense attorney, but you might want to if there are language problems. However, in the German system, the judge is not merely the 'referee' between the prosecution and defense. The judge is supposed to question witnesses to understand what happened, and in many cases the judge will ask the same questions a defender would have asked.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>For minor crimes, there is a procedure called <em>Strafbefehl</em>, which is important to understand. It is a letter with the offer of a sort of 'plea bargain,' which goes into effect unless you <em>refuse</em> it quickly and demand a trial. Doing nothing means you accept.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Sometimes, things that are made of legal fiction are held to operate as normal even when someone attempts to disobey them.</p>
<p>For example, I can browse a web site and agree to its terms, or I can not browse the web site, but it seems <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/a/92317/18089">I can't browse the web site but not form the TOS contract, even if I am willing to accept the consequences of not having permission.</a></p>
<p>Does this same principle apply to copyright law? If a license is attached to something saying that anyone may copy it provided that they pay a fee much larger than the damages for copyright infringement, and I copy it, can the licensor declare that I agreed to the license and therefore owe the fee? Or can I say I rejected the license and am only responsible for the damages?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Or similarly, can source code that is distributed to you and contains GPL code be considered to have automatically been licensed to you under the GPL? Or is it possible to receive code that <em>should have been</em> but still <em>is not actually</em> licensed to you under the GPL, because the distributor rejected the GPL and chose to commit copyright infringement instead?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Whether a contract relates to copyright vs traditional property rights is a red herring.</p>
<p>As explained in two existing Q&amp;As (very similar to your question, these were about whether one can chose to trespass instead of accepting a parking-lot contract, or an entrance fee):</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/92593/overriding-offered-contract-acceptance-methods-with-express-written-declaration/92600#92600">Overriding offered contract acceptance methods with express written declaration</a></li>
<li><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/92399/legal-bindingness-validity-of-implicit-presumptively-entered-contracts-for-occup/92400#92400">Legal bindingness/validity of implicit/presumptively entered contracts for occupancy fees</a></li>
</ul>
<p>and this Q&amp;A about the <em>objective</em> rather than <em>subjective</em> analysis of contract formation:</p>
<ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>and this Q&amp;A about the <em>objective</em> rather than <em>subjective</em> analysis of contract formation:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/90788/does-contract-formation-require-subjective-meeting-of-the-minds">Does contract formation require subjective &quot;meeting of the minds&quot;?</a></li>
</ul>
<p>, what matters is whether you've done the thing that constitutes acceptance of the contract, and whether in the circumstances, the conduct that the offeror has deemed to be acceptance is the kind of conduct that can objectively convey acceptance.</p>
<p>You can refuse contractual obligations by not doing the act that the offeror has said would constitute acceptance.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<p>is it possible to receive code that should have been but still is not actually licensed to you under the GPL</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is definitely possible, but in this scenario your question is moot.</p>
<p>It doesn't matter to you whether the person who provided the code to you</p>
<p>(a) agreed to the GPL and then violated its terms (breach of contract)</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>(b) made copies without agreeing to the GPL (infringement of copyright).</p>
<p>In neither case was a license under GPL offered to you.  You cannot enforce the offender to offer you a license, because you are not a party to the contract requiring them to do so.</p>


Tags: united-states, copyright, licensing


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is a thumbs-up emoji considered as legally binding agreement in the United States?

Question Body: <p>I <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com//news/international/us/thumbs-up-emoji-to-be-considered-as-legally-binding-agreement-all-you-need-to-know/articleshow/101617715.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&amp;utm_medium=text&amp;utm_campaign=cppst" rel="noreferrer">read</a> that a thumbs-up emoji considered as legally binding agreement in Canada. Is a thumbs-up emoji considered as legally binding agreement in the United States?</p>
<p>If state-specific, I am mostly interested in California and  Washington state.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a><sup>1</sup></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The judgment you have read about is <em>South West Terminal Ltd. v Achter Land</em>, <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skkb/doc/2023/2023skkb116/2023skkb116.html" rel="noreferrer">2023 SKKB 116</a>. <strong>The judge did not hold that &quot;👍&quot; is categorically considered to be binding agreement</strong>. The judge applied the modern approach to contractual interpretation outlined by the Supreme Court of Canada in <em>Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp.</em>, <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2014/2014scc53/2014scc53.html" rel="noreferrer">2014 SCC 53</a> and <em>Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v. Aga</em>, <a href="https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/18895/index.do" rel="noreferrer">2021 SCC 22</a>. This requires judges to interpret the text of the contract and indicators of acceptance in light of the surrounding circumstances.</p>
<p>Regarding interpretation, see <em>Sattva</em>:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Regarding interpretation, see <em>Sattva</em>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>a decision-maker must read the contract as a whole, giving the words used their ordinary and grammatical meaning, consistent with the surrounding circumstances known to the parties at the time of formation of the contract. Consideration of the surrounding circumstances recognizes that ascertaining contractual intention can be difficult when looking at words on their own, because words alone do not have an immutable or absolute meaning</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Regarding formation, see <em>Aga</em> (internal citations removed):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[36] For present purposes, it will suffice to focus on the requirement of
intention to create legal relations. As G. H. L. Fridman explains,
“the test of agreement for legal purposes is whether parties have
indicated to the outside world, in the form of the objective
reasonable bystander, their intention to contract and the terms of such contract”.


key: chroma:document
string_value:
indicated to the outside world, in the form of the objective
reasonable bystander, their intention to contract and the terms of such contract”.
This requirement can be understood as an aspect of valid offer and
acceptance, in the sense that a valid offer and acceptance must
objectively manifest an intention to be legally bound.</p>
<p>[37] The test for an intention to create
legal relations is objective. The question is not what the parties
subjectively had in mind but whether their conduct was such that a
reasonable person would conclude that they intended to be bound. In answering this question,
courts are not limited to the four corners of the purported agreement,
but may consider the surrounding circumstances.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>See also <em>Owners, Strata Plan LMS 3905 v. Crystal Square Parking Corp.</em>, <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/jb62z#par37" rel="noreferrer">2020 SCC 29, para. 37</a>:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>See also <em>Owners, Strata Plan LMS 3905 v. Crystal Square Parking Corp.</em>, <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/jb62z#par37" rel="noreferrer">2020 SCC 29, para. 37</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the offer, acceptance, consideration and terms may be inferred from the parties’ conduct and from the surrounding circumstances</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The conclusion about the 👍 emoji was case-specific. See paras. <a href="https://canlii.ca/t/jxq15#par62" rel="noreferrer">62-63</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[62] ... Again, <strong>based on the facts in this case</strong> – the texting of a contract and then the seeking and receipt of approval was consistent with the previous process between SWT and Achter to enter into grain contracts.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>[63] This court readily acknowledges that a 👍 emoji is a non-traditional means to “sign” a document but nevertheless <strong>under these circumstances</strong> this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a “signature” – to identify the signator (Chris using his unique cell phone number) and as I have found above – to convey Achter’s acceptance of the flax contract.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p><sup>1.&quot;<a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic">Even if you supply a jurisdiction tag, we expect and encourage answers dealing with other jurisdictions – while it might not answer your question directly, your question will be here for others who may be from those jurisdictions.</a>&quot;</sup></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>The meaning of a thumbs-up emoji would be evaluated on a case by case basis in the context of the discussion purported to be creating a binding agreement. I suspect that this is also the true statement of Canadian law.</p>
<p>More generally, body language and gestures and images together with actual words can be considered by a court, in the overall context of an interaction, to determine what was communicated by the parties with each other in order to form a contract. Similarly, slang or non-literal uses of words could form a contract if their meaning is consistent with agreement in the context of the overall discussion.</p>
<p>These foundational concepts of contract interpretation and formation are shared by essentially all common law countries.</p>


Tags: united-states, contract-law, california, washington


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What should I know and consider before deciding whether or not to go to law school?

Question Body: <p>I'm thinking about enrolling in law school, but I haven't taken the LSAT yet or done any serious research regarding schools, career tracks, etc.</p>
<p>My question is: what are some resources I should be looking into?</p>
<p>It's worth noting I'm 29 years old and not currently enrolled in college, though I do have a bachelor's and master's.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>The first thing you need to know is that if you go to law school, you will hate your life for at least those three years. Law school is not like other graduate school programs. If you do reasonably well, it will almost certainly consume your life. Law school students (and lawyers) experience substantially higher rates of alcoholism, drug abuse and depression. And student debt, of course.</p>
<p>The second thing you need to know is that the legal jobs that most people seem to dream of are in very short supply. I haven't looked at the latest market research, but I'd be comfortable betting that the vast majority of work that is available is in criminal law and defending businesses.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Upon graduation, you will probably not be: a lawyer at a large firm, a lawyer at a firm that will pay you more than $100,000, a constitutional lawyer or an environmental lawyer. There are great odds that you will never argue before the Supreme Court, or even your state supreme court. There are really good odds that you will argue in front of a jury no more than six times in your life.</p>
<p>So don't go in blind.</p>
<p><strong>Resource 1: Students at nearby law schools.</strong></p>
<p>My experience is that a powerful majority of law school students go in for the wrong reasons, hate law school, and graduate with more regrets and debt than anything else. I think this is because they usually go in for the wrong reasons: they didn't know what else to do, their mom was a lawyer, they like to argue, their uncle said they should.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>There is only one reason that anyone should go to law school, and that is because they enjoy doing legal work. &quot;Legal work&quot; means two things: research and writing. It does not mean arguing. If you don't like research and writing, you will not like law school, and you will not be a successful lawyer.</p>
<p>So the first resource you should be looking into is students of nearby law schools. Ask them why they went, if they're glad they did, and what their career prospects are like as a result. If their pre-law experiences and motivations sound like yours, consider whether their law-school and career experiences might be the same, as well.</p>
<p>If they don't talk you out of this, move on to...</p>
<p><strong>Resource 2: The career offices at nearby law schools</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If they don't talk you out of this, move on to...</p>
<p><strong>Resource 2: The career offices at nearby law schools</strong></p>
<p>Ask for an appointment to talk about where the legal market is headed, how their schools prepare people for it, and how their graduates are doing. If the market is headed in directions that you don't like, think about whether law school is really a smart decision, at least at this point. You are already entering later than other people, but there's also still time to wait. I went in at 34.</p>
<p>Ask them to put you in touch with recent graduates, as well. They can give you a better idea of what it's like to find a job as an attorney and what it's like to spend three years in law school.</p>
<p>If they don't talk you out of this, move on to...</p>
<p><strong>Resource 3: The cesspool of the online pre-law websites</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If they don't talk you out of this, move on to...</p>
<p><strong>Resource 3: The cesspool of the online pre-law websites</strong></p>
<p>You'll get more good (and bad) information from the ugly, ugly world of pre-law chat. If you want more information about specific law schools, the admissions process, the implications of any criminal, civil, or academic misconduct on your candidacy, or almost anything else, you should take a look at:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.top-law-schools.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Top-Law-Schools.com</a></li>
<li><a href="https://abovethelaw.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Above the Law</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/LawSchool/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Reddit School of Law</a></li>
<li><a href="http://lawschoolnumbers.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Law School Numbers</a></li>
</ul>
<p>There's more out there. It's all awful. If they don't talk you out of it...</p>
<p><strong>Resource 4: Your LSAT score</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>There's more out there. It's all awful. If they don't talk you out of it...</p>
<p><strong>Resource 4: Your LSAT score</strong></p>
<p>Do not take your LSAT without preparing. Take a formal LSAT prep course. They can be expensive, but they are worth it. I spent roughly $1,000 on mine and went from the 50th percentile to the 90th. Given my terrible GPA, that was the difference between being rejected by everyone and $120,000 in scholarship funds.</p>
<p>If you prepare for the LSAT and get a low score (under the 50th percentile) anyway, <strong>DO NOT GO TO LAW SCHOOL.</strong> There are law schools that will take you, but there are decent odds that they are basically not real law schools. The ABA is currently targeting law schools admitting underqualified candidates and revoking their certification.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If you get a decent score, and you have a decent undergraduate GPA, the odds are good that you'll get into a decent school and perform reasonably well. That does not, however, mean that you'll enjoy yourself. So I recommend that throughout all of this, you also take advantage of....</p>
<p><strong>Resource 5: Reading about the law</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>Resource 5: Reading about the law</strong></p>
<p>To get a feel for whether law school will be an enjoyable experience or a painful slog, I recommend starting to read the law now. Start getting a feel for whether the people you'd be spending your education and career with are doing anything you find remotely interesting. Do you enjoy reading <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/17" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Supreme Court decisions</a>? Do you get off on the idea of <a href="https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=775083081114007114011079089087000125015041073000033030103116094071025080023085080099019058097123006014049012002031127110007082019050035019082076106097099066028116084015076004017114110068080111127087083113016096121009000088108018009091080006001017027&amp;EXT=pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">writing a really good contract</a>?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Maybe you can find an area where you might like to carve a niche. But maybe you'd rather carve your eyes out with a spoon. Take a look around to find out:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.scotusblog.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SCOTUSblog</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.law.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Law.com</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.law360.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Law360</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.abajournal.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ABA Journal</a></li>
<li><a href="http://volokh.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Volokh Conspiracy</a></li>
<li><a href="https://balkin.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Balkinization</a></li>
<li><a href="https://fedsoc.org/commentary/blog-posts" rel="nofollow noreferrer">FedSoc blog</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.aclu.org/blog" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ACLU blog</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ACS blog</a></li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li><a href="https://www.aclu.org/blog" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ACLU blog</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ACS blog</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Lawfare</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.popehat.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Popehat</a></li>
<li><a href="http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">PrawfsBlawg</a></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Bad resources:</strong></p>
<p>You should not base your decision to go to law school on:</p>
<ul>
<li><em>1L</em>, by Scott Turow</li>
<li><em>Legally Blonde</em></li>
<li><em>The Paper Chase</em></li>
<li><em>My Cousin Vinny</em></li>
<li><em>Law &amp; Order</em></li>
</ul>
<p>If you decide to go to law school, however, you should familiarize with all of these, as they are subcultural touchstones.</p>
<p><strong>A final word</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>If you decide to go to law school, however, you should familiarize with all of these, as they are subcultural touchstones.</p>
<p><strong>A final word</strong></p>
<p>If this sounds like I'm trying to talk you out of it, it's because I'm guessing that you're a lot like the vast majority of the law students and lawyers I have ever known, and I've known a lot.</p>
<p>But there is a small group of people who enjoy law school and enjoy the law. I enjoyed the first year of law school, if not the last two, and I really love the legal work that I do. But I came to law school only after about 10 years in a job doing work that was already pretty intensively law-related and having really committed to the idea for reasons that were purely internal and had nothing to do with making anyone happy other than myself.</p>
<p>If you can get to that point, I'd say go for it. If you can't, I promise you that you can find a more fulfilling way to spend three years of your life.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>Deciding whether to go to law school is a personal choice that depends on your interests, career goals, and financial situation. Law school can provide you with a solid foundation in legal knowledge and critical thinking skills, opening up various career opportunities in the legal field. However, it is essential to consider the time commitment and financial investment required for law school. Research the job market and speak with practicing lawyers to gain insights into the profession. This article from the American Bar Association (ABA) provides valuable information to help you make an informed decision: <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/pre_law_/should-i-go-to-law-school/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Should I Go to Law School</a>?, Also you can check <a href="https://www.lawinfoadvice.com/p/law-student-resource.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Law Student Resources</a> from Law Info Advice.</p>


Tags: legal-education


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>What is the law on scanning pages from a copyright book for a friend? Not the whole book, but a section or whatever the friend needs. What about if the book is out of print?</p>
<p>If it is illegal, then what's the difference between this and lending the friend the book? If the person lends the book and the friend does his own personal scanning with it, is that a different scenario, and if so what is the legality of it?</p>
<p>I live in the UK, but knowing the international side of this is probably important too. Could a person in the UK scan pages for a friend in another country, for example? Can we generalise?</p>
<p>If it's black and white, what about in practice? Would a friend copying for a friend as a one off for no malicious intents or purposes be something many publishers would allow? Is it common for single authors to allow this? Or is this never allowed and either gets generally overlooked, gets prosecuted regularly?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>I am asking this because I am studying the ethics of this concurrently, and knowing what the law is is an important side of that.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>It should not surprise you that copyright protects the right to (among other things) make copies. There are limited exceptions that are considered &quot;fair use&quot;, like if you reproduce a limited amount of text for educational, reporting, or review purposes. Giving your friend a copy of a large portion of the text just because they want it would almost certainly violate copyright. Whether the book is available or out-of-print has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on who holds the copyright or whether your actions violate it.</p>
<p>This is very different from giving your friend the book itself. The book itself is covered under the &quot;first sale doctrine&quot;, meaning that by buying a copy of the book, you buy the right to sell, transfer, or dispose of <em>that particular copy</em>, but it doesn't give you the right to make more copies.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>I will note that in practice, it is vanishingly unlikely that the copyright holder would ever learn of your isolated instance of limited infringement in the first place (especially since it's out of print), much less bring legal action against you for making a single copy that did not affect their bottom line.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>It depends on the use your friend will make of the copy</h2>
<p>Any amount of copying is <em>prima facie</em> copyright infringement.</p>
<p>UK law allows <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright#non-commercial-research-and-private-study" rel="noreferrer">fair dealing</a> copying for specific use cases. You don’t tell us <em>why</em> your friend wants a copy so we can’t tell if it fits one of the exemptions. If it does, the copying must still be <em>fair</em> - a small portion of the work and not the total work, for example.</p>
<p>Lending your friend the book is not a problem because there is no copying involved. If they make copes while they have it - see above.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>Copyright law generally reserves to the owner of the copyright the exclusive right to copy the material:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>United States</strong>. <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" rel="noreferrer">17 U.S.C. § 106</a>: &quot;the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following... (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies...&quot;</li>
<li><strong>Canada</strong>. <a href="https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/page-2.html#h-102726" rel="noreferrer"><em>Copyright Act</em>, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, s. 3</a> &quot;copyright... means the sole right to produce or reproduce the work...&quot;</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>These are just two examples of domestic legislation giving effect to the countries' commitments as parties to the <a href="https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/283698" rel="noreferrer">Berne Convention</a> to ensure that &quot;[a]uthors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form&quot; (art. 9).</p>
<p>Many countries also provide a fair-use exception or fair-dealing right, consistent with art. 9(2) of the Berne Convention. For example, see:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/7683/in-the-us-when-is-fair-use-a-defense-to-copyright-infringement">In the US, when is fair use a defense to copyright infringement?</a></li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 4: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/germany" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-germany-tooltip-container">germany</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/urhg/__53.html" rel="noreferrer">§ 53</a> of the German copyright law got you and your friend covered. Specifically, the first subparagraph says:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Zulässig sind einzelne Vervielfältigungen eines Werkes durch eine natürliche Person zum privaten Gebrauch auf beliebigen Trägern, sofern sie weder unmittelbar noch mittelbar Erwerbszwecken dienen, soweit nicht zur Vervielfältigung eine offensichtlich rechtswidrig hergestellte oder öffentlich zugänglich gemachte Vorlage verwendet wird. Der zur Vervielfältigung Befugte darf die Vervielfältigungsstücke auch durch einen anderen herstellen lassen, sofern dies unentgeltlich geschieht oder es sich um Vervielfältigungen auf Papier oder einem ähnlichen Träger mittels beliebiger photomechanischer Verfahren oder anderer Verfahren mit ähnlicher Wirkung handelt.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Individual reproductions of a work by a natural person for private use on any medium are permitted, provided they are not used directly or indirectly for commercial purposes, unless a template that was obviously illegally produced or made publicly accessible is used for the reproduction. The person authorized to make copies may also have the copies made by someone else, provided this is done free of charge or the copies are made on paper or a similar medium using any photomechanical process or other process with a similar effect.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You presumably obtained the book legally. Therefore, you're not violating &quot; unless a template that was obviously illegally produced or made publicly accessible&quot;.</p>
<p>If you're making copies on paper, your friend can even pay you for it. If you're scanning the pages, your friend must not pay you for your trouble or scan the pages themselves.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If you're making copies on paper, your friend can even pay you for it. If you're scanning the pages, your friend must not pay you for your trouble or scan the pages themselves.</p>
<p>There is no strict definition for what &quot;for private use&quot; means. I learned in law classes that you should stay in the single digits for the number of friends you make copies for.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 5: <p>Any copying, which includes photographing, xeroxing, scanning or retyping is copyright infringement. Copyright protection exists for books that are out of print. Infringement exists with any amount of copying, though in the US there is the &quot;fair use&quot; defense, which is marginally applicable.</p>
<p>The difference between you scanning the book, versus lending (or giving) the book to the friend and having the friend do the scanning is that in the former case you violate the law and in the latter case your friend violates the law. There is a third case where nobody violates the law and you lend the friend a copy of the book. Also, borrowing a book from a library (governmental or otherwise) does not change the outcome, because the law prohibits anyone making any unauthorized copy, regardless of the ownership status of the physical original.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Generally speaking, wherever you are you cannot infringe copyright. Eritrea and Iran are hard cases, since Iran does not enforce copyright from other cases though there is Iran-internal protection of Iranian material; and Eritrea simply does not have any copyright protection.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 6: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/switzerland" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;switzerland&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;switzerland&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-switzerland-tooltip-container">switzerland</a></p>
<p>Published works may be freely shared among &quot;people closely connected to each other, such as relatives or friends&quot;. Copyright owners are compensated collectively through a tax levied on devices and media capable of facilitating such copies.</p>
<p>This exemption from copyright is stipulated in the Federal Act on Copyright and Related Rights, article 19, which <a href="https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1993/1798_1798_1798/en#tit_2/chap_5" rel="nofollow noreferrer">writes</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Published works may be used for private use. Private use means:</p>
<p>a. any personal use of a work or use within a circle of persons closely connected to each other, such as relatives or friends;</p>
<p>[...]</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>a. any personal use of a work or use within a circle of persons closely connected to each other, such as relatives or friends;</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>This Article does not apply to computer programs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(&quot;use&quot; encompasses any use of the work, including making copies for those people)</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: May putting others at peril worsen the sentence?

Question Body: <p>Bob the Burglar specializes in fencing of stolen safety equipment (fire extinguishers, AEDs, etc.).</p>
<p>One night, he breaks into a factory and steals the fire extinguishers and a fire hose. The theft is not immediately discovered. The next day, during ordinary work hours, a small fire breaks out that could normally have been put out easily, but because there's nothing to do so, the factory burns to the ground and several workers die.</p>
<p>Could Bob get a charge (or even conviction) for manslaughter? Clearly he didn't intend to really harm anybody.</p>
<p>What if nothing more had happened? Could he be convicted for attempted manslaughter just because he put the workers in peril with his theft?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/us" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;us&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;us&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-us-tooltip-container">us</a><a href="/questions/tagged/uk" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;uk&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;uk&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-uk-tooltip-container">uk</a><a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-australia-tooltip-container">australia</a></p>
<p>Yes, this can be charged as a type of negligent homicide, involuntary manslaughter.
The degree of culpability might be greater than negligence, since the initial act was a premeditated crime.</p>
<ul>
<li>There is no intent to kill</li>
<li>The act is criminal and malicious</li>
<li>The consequences are reasonably foreseeable</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<ul>
<li>There is no intent to kill</li>
<li>The act is criminal and malicious</li>
<li>The consequences are reasonably foreseeable</li>
</ul>
<p>The offense would be a type of <strong>constructive manslaughter</strong>, where a crime not intended to kill or cause bodily harm results in death. In the UK this is also known as an <em>unlawful act manslaughter</em>. The perpetrator of a premeditated crime is held responsible not only for the intended consequences, but also for foreseeable incidental ones, albeit at a reduced <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culpability" rel="noreferrer">degree of culpability</a>.</p>
<p>This doctrine is established in both civil and common law, and will apply in broadly similar ways, with different local names, usually variations on unintended homicide, in most civil law jurisdictions as well.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/us" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;us&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;us&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-us-tooltip-container">us</a></p>
<p>Medical or fire-fighting equipment being among the stolen items is, in many jurisdictions, by itself sufficient to <a href="https://www.pumphreylawfirm.com/blog/penalties-for-grand-theft-of-an-emergency-medical-equipment/" rel="noreferrer">raise the charge to grand theft</a>, which is a felony in common law.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If Bob actually specializes in this, and a death did occur, the prosecution might charge them with second-degree felony murder, if applicable in their state. That rule is generally applied when the base offense presents danger to human life, but there have been <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Holle" rel="noreferrer">cases that stretch it</a>. Burglary is sufficient to apply this rule. Such a charge is less certain to stand up in court and is usually traded down in a plea bargain.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/france" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-france-tooltip-container">france</a></p>
<h2>Yes, because it changes the charge</h2>
<p>Bob's conduct falls under <a href="https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000024042647" rel="nofollow noreferrer">article 221-6 du Code Pénal</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Le fait de causer, dans les conditions et selon les distinctions prévues à l'article 121-3, par maladresse, imprudence, inattention, négligence ou manquement à une obligation de prudence ou de sécurité imposée par la loi ou le règlement, la mort d'autrui constitue un homicide involontaire puni de trois ans d'emprisonnement et de 45 000 euros d'amende.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Causing the death of another under the conditions of article 121-3 by carelessness, imprudence, negligence, or failing to obey a duty of prudence or safety given by the law or local regulation, is involuntary homicide punished by [a maximum of] three years in jail and €45 000 fine.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The theft charge itself and its sentence should not be affected (but that’s likely to be small change compared to the sentence for involuntary homicide anyway).</p>
<p>There is a reference to <a href="https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006417208" rel="nofollow noreferrer">article 121-3</a>. That article establishes the general principle of <em>mens rea</em> (no crime without the intention to commit it), but it also introduces narrow exceptions that apply here (basically, strict liability for &quot;reckless endangerement&quot;-type charges).</p>
<h2>Bob is also civilly liable</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>Bob is also civilly liable</h2>
<p>He had faulty conduct (committed a crime), others suffered damage (deaths by fire, material damage to the factory), and there is a clear causal link between the two.</p>
<p>Bob’s lawyer might argue to reduce the fraction of damages that Bob is responsible for. After all, the damages only occurred because there was a fire, of which Bob is not responsible. Carol the worker, who started the fire, is responsible at least in part (either as a representative of the company if she acted within her work duties, or personally if she failed to comply with her employer’s safety instructions). Dave the director potentially failed to promptly call the firemen (or establish safety procedures that would have allowed to do so), or skimped on fire retardant materials. If any of those can be criminally charged, there would usually be a joint trial, and the court will decide on a split of responsibility.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: In which states can an out of state company be sued in small claims court?

Question Body: <p>In the U.S., where can a company be sued in small claims court for a breach of contract and fraudulent billing, when the plaintiff resides in one U.S. state, the company's headquarters and place of organization is in another U.S. state, and the conduct giving rise to the claim took place in a third U.S. state?</p>
<p>The amount in controversy is less than $75,000 and the claims do not arise under federal law, so the federal courts do not have jurisdiction over the case.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></p>
<h3>Short Answer</h3>
<p>Generally speaking, you can sue in some court in the state where the company has its headquarters or its organized, or in the state where the events giving rise to the lawsuit occurred (or in any other state to which the defendant fails to object in a timely manner). There is an exception to the general rule when the conduct that forms the basis of the lawsuit was targeted at the plaintiff in the state where the plaintiff now resides.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Whether you can sue in a true small claims court particularly varies a lot from state to state. Often true small claims courts are not allowed under state law to consider all cases that other courts in the state could consider (e.g. cases against defendants who are not headquartered in that county).</p>
<p>Even if you can sue in true small claims court in a state where you do not reside, it often makes more sense to sue in a limited jurisdiction court rather than a small claims court in those cases, with or without a lawyer.</p>
<h3>Long Answer</h3>
<p><em>Preface On Federal v. State Claims And Removal To Federal Court</em></p>
<p>In the U.S. claims for a breach of contract and fraudulent billing usually arise solely under state law, although sometimes federal law may apply in specific circumstances.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In the U.S. claims for a breach of contract and fraudulent billing usually arise solely under state law, although sometimes federal law may apply in specific circumstances.</p>
<p>This answer assumes that no federal law claims are filed. But the states in which federal law claims could be brought in a federal U.S. District Court, would be the same as the states in which state law claims could be brought in state court.</p>
<p>The federal courts do not have a small claims court division or limited jurisdiction court division.</p>
<p>Federal claims can be brought in state court, but the defendant can remove the case to federal court in the same state if this is done, which would make a small claims court forum unavailable.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Federal claims can be brought in state court, but the defendant can remove the case to federal court in the same state if this is done, which would make a small claims court forum unavailable.</p>
<p>If the Plaintiff files only state law claims in state court, the defendant cannot remove the case to federal court on the grounds that the defendant has asserted federal law defenses to the claim or has asserted a counterclaim arising under federal law. But, the defendant could remove the case to federal court if the Plaintiff and Defendant reside in different states and the Defendant shows in good faith that the amount in controversy between them exceeds $75,000.</p>
<p><em>Issues Presented</em></p>
<p>There are two issues presented.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Do any courts of a particular state have (personal) jurisdiction over the case?</p>
</li>
<li><p>Does a small claims court in a state that does have jurisdiction have jurisdiction over the case?</p>
</li>
</ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</li>
<li><p>Does a small claims court in a state that does have jurisdiction have jurisdiction over the case?</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Do any courts of a particular state have jurisdiction over the case?</strong></p>
<p><em>General Jurisdiction Where The Defendant Resides</em></p>
<p>A company can always be sued over its conduct anywhere in the world in some court of the state where a company is organized and has its headquarters. This concept is called &quot;general jurisdiction&quot; and while the U.S. Supreme Court has narrowed the number of states where courts have general jurisdiction over a company, this heartland of the concept remains effective. This is usually the state where it is easiest to collect a money judgment in a lawsuit if the person suing wins the case, because the company usually has assets in the state where it has its headquarters.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Under a case called <em>International Shoe Co. v. Washington</em>, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) until just a few years ago, a state had &quot;general jurisdiction&quot; over a company in every state where it had a regular employee or a brick and mortar place of business.</p>
<p>But this rule was narrowed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2014 case <em>Daimler AG v. Bauman</em>, to give a state general jurisdiction over a company only in the state where its headquarters (ignoring any headquarters of any subsidiary of the company) are located or under whose law the company was organized. Before this ruling, this narrow scope of general jurisdiction only applied to national banks, and then, only as a result of a Congressionally enacted statute to that effect.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Just this summer, however, the U.S. Supreme Court created an except to an exception to <em>Daimler AG v. Bauman</em>, in the case of <em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mallory-v-norfolk-southern-railway-co/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co</a>.</em>, ___ U.S. ___ (2023), holding that in states where a company is registered to do business, if the state has a statute (like the one in Pennsylvania) allowing its residents to sue the business on any claim against a company registered there arising anywhere in the world, that the state has jurisdiction over the case.</p>
<p>(There is also another case creating a partial exception to the <em>Daimler AG v. Bauman</em> rule in cases that involve fact patterns very different from those in the question, such as product liability lawsuits against car makers.)</p>
<p><em>Specific Jurisdiction Where The Claim Arises</em></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Specific Jurisdiction Where The Claim Arises</em></p>
<p>A company can also always be sued in the state where all of the important events that provide a basis for the lawsuit took place. This concept is called &quot;specific jurisdiction&quot; which is also known as &quot;long arm jurisdiction&quot;. This is usually the state where it is easiest to prove the case because usually witnesses and evidence are more available in this state.</p>
<p><em>Usually A State Doesn't Have Jurisdiction Because The Plaintiff Resides There</em></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Usually A State Doesn't Have Jurisdiction Because The Plaintiff Resides There</em></p>
<p>Usually, under U.S. law, unless a specific statute says otherwise, a lawsuit against a company cannot be brought where the person bringing the lawsuit (who is called &quot;the Plaintiff&quot;) resides, unless that state has some other connection to the lawsuit. This would be the most convenient state to sue in for the Plaintiff, especially if the Plaintiff is not hiring a lawyer and will have to appear in person as if often the case in small claims court, and the other relevant states are far away.</p>
<p>However, if fraud is &quot;targeted&quot; at someone in a particular state, then the courts of the state state at which the conduct is targeted has jurisdiction over the claims that were targeted at that state.</p>
<p><em>Tag Jurisdiction Over Natural Persons</em></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Tag Jurisdiction Over Natural Persons</em></p>
<p>Another way that a state can have jurisdiction over a defendant is called &quot;tag jurisdiction&quot; which is obtained by physically handing a summons and complaint to the defendant in person in the state as allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court case of <em>Burnham v. Superior Court</em>. This is allowed for natural persons (i.e. human beings) who are defendants, but it isn't allowed as a way to give a state jurisdiction over a defendant who is a company.</p>
<p><em>Waiver Of In Personam Jurisdiction Defenses</em></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Waiver Of In Personam Jurisdiction Defenses</em></p>
<p>Also, if a Plaintiff sues in a state where the Defendant has a right to object to state's jurisdiction, but the Defendant does not object to the state's jurisdiction in the first substantive document file in that court (usually either an &quot;answer&quot; or a &quot;motion to dismiss&quot;) then any objection to the jurisdiction of that state over the case is automatically waived. So, if the state where the Plaintiff lives doesn't have jurisdiction, but the Plaintiff sues the company there anyway, and that company sued doesn't immediately object, then the court has jurisdiction to proceed because the company's objections to filing the lawsuit in the wrong state are waived.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Another component of jurisdiction called &quot;subject-matter&quot; jurisdiction, which can't be waived, involves whether a particular court can handle a particular kind of case without regard to whether the case was filed in the right state and isn't an issue in this question. Subject-matter jurisdiction can't be waived involves questions like whether a limited jurisdiction court takes on a case in excess of the dollar amount it is allowed to consider, or grants a kind of judgment it doesn't have the authority to grant, or grants relief in a case brought by someone who hasn't suffered any legal injury which is called lacking &quot;standing&quot; to sue.</p>
<p>Some waivers of personal jurisdiction defenses are intentional litigation strategy decisions and others are a result of simple carelessness or malpractice by the lawyer involved.</p>
<p><strong>Does a small claims court in a state that does have jurisdiction have jurisdiction over the case?</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>Does a small claims court in a state that does have jurisdiction have jurisdiction over the case?</strong></p>
<p><em>What is small claims court?</em></p>
<p>The term &quot;small claims court&quot; has both a strict and a more general meaning.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In the strict sense of the word, a small claims court is a state court or division of a state court which can adjudicate only claims up to a specific dollar amount that uses a very simplified procedure and is designed to be used by non-lawyers bringing lawsuit (and often only allows non-lawyers to bring lawsuit in this forum). The maximum dollar amount that can be claimed in small claims court varies. In some states it can be as low as $3,000. In some states it can be as much as $10,000 (maybe more, I haven't checked recently and the dollar amounts get adjusted from time to time for inflation). Not every state has a separate small claims court or small claims court division, but most do. In states that have &quot;justices of the peace&quot;, the small claims court is the justices of the peace court (often presided over by non-lawyer judges). In the rest of this answer I will call these &quot;true small claims courts&quot; The dollar limit on small claims court jurisdiction is


key: chroma:document
string_value:
of the peace court (often presided over by non-lawyer judges). In the rest of this answer I will call these &quot;true small claims courts&quot; The dollar limit on small claims court jurisdiction is typically lower than the dollar limit on limited jurisdiction court claims discussed below. Usually, small claims court has low filing fees.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Typically in a true small claims court, all proceedings other than the initial summons and complaint (and sometimes a written answer) must be conducted orally, with both the person suing and the person being sued (or a representative of a company) appearing in person in the courtroom. COVID changed this in some states, but probably only a minority of them and in most cases only temporarily.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In the broader sense of the word, &quot;small claims court&quot; means a court of limited jurisdiction that can only handle claims up to a certain dollar amount (typically somewhere in the range of $10,000 to $50,000), that is used by lawyers and non-lawyers alike to bring lawsuits and has a more formal process than the small claims court in the strict sense discussed above, but has a simpler and faster process than courts of general jurisdiction that handle cases of unlimited dollar amounts. In the rest of this answer I will call these &quot;limited jurisdiction courts.&quot; More of the court process can be conducted by filing documents in limited jurisdiction courts than in small claims court, lawyers can appear in person at trials instead of parties in most cases in limited jurisdiction courts, and limited jurisdiction courts more often, although not always, will allow parties or other witnesses to testify by telephone or videoconferencing. Usually the filing fees in limited


key: chroma:document
string_value:
courts, and limited jurisdiction courts more often, although not always, will allow parties or other witnesses to testify by telephone or videoconferencing. Usually the filing fees in limited jurisdiction courts is higher than in small claims court but lower than in a general jurisdiction court.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Where Can Lawsuits Be Filed In Limited Jurisdiction Courts?</em></p>
<p>A lawsuit can be commenced in a limited jurisdiction court in any state over which some courts of the state have either general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction, as long as the amount in dispute is less than the dollar limit of the jurisdiction of the court.</p>
<p><em>Where Can Lawsuits Be Filed In True Small Claims Courts?</em></p>
<p>States vary a great deal over what kind of cases can be commenced in small claims courts.</p>
<p>Some states allow small claims court cases to be brought in any case up to the dollar amount limit for the court that a limited jurisdiction court could handle.</p>
<p>But other states impose one or more of the following additional restrictions on bringing cases in small claims court:</p>
<ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>But other states impose one or more of the following additional restrictions on bringing cases in small claims court:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Some states only allow small claims court cases to be brought against defendants (i.e. persons or companies that are being sued) that reside or are headquartered in the county where the small claims court is located.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Some states only allow small claims court cases to be brought in cases where both the person bringing the lawsuit and the person being sued reside or have headquarters in the same county.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Some states only allow small claims court cases to be brought in cases where the events giving rise to the case occurred in the county where the small claims court is located.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p><em>Remedies Available</em></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</li>
</ol>
<p><em>Remedies Available</em></p>
<p>Both small claims courts and limited jurisdiction courts are also typically limited to awarding money judgments for damages, rather than any other kind of remedies - like reforming a contract or entering a declaratory judgment or adjudicating real property title or entering an injunction. Usually only &quot;general jurisdiction courts&quot; are allowed to provide that kind of relief to a party bringing a lawsuit.</p>
<p>If you win a money judgment in small claims court or in a limited jurisdiction court and you get a judgment. Usually the technical legal process for collecting the judgment is the same as the technical legal process for doing that in general jurisdiction courts.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If the company sued doesn't have assets in the state where it is sued, and you win in a lawsuit against that company, the judgment entered in the state where you win has to be &quot;domesticated&quot; to the state where the company's assets are located after the judgment is entered (which can be in a state that didn't have jurisdiction to try the case in the first place). This process is basically automatic (you file a certified copy of the judgment with a court of the state where the assets are located) but filing fee has to be paid in the state where the assets are located in which the money judgment is domesticated, and you may have to send a notice to the defendant/judgment debtor by mail that the judgment has been domesticated to that state. Then you have to use the technical court process to collect the judgment in the state where the assets are located.</p>
<p><em>Appeals</em></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Appeals</em></p>
<p>Limited jurisdiction courts are usually &quot;courts of record&quot; which means that a verbatim record of the testimony in trials is kept either with a court reporter or an audiotape, and appeals from a limited jurisdiction court are usually just like appeals from a general jurisdiction court, except that you normally appeal to a single judge of the general jurisdiction court, instead of to a three judge panel of a court of appeals or to state supreme court in a state that doesn't have an intermediate court of appeals. These appeals are usually a little less expensive (due to smaller filing fees) and a little faster, than appeals from a general jurisdiction court to an appellate court.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>A minority of true small claims courts are courts of record and the same appeal process as an appeal from a limited jurisdiction court is used, except that lots of procedural issues like failure to follow the rules of evidence which you are allowed to appeal from in limited jurisdiction courts are not valid grounds for an appeal from a small claims court ruling.</p>
<p>Most true small claims claims courts, however, are courts not of record. In courts not of record, there is no court reporter or tape recording of the proceedings. In these courts, if either party appeals that do the trial over from scratch in the limited jurisdiction court of record (using small claims court procedures and rules) in what is called a trial <em>de novo</em>, rather than considering what happened in the original true small claims court trial. So, this can end up being slower and more expensive and time consuming if the other side is very litigious and is likely to appeal any unfavorable ruling.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>Any of the three states plus the Commonwealth potentially have jurisdiction</h2>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-australia-tooltip-container">australia</a></p>
<p>Federal jurisdiction is engaged whenever a civil case arises under a Commonwealth statute or the claim or defense engages a Commonwealth matter. The Australian Consumer Law is Commonwealth legislation and probably applies to Your circumstances. Both Federal and state courts have jurisdiction over Federal matters.</p>
<p>The most appropriate state court is the one where the event occurred. There are arguments that this is any or all of the three involved states: the registered office of the company, your residence, or where the locus of the contract is.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>As the plaintiff, you get to choose where to bring your action. A small claims court is unlikely to be interested in technical jurisdictional arguments if they prima facie have jurisdiction.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does accepting a pardon have any bearing on trying that person for the same crime in a sovereign jurisdiction?

Question Body: <p>In the United States, accepting a pardon is an admission to the crime.  In <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States" rel="noreferrer"><em>Burdick_v._United_States</em></a>, the majority opinion stated that a pardon "carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it."  </p>

<p>The United States has <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Jeopardy_Clause#Dual_sovereignty_doctrine" rel="noreferrer">dual sovereignty</a>.  Each state and the federal government makes and prosecutes its own laws.  A federal pardon does not grant immunity to state laws, and vice versa.  A person pardoned in one jurisdiction can still be prosecuted for the same crime (e.g. tax evasion) in another jurisdiction.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Could the acceptance of the pardon then have any bearing on the case in the other jurisdiction?  Can the admission of guilt be used in the new case?  Can it be used as "reasonable cause" for various actions?  Does the defendant <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/q/22207/25263">lose their right to refuse to testify</a> in the new case?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>Could the acceptance of the pardon then have any bearing on the case
in the other jurisdiction?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Possibly, but not much. There is very, very little case law on this point since: (1) pardons are rare (especially federal ones), (2) people who are pardoned generally do so because everyone in the criminal justice process in the prior case agrees that the person is reformed and they are usually correct, (3) the statute of limitations has often run on a new prosecution, and (4) many cases where these issues arise, are probably not appealed (either because the neither parties attempts to, or because a defendant is acquitted and there is no appeal), but an appeal is necessary to give rise to binding precedents.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Can the admission of guilt be used in the new case?</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Can the admission of guilt be used in the new case?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The criminal collateral estoppel effects of a pardon flow from the adjudication on the merits which is vacated. Also, comity between sovereigns and public policy mitigate such a rule. The pardon power would not be very interesting if it routinely resulted in a new prosecution that was conducted on a summary basis via a preclusion doctrine such as collateral estoppel.</p>
<p>In many cases, the statute of limitations will have run on the original crime or there will be no parallel state law crime, but this is not always the case.</p>
<p>Also, I would disagree with the statement that a pardon always implies an admission of guilt to the crime for which a pardon was granted, even though that statement is often used rhetorically.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Also, I would disagree with the statement that a pardon always implies an admission of guilt to the crime for which a pardon was granted, even though that statement is often used rhetorically.</p>
<p>For example, one important use of the pardon power is to commute the sentence of someone who asserts that they are factually innocent but have been convicted of a crime, potentially in a manner that is not subject to further judicial review, and treating that as an admission of guilt doesn't make sense.</p>
<p>As the Wikipedia entry on <em>Burdick</em> notes in the pertinent part:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Legal scholars have questioned whether that portion of <em>Burdick</em>
[<em>ed.</em> about admission of guilt] is meaningful or merely <em>dicta</em>.
President Ford made reference to the <em>Burdick</em> decision in his
post-pardon written statement furnished to the Judiciary Committee of
the United States House of Representatives on October 17, 1974.


key: chroma:document
string_value:
post-pardon written statement furnished to the Judiciary Committee of
the United States House of Representatives on October 17, 1974.
However, said reference related only to the portion of <em>Burdick</em> that
supported the proposition that the Constitution does not limit the
pardon power to cases of convicted offenders or even indicted
offenders.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I would read this as <em>dicta</em>, as this portion of the holding was not necessary for the court to reach its conclusion and the fact pattern in <em>Burdick</em> was a typical fact pattern where guilt was not disputed. It didn't raise the concerns present when a pardon is requested based upon a claim of innocence, and granted following a conviction.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Instead, the holding of <em>Burdick</em> was that there was no pardon because the pardon was rejected (in a manner very similar to a common law disclaimer of a gift), so its holding didn't need to reach the effect of a pardon that is accepted to resolve the case.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Can it be used as &quot;reasonable cause&quot; for various actions?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a bit too vague to know what you are getting at.</p>
<p>I suppose that a pardon could constitute reasonable cause for some things favorable to a defendant who is pardoned (e.g., potentially in a motion seeking to reopen a termination of parental rights entered on the basis of the conviction).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>I suppose it could also be used in a manner potentially unfavorable to a defendant (e.g. showing a pattern of past conduct that demonstrates modus operandi in connection with a prosecution for a new crime). I don't think it could be used as grounds to deny an occupational or business license for bad character.</p>
<p>Still, without more clear context it is harder to know what you are really looking for in this regard and I'm not confident that my examples address that.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Does the defendant lose their right to refuse to testify in the new
case?</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Does the defendant lose their right to refuse to testify in the new
case?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I haven't reviewed the case law, but my intuition is that if it has never been waived before, it wouldn't be waived by the pardon, but that if it was waived in a previous proceeding resulting in a conviction that was then pardoned, that the prior sworn testimony might be admissible evidence in the new action since it is not hearsay and isn't itself evidence of a prior conviction. The context of the prior testimony might have to be concealed from the jury.</p>
<p>As noted by @Putvi, the defendant could not claim risk of conviction for the federal crime as a ground for invoking the 5th Amendment if a pardon is accepted (something that is implied in <em>Burdick</em>), but if there was an overlapping state law crime, risk of conviction for the state crime could constitute a grounds upon which to invoke the 5th Amendment.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>Burdick</em> does stand for the proposition that a pardon not solicited by the defendant, that is rejected, cannot provide a basis for removing the 5th Amendment protection with respect to a risk of conviction for federal crime.</p>
<p>I would also be inclined to think that matters disclosed in an application for a pardon might be admissible evidence as a non-hearsay statement of a party-opponent, if the statement was stripped of the pardon application context (which would be unduly prejudicial since it would imply a prior conviction which otherwise wouldn't be admissible).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>The reason a person can be compelled to testify after receiving a pardon is that they are no longer in jeopardy of incriminating themselves. <a href="http://time.com/4868418/donald-trump-presidential-pardons-backfire/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://time.com/4868418/donald-trump-presidential-pardons-backfire/</a></p>

<p>It would depend on the specific situation, but if you were in jeopardy of incriminating yourself in the state trial, you could plead the fifth, just like the Time.com article's hypothetical about testifying before congress.</p>

<p>You could bring up the pardon in the state court, if the judge allowed it, but that doesn't mean you are guilty just because you accept a pardon.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>You could bring up the pardon in the state court, if the judge allowed it, but that doesn't mean you are guilty just because you accept a pardon.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>But Burdick was about a different issue: the ability to turn down a pardon. The language about imputing and confessing guilt was just an aside — what lawyers call dicta. The court meant that, as a practical matter, because pardons make people look guilty, a recipient might not want to accept one. But pardons have no formal, legal effect of declaring guilt.<a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-pardons-presidential-trump-nixon-ford-kardashian-0608-story.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-pardons-presidential-trump-nixon-ford-kardashian-0608-story.html</a></p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Whether it made a difference would be up to the jury, in that they would have to decide if it was relevant evidence that aided their deliberations.</p>


Tags: united-states, pardon, multiple-jurisdiction


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Can a private party shoot down an aircraft in self defense or in defense of others?

Question Body: <p>If someone who is not associated with the police or military is certain that an aircraft is being used as a weapon for a violent crime (maybe someone is flying a small plane directly toward an occupied house), and that person legally possesses a weapon that is capable of shooting down the aircraft, is it legal to do so?</p>
<p>ETA: The pilot/attacker is the only person in the plane.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<p>The defences of &quot;self-defence&quot; and &quot;defence of another&quot; are available defences to <em>any act</em> that would otherwise constitute &quot;an offence&quot; in Canada. Section 34 simply says: &quot;A person is not guilty of an offence if... [and then goes on to list the elements of the defence].&quot;</p>
<p>Your question seems to ask about the scope of actions that might be justified or excused by the defence.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Your question seems to ask about the scope of actions that might be justified or excused by the defence.</p>
<p>If it wasn't clear before 2012, amendments in 2012 to the self-defence laws in Canada made it absolutely clear that <em>any</em> offence may be justified or excused by self-defence or defence of another. As the Supreme Court describes in <em>R. v. Khill</em>, <a href="https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19020/index.do" rel="noreferrer">2021 SCC 37</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The accused’s response under the new law is also no longer limited to a defensive use of force. <em>It can apply to other classes of offences, including acts that tread upon the rights of innocent third parties, such as theft, breaking and entering or dangerous driving.</em></p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>The substantive elements of self-defence and defence of another are described two other Q&amp;As, so I will only state them briefly: (a) reasonable belief of a threat of force; (b) the act constituting the offence is for the purpose of protection; (c) the act committed is reasonable.</p>
<p>For details see:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/90856/is-it-legal-to-use-force-against-a-person-who-is-trying-to-stop-you-from-rescuin">Is it legal to use force against a person who is trying to stop you from rescuing another person?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/87377/is-self-defense-allowed-when-there-are-objectively-reasonable-grounds-but-it-is/87387#87387">Is self-defense allowed when there are objectively reasonable grounds but it is actually done subjectively for improper reasons?</a></li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>&quot;Shooting down the plane&quot; is unlikely to fall under Notwehr in <a href="/questions/tagged/germany" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-germany-tooltip-container">germany</a></h2>
<p>In Germany, the fact pattern as described is impossible to achieve and still grant Notwehr. Notwehr is <strong>not</strong> the same as self defense under common law, but that is the best translation. In contrast to the wide latitude given in for example US law, it is <strong>incredibly tightly defined</strong> in Germany.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In Notwehr, one may under no condition risk the harm or death of <strong>any</strong> person besides the pilot, even <strong>if</strong> they find a way to somehow kill the pilot in self-defense, and you only may use proportional force to the threat. That excessive risk by the wreck of the airplane or killing the passengers can all be treated as separate charges of reckless endangerment or murder (as death was taken willingly into account). In Germany, self-defense does <strong>not</strong> allow Bob to harm or kill those others, and threatening them with his illegal backyard stinger, in turn, allows anybody to defend the passengers by shooting Bob first.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>This hinges on a particularity of the law: You only are allowed to use the <strong>least forceful means that are effective</strong> to stop the crime, and shooting the pilot or plane is most likely not an effective means to stop the plane from crashing into the building (as proffered by OP) in the first place. Or to stop any other crime that could be conducted with a plane. Also, you are only allowed to use lethal force after having given a warning of some sort - which is clearly lacking in this case. As a result, it might be an extreme case of <a href="https://www.uni-potsdam.de/de/rechtskunde-online/rechtsgebiete/strafrecht/entschuldigungsgruende/notwehrexzess-33-stgb" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Notwehrexcess</a> (excessive self-defense) to shoot down the plane, especially without warning. Shooting down a plane simply lacks <em>Gebotenheit</em> under German law, which is a crucial part of an analysis of Notwehr.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Note that while Gebotenheit can be translated with necessity, that is not a good translation at all, even a worse one than to translate Notwehr as self-defense: Gebotenheit does not just cover the <em>need</em> for a specific action, that it is <em>proportional</em> to the danger and that it is <em>is able to have success</em>. Shooting a person armed with a rubber chicken is not geboten as it is neither required nor proportional, and shooting a plane down is unlikely to be geboten as it is unlikely to have the intended success while endangering others.</p>
<p>To stay with the example of OP: No means of shooting a plane &quot;down&quot; will stop a plane from crashing into a building once it becomes apparent that the pilot can no longer avoid crashing into the building, and likely doing so is a case of <a href="https://www.juraforum.de/lexikon/notwehrexzess" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Extensiver Notwehrexzess</a> (extensive excessive self-defense).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Shooting the plane &quot;down&quot; before it is clear that the plane will crash into the building is an unlawful killing and clearly <em>Extensiver Notwehrexcess</em>, possibly even Mord of the pilot. This is because a pilot might avert a plane to not crash into the occupied building until about two seconds before the catastrophe - and so there was no situation that required Notwehr at all, and you had no right to apply it in the first place.</p>
<p>Shooting the plane after that point, where the crash has become inevitable and Notwehr would start, doing so does not stop the debris to follow Newton's Laws and crash into the building, and thus shooting the plane &quot;down&quot; is clearly not an effective means to stop the death of people in the building. The act isn't covered by Gebotenheit. However, that might only be Intensiver Notwehrexcess, and the shooting of the plane thus might not be punished.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>However</strong>, that would not excuse any other violations of law that needed to happen to shoot the plane in this way, such as illegal possession of a firearm that is able to destroy the fuselage (most of which are illegal to possess under the Kriegswaffenkontrollgesetz (War Weapons Control Act) in the first place)</p>
<h4>But even the military is not allowed to shoot down a plane:</h4>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h4>But even the military is not allowed to shoot down a plane:</h4>
<p>The first organization that for a short time was deemed able to decide to shoot down a plane in Germany was the Einsatzführungskommando der Bundeswehr according to the 2005 of § 14 (3) LuftSiG. <a href="https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/DE/2006/bvg06-011.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">But that was declared void in 2006</a>, which led to a new version in 2009, <a href="https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2013/03/fs20130320_2bvf000105.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">which was then deemed valid in 2013 under BVerfGE v. 20.3.2013 I 1118 - 2 BvF 1/05</a>. This current version of <a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/luftsig/__14.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§14 (1) LuftSiG</a> does not permit to actually shooting down a plane at all:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>(1) Zur Verhinderung des Eintritts eines besonders schweren Unglücksfalles dürfen die Streitkräfte im Luftraum Luftfahrzeuge abdrängen, zur Landung zwingen, den Einsatz von Waffengewalt androhen oder Warnschüsse abgeben.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In English: To prevent an aircraft disaster, the <strong>armed forces</strong> may force an aircraft out of German territorial airspace, force it to land, threaten the use weapons or give warning shots.</p>
<p>Note that this law does only handle civilian aircraft, not military enemy incursions in case of war - those are handled as enemy combatants and are fair game to shoot down for the armed forces.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/france" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-france-tooltip-container">france</a> Yes, but the factual pattern is unlikely to ever happen.</p>
<h2>Self-defense</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006417218" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Article 122-5 du Code Pénal</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>N'est pas pénalement responsable la personne qui, devant une atteinte injustifiée envers elle-même ou autrui, accomplit, dans le même temps, un acte commandé par la nécessité de la légitime défense d'elle-même ou d'autrui, sauf s'il y a disproportion entre les moyens de défense employés et la gravité de l'atteinte.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>N'est pas pénalement responsable la personne qui, pour interrompre l'exécution d'un crime ou d'un délit contre un bien, accomplit un acte de défense, autre qu'un homicide volontaire, lorsque cet acte est strictement nécessaire au but poursuivi dès lors que les moyens employés sont proportionnés à la gravité de l'infraction.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>A person has no criminal liability when he or she is faced by an unjustified attack against himself or herself or another, accomplishes at the same time an act out of the need of legitimate defense or himself, herself or another, unless there is a disproportion between the means of defense and the severity of the attack.</p>
<p>A person has no criminal liability when he or she accomplishes an act of defense other than voluntary homicide, in order to interrupt a crime or felony against goods, when the act is strictly necessary to the aim of defense and when the means of the act are proportionate to the gravity of the attack.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>It’s a bit complicated but it all checks out:</p>
<ul>
<li>unjustified attack: check, assuming the prospective defender knows that the plane pilot intends to crash it into their house</li>
<li>towards persons: check (if the house is occupied)</li>
<li>action taken &quot;in the heat of the moment&quot;: check (you don’t shoot the plane pilot <em>after</em> the plane has crashed)</li>
<li>necessary act: check? (see below)</li>
<li>proportionate: check (there is no way to stop the plane other than shooting it down)</li>
</ul>
<h2>The factual pattern is dubious</h2>
<p>In the above, the person shooting down the plane</p>
<ul>
<li>has the knowledge that the plane is coming for an unjustified attack (how do you know the plane will aim at the house? that it is voluntary and not a distress landing?)</li>
<li>has enough time to do something weapon-y about it (shooting down planes is, you know, hard)...</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>has enough time to do something weapon-y about it (shooting down planes is, you know, hard)...</li>
<li>...but not enough time to evacuate the house of its occupants (or ask the police or army to shoot down the plane, or any other means)</li>
<li>has the necessary material at hand to shoot down the plane. That is almost certainly a violation of some arm control provision. Contrary to popular belief, you can legally have weapons in France and the permit is decently easy to get; but you don’t shoot down a plane with a hunting rifle.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>I was reading a bit about this subject and was wondering about the specific status of the medical professionals involved.</p>
<p>If I am pulled over for a DUI and the cops take me back to the police station and subject me to a blood test, presumably a trained medical professional such as a nurse or a phlebotomist does the needle stick and draws the blood.</p>
<p>I wonder though what are the legal and ethical considerations for that medical professional? A medical professional's job is to provide care and support for their patients -- &quot;first do no harm&quot;. But plainly their actions in this case can at best do nothing and at worst get them in a lot of legal trouble, or perhaps at worst damage the blood vessel or give them an infection -- though obviously that is VERY rare.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Given that you are innocent until proven guilty the only purpose of the test is to prove you guilty, and so the person administering the test is doing so with the intent of doing you harm.</p>
<p><strong>Are medical personnel required to draw blood in support of police investigations even when the patient/suspect is unable to provide consent?</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>We can look at Missouri law as an example. <a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=577.029" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Missouri Statutes §577.029</a> says</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A licensed physician, registered nurse, phlebotomist, or trained
medical technician, acting at the request and direction of the law
enforcement officer under section 577.020, shall, with the consent of
the patient or a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction,
withdraw blood for the purpose of determining the alcohol content of
the blood, unless such medical personnel, in his or her good faith
medical judgment, believes such procedure would endanger the life or
health of the person in custody.  Blood may be withdrawn only by such
medical personnel, but such restriction shall not apply to the taking
of a breath test, a saliva specimen, or a urine specimen.  In
withdrawing blood for the purpose of determining the alcohol content


key: chroma:document
string_value:
of a breath test, a saliva specimen, or a urine specimen.  In
withdrawing blood for the purpose of determining the alcohol content
thereof, only a previously unused and sterile needle and sterile
vessel shall be utilized and the withdrawal shall otherwise be in
strict accord with accepted medical practices.  Upon the request of
the person who is tested, full information concerning the test taken
at the direction of the law enforcement officer shall be made
available to him or her.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>&quot;Shall&quot; means &quot;must&quot; – if there is a warrant (we assume there is no consent). Then the question is, what happens if the phlebotomist (etc) refuses? First, <a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=577.031&amp;bid=29960" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§577.031</a> immunizes the medical-person from legal liability when they act in compliance with a request from a LEO (a simple request, not necessarily accompanied by a warrant). <a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=577.033&amp;bid=29962" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§577.033</a> says that being dead, unconscious or otherwise incapable of refusing does not constitute withdrawal of consent (which is implied, by law). No specific penalty is prescribed for refusal to administer a court-ordered blood draw. There is no penalty for complying, there is no prescribed criminal penalty for refusing to comply with a court order (there is the possibility of a finding of contempt of court).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>As discussed in the article linked in comments by @Michael Hall the nurse in question informs the police officer that they hospital policy is to not draw blood without consent, unless there is a warrant signed by a judge, or the police have arrested the patient in question. As such, when the police bring a DUI suspect in for a blood test for alcohol content, they have made already made an arrest for DUI. Typically, the suspect has already blown a failing score on the breathalyzer and failed field sobriety tests which are grounds enough to affect the arrest and the officer is getting the blood test for additional evidence at this point (while grounds for an arrest are met, the grounds for conviction may not be satisfied.  The BAC from a blood test will aide in adding further evidence against the drunk driver)


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Additionally, the DUI does not always mean the driver is under the influence of Alcohol, and certain drug tests look for chemicals that are byproducts of use and may not be as timely as a blood test. For example, any drug test that requires a hair sample and tests positive for the drugs tested means that you took the drug sometime in a period of months, which fails to show what the breathalyzer does which is recent immediate use.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Another reason to get the blood test done is that the breathalyzer can give a false positive if you have been using certain products (For example, Mouth Wash uses a strong alcohol to kill germs, but you're not supposed to swallow it.  It will still read higher on the breathalyzer test if you blow shortly after using mouthwash correctly.  A defense attorney can argue that the breathalyzer will point to this which is enough doubt to let the suspect walk, where as a blood test will show how much alcohol is in the your blood real if done quickly).  In this case, the nurse drawling the blood might actually be doing good as if you blew a false positive on your breathalyzer, this could spare you from having to pay an attorney at all.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>In October of last year, I toured an apartment complex in Oklahoma with my daughter and her friends because they wanted to live off-campus the next school year. I went with them b/c they wanted a parent who knew which questions to ask, and this would be the first time any of them would be in an apartment on their own. During the tour, I asked if the furniture would be provided to the residents, or if they’d be responsible for it themselves. The manager told us that the apartments came fully furnished, and that furniture was included in rent, along with cable, water, trash, sewer, gas, and internet. The only utility the girls would be responsible for is electric.
The girls signed their leases a week later, which stated what each of their monthly rent would be, the term of the lease, which utilities were included and which one the girls were responsible for, that the girls would need $100,000 of liability insurance, which cost $14/month, and additional pet fees.


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Fast forward to last week, when my daughter received an email from the apartment complex, stating that on August 1st, she’d have to pay first months rent, the insurance, and $34 furniture rental!  I contacted the apartment manager, and questioned this, told them what was said during the tour, and mentioned it wasn’t in the lease. The manager said “The current staff wasn’t here last fall, but it sounds like you were misinformed. Furniture is not included in rent.” When I asked why it’s not listed as a fee on the lease, he said he didn’t know, but this is how it’s always been done.
Does this sound right?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>You say that &quot;furniture included&quot; was mentioned during the tour, but the verbal representations made during a tour are probably not binding. If there is contemporary record of the representations made on the tour (perhaps an audio recording, a note made the the same day, or an information flyer) then perhaps it carries weight.  But, in general, unprovable chit-chat during a tour is not part of the contract.</p>
<p>Next you say that &quot;it wasn't mentioned in the lease&quot;.  I encourage you to read the entire lease closely.  Does it ever say that the lease is for an &quot;unfurnished apartment&quot;? or say &quot;as shown&quot;? or make vague reference to &quot;other items at additional cost&quot;?</p>
<p>The Lease really should have described the apartment in <em>some</em> way, even if it isn't explicitly about furniture at first glance.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The Lease really should have described the apartment in <em>some</em> way, even if it isn't explicitly about furniture at first glance.</p>
<p>If the lease really didn't mention furniture and/or additional costs in any way, then I think you got the apartment in move-in condition (with furniture) for no additional costs.</p>
<p>You may well want to talk to neighbors/other tenants, and mention the surprise fees.  See if other tenants also encountered this, and if/how it was addressed by them.</p>
<p>But remember: if you annoy the landlords, they will very likely opt to not-renew the lease when its up, and you'll be looking for a new place again, possibly with a negative recommendation from this landlord.</p>
<p>Even when you're in the right, consider carefully how much you want to pursue relatively small issues.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>From a recent answer:</p>
<p>Subject to compliance with the standard conditions, there are 3 categories of flag:</p>
<p>(a) flags which can be flown without consent of the local planning authority</p>
<p>(b) flags which do not need consent provided they comply with further restrictions (referred to as “deemed consent” in the Regulations)</p>
<p>(c) flags which require consent (“express consent”)</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>(b) Flags which do not require consent provided they comply with certain restrictions [include for example] ... the Rainbow flag (6 horizontal equal stripes of red, orange, yellow, green, blue and violet).</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>The regulations governing the flying of flags in England are set out in the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 2007 (as amended in 2012 and in 2021).</p>
<p>These regulations, including relevant amendments to flying of flags, can be viewed on the government legislation website:</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>These regulations, including relevant amendments to flying of flags, can be viewed on the government legislation website:</p>
<p>Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007
The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2012
The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 ...</p>
<p>User Michael Hall points out this begs the question of who (and I would add how and on what considerations) will decide which flags fall into which category.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>In summary,</p>
<ul>
<li>At the time of writing, Michael Gove has overall ministerial responsibility for making planning regulations, with a good part of the role delegated to Rachel Maclean as Minister of State for Housing.</li>
<li>The detail of regulatory verbiage is the work of civil service lawyers, based on policy formed within the department as a result of the general political process.</li>
<li>There are various rules for how these functions arise and get transferred around government, described below.</li>
</ul>
<h2>The Secretary of State can make regulations about flag display</h2>
<p>These pieces of secondary legislation, as their names suggest, are made under the authority of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/contents" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Town and Country Planning Act 1990</a>. Several sections of the Act empower regulations to be made by &quot;the Secretary of State&quot;, e.g. in s.220(1) we read</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Regulations under this Act shall make provision for restricting or regulating the display of advertisements so far as appears to the Secretary of State to be expedient in the interests of amenity or public safety.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>and the full Parliamentary procedure for making them is spelled out in  <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/333" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s.333</a>. This comports with the regulatory preambles, e.g. <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/783/introduction/made" rel="nofollow noreferrer">for the 2007 regulations</a>, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 220, 221, 223(1), 224(3) and 333(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, makes the following Regulations</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>&quot;The Secretary of State&quot; means a specific Secretary chosen by the Prime Minister</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<h2>&quot;The Secretary of State&quot; means a specific Secretary chosen by the Prime Minister</h2>
<p>Note that the Act just said &quot;the Secretary of State&quot;, whereas we have just read about a <em>specific</em> Secretary.</p>
<p>What's going on here is that primary legislation just wants to say &quot;whoever in Cabinet has a job that is most relevant&quot;, since functions get transferred around, departments created or abolished, etc., and nobody really wants to update a zillion Acts every time that happens. Instead, there is a framework pattern where powers will be given to &quot;the Secretary of State&quot; generally, but will be executed by a specific one according to the division of responsibilities in the government of the day. That will sometimes be just a matter of agreement within Cabinet, but at other times be encoded in secondary legislation - a &quot;Transfer of Functions Order&quot;. Those Orders are also needed to handle special situations like -</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<ul>
<li>transferring property and legal obligations when departments are created, merged, split or abolished</li>
<li>making amendments to legislation which <em>did</em> happen to mention a specific minister</li>
<li>ministers who are not a &quot;Secretary of State&quot; as such, but hold another ministerial title, such as &quot;Lord Privy Seal&quot;</li>
</ul>
<p>These Orders are made under the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/26/contents" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ministers of the Crown Act 1975</a>, and are in the form of orders of the King on the advice of the Privy Council - which is to say, that the Prime Minister decides who does which jobs. Historically, this is something of an accident, since the number of Secretaries of State has increased along with the scope of government, and it was convenient to appoint lots of people to the same formal office rather than invent fresh jobs - especially in the days before ministers were paid.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In any case, flag decisions would currently be made under the authority of the minister responsible for planning affairs, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Michael Gove</a>. That comes from <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/1265/article/4" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a 2021 order</a> when that position was created, inheriting all functions from the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government. Those in turn derive from <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/378/article/8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a 2018 order</a> taking them from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, and so on back in time.</p>
<h2>SoS authority can be exercised by other people who work for him</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>SoS authority can be exercised by other people who work for him</h2>
<p>Additionally, the SoS can delegate functions to junior ministers; for example, the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/617/signature/made" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2021 regulations</a> state that they are</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Signed by authority of the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government<br>
<em>Christopher Pincher</em><br>Minister of State<br>Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Intra-departmental delegation of functions also requires the agreement of the Prime Minister, although some functions must be performed by the Secretary of State personally. That relates to the so-called &quot;Carltona doctrine&quot;, named for a 1943 court case <em>Carltona Ltd v Commissioners of Works</em> [1943] 2 All ER 560, which establishes that a minister is generally responsible for his whole department, and that when some function is conferred on the Secretary of State, it usually doesn't mean that he has to do it himself. Most administrative functions are like that, although the actual laying of secondary legislation before Parliament has to be done by a member of Parliament, i.e. a member of the ministerial team. Following the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Pincher_scandal" rel="nofollow noreferrer">downfall of Mr Pincher</a>, the junior minister responsible for planning is currently Rachel Maclean, so she would be likely to be taking lead responsibility


key: chroma:document
string_value:
rel="nofollow noreferrer">downfall of Mr Pincher</a>, the junior minister responsible for planning is currently Rachel Maclean, so she would be likely to be taking lead responsibility for putting through planning regulations.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>So all this doesn't mean that Mr Gove personally decides which flags fall into which category, although observers of his career know that we can't rule that out. But he is responsible for the actions of his department, and the secondary legislation would be laid before Parliament in his name and on his instructions.</p>
<h2>On the making of flags and sausages</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>On the making of flags and sausages</h2>
<p>Regarding &quot;how and on what considerations&quot; these decisions are made, I have no specific knowledge for flag-related policy. But in general, the secondary legislation is written by civil service lawyers on the basis of government policy, and then approved (or at least not disapproved) by Parliament. For example, after Brexit, the EU flag was removed from the list. The mechanism would be that various people who had never heard of the Town and Country Planning Act became upset about flying of the EU flag, and either wrote to ministers or were Cabinet ministers already. Internally to the department, there would have been a mandate to stop the flag being flown, civil servants would figure out the legal steps, and draft the statutory instrument. In the end <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/617/regulation/4/made" rel="nofollow noreferrer">we get
a regulation</a> saying</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
a regulation</a> saying</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In Class H in Schedule 1, in paragraph (b) of column (1) omit the words &quot;the European Union,&quot;.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>even though only planning experts would know or care about &quot;Class H in Schedule 1&quot;. Similar remarks apply to the companion regulation giving prominence to the Union flag over the Scottish flag, which was a political reaction in Westminster to the SNP-led government in Scotland.</p>
<p>Someone who is upset about a regulation, or just wants it to be different, may be able to challenge it through the political process in the same sort of way. There are also avenues for judicial review, if regulations have been made in a way which is irrational, or exceeding the scope of what the original Act allowed, or other similar reasons - but these are difficult to pursue in court. For example, it is more than three months since the 2021 regulations were made, so it is now too late to mount a judicial challenge.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Legality of Using Unofficial API

Question Body: <p>I have discovered a mobile app's backend API through reverse engineering. The public can access this API and it does not require specific authorization, however, it is not documented and it is not an official API that the public is meant to access. It was made solely for the purpose of that app. The app does not have a ToS.</p>
<p>Is it legal for me to use this API to get data for my own purposes?</p>
<p>By &quot;my own purposes&quot; I mean collecting data from the API, storing it on a database, and displaying it to users on my own website which was not built to make a profit.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>If the app (and the service accessed from the app) truly doesn't have any EULA, ToS, or license agreement, to include restrictions on reverse engineering, you can probably create an alternate front end, so long as you aren't using their logos, etc.</p>
<p>However, their data may be a different beast, depending on the nature of it. For example, extracting data from Twitter would potentially violate Twitter's license on the original text copyright held by the authors in question. Wikipedia explicitly includes redistribution in their license agreement with authors/content creators.</p>
<p>If all you are extracting and storing is the temperature at a particular weather station, you might have less of a concern. Anything beyond merely factual runs the risk of a copyright infringement as you store the data in your own database.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a></p>
<p>If you know you have no authorisation to access the API then on the face of it this seems to be contrary to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s1 Computer Misuse Act 1990</a> (and possibly <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s3 Unauthorised acts ... with recklessness as to impairing ... etc</a>, depending).</p>
<blockquote>
<ol>
<li>Unauthorised access to computer material.</li>
</ol>
<p>(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—</p>
<p>(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure
access to any program or data held in any computer, or to enable


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ol>
<p>(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—</p>
<p>(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure
access to any program or data held in any computer, or to enable
any such access to be secured;</p>
<p>(b) the access he intends to secure, or to enable to be secured,
is unauthorised; and</p>
<p>(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the
function that that is the case.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/computer-misuse-act" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Crown Prosecution Service Guidance for Computer Misuse Act</a>.</p>
<p>(If the data is &quot;personal data&quot; then there is the offence of the deliberate or reckless obtaining, disclosing, procuring and retention of personal data without the consent of the data controller contrary to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/12/section/170/enacted" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s170 Data Protection Act 2018</a>.)</p>
<p>[edit]</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>[edit]</p>
<p>There is some discussion in comments about what is authorisation or tantamount to it, implied authorisation, passwords, etc.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/17" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s17 Computer Misuse Act - Interpretation</a></p>
<p>(5)Access of any kind by any person to any program or data held in a
computer is unauthorised if—</p>
<p>(a)he is not himself entitled to control access of the kind in
question to the program or data; and</p>
<p>(b)he does not have consent to access by him of the kind in question
to the program or data from any person who is so entitled [F2but this
subsection is subject to section 10.]</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>(b)he does not have consent to access by him of the kind in question
to the program or data from any person who is so entitled [F2but this
subsection is subject to section 10.]</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199899/ldjudgmt/jd990805/bow.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Judgments -- Regina v. Bow Street Magistrates Court and Allison (A.P.) Ex Parte Government of the United States of America (on Appeal from a Divisional Court of the Queens Bench Division)</a>:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Section 17 is an interpretation section. Subsection (2) defines what is meant by access and securing access to any programme or data. It lists four ways in which this may occur or be achieved. Its purpose is clearly to give a specific meaning to the phrase &quot;to secure access&quot;. Subsection (5) is to be read with subsection (2). It deals with the relationship between the widened definition of securing access and the scope of the authority which the relevant person may hold. That is why the subsection refers to &quot;access of any kind&quot; and &quot;access of the kind in question&quot;. Authority to view data may not extend to authority to copy or alter that data. The refinement of the concept of access requires a refinement of the concept of authorisation. The authorisation must be authority to secure access of the kind in question. As part of this refinement, the subsection lays down two cumulative requirements of lack of authority. The first is the requirement that the


key: chroma:document
string_value:
be authority to secure access of the kind in question. As part of this refinement, the subsection lays down two cumulative requirements of lack of authority. The first is the requirement that the relevant person be not the person entitled to control the relevant kind of access. The word &quot;control&quot; in this context clearly means authorise and forbid. If the relevant person is so entitled, then it would be unrealistic to treat his access as being unauthorised. The second is that the relevant person does not have the consent to secure the relevant kind of access from a person entitled to control, ie authorise, that access.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Subsection (5) therefore has a plain meaning subsidiary to the other provisions of the Act. It simply identifies the two ways in
which authority may be acquired--by being oneself the person entitled
to authorise and by being a person who has been authorised by a person
entitled to authorise. It also makes clear that the authority must
relate not simply to the data or programme but also to the actual kind
of access secured. Similarly, it is plain that it is not using the
word &quot;control&quot; in a physical sense of the ability to operate or
manipulate the computer and that it is not derogating from the
requirement that for access to be authorised it must be authorised to
the relevant data or relevant programme or part of a programme. It
does not introduce any concept that authority to access one piece of
data should be treated as authority to access other pieces of data &quot;of
the same kind&quot; notwithstanding that the relevant person did not in


key: chroma:document
string_value:
data should be treated as authority to access other pieces of data &quot;of
the same kind&quot; notwithstanding that the relevant person did not in
fact have authority to access that piece of data. Section 1 refers to
the intent to secure unauthorised access to any programme or data.
These plain words leave no room for any suggestion that the relevant
person may say: &quot;Yes, I know that I was not authorised to access that
data but I was authorised to access other data of the same kind.**</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The questioner states that &quot;I have discovered a mobile app's backend API through reverse engineering. ... it is not an official API that the public is meant to access. It was made solely for the purpose of that app.&quot;</p>
<p>It seems to me the questioner knows they are not authorised to access it for their purposes.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>In the US, the relevant law is the <a href="https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-48000-computer-fraud" rel="noreferrer">Computer Fraud and Abuse Act</a>, which makes it a federal crime to access a protected computer system without proper authorization or to exceed the scope of your authorization. So the questions here are</p>
<ul>
<li>Is the API sufficiently protected to count as a &quot;protected computer&quot;</li>
<li>By building an alternate frontend, are you accessing it without authorization.</li>
</ul>
<p>From the Justice Department memo I linked,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A CFAA prosecution may not be brought on the theory that a defendant exceeds authorized access solely by violating an access restriction contained in a contractual agreement or term of service with an Internet service provider or web service available to the general public—including public websites (such as social-media services) that allow for free or paid registration without human intervention.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: False discrimination

Question Body: <p>Most countries have some law that makes it illegal to discriminate against someone because they are a member of some protected class. But what happens if A believes wrongly that B belongs to some protected class and discriminates against B?</p>
<p>For example: Say in the USA the new owner of a company fires all male gay employees. He also fires Bob, who he thinks is gay, but who actually isn't. Would Bob be protected by anti-discrimination laws?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=166ebd06a2eab96e32075c79fe96e986&amp;mc=true&amp;tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title29/29cfrv4_02.tpl#1600" rel="nofollow">29 CFR</a> 1601.34 states "These rules and regulations shall be liberally construed to effectuate the purpose and provisions of title VII, the ADA, and GINA" (by contrast 29 CFR 1606.4 says "The exception stated in section 703(e) of title VII, that national origin may be a bona fide occupational qualification, shall be strictly construed". A "liberal construal" of the rules would include as many instances as one could interpret as being prohibited, given the purpose of the underlying legislation. The purpose of title VII is to prevent people from using certain considerations as a basis for employment, so a liberal construal of the act would extend to "because of a belief that X is the case", as well as "because of the fact that X is the case". In addition, 29 CFR 1607.3 says</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
  <p>The use of any selection procedure which has an adverse impact on the
  hiring, promotion, or other employment or membership opportunities of
  members of any race, sex, or ethnic group will be considered to be
  discriminatory and inconsistent with these guidelines, unless the
  procedure has been validated in accordance with these guidelines, or
  the provisions of section 6 below are satisfied.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Firing on the basis of belief that a set of individuals has a protected characteristic obviously has an adverse impact on the protected class, and is accordingly prohibited, even when one or more individuals is not in the protected class.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Switching to state law, in <a href="http://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-published/2012/a4014-10.html" rel="nofollow">Cowher v. Carson &amp; Roberts</a> the relevant question is whether there had been religious discrimination against plaintiff, who was not Jewish. The decision rests in part on the finding <a href="http://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/1993/132-n-j-587.html" rel="nofollow">Lehmann v. Toys 'R' Us, 132 N.J. 587</a> that "it is the harassing conduct that must be severe or pervasive, <em>not its effect on the plaintiff</em> or on the work environment" – this basically isolates the particulars of the discriminee from the actions of the discriminator. In Cowher, the lower court held that "plaintiff could not meet the first prong of the Lehmann test because he was not Jewish, and that the allegation that he was perceived to be Jewish was insufficient". The higher court disagreed. Drawing on case law pertaining to handicaps as a basis of


key: chroma:document
string_value:
test because he was not Jewish, and that the allegation that he was perceived to be Jewish was insufficient". The higher court disagreed. Drawing on case law pertaining to handicaps as a basis of discrimination, the court stated </p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
  <p>Distinguishing between actual handicaps and perceived handicaps makes
  no sense. For example, in the case of racial and religious
  discrimination, the Law Against Discrimination cannot reasonably be
  read to prohibit a landlord from refusing to rent to a member of a
  racial or religious minority, but to allow a landlord to refuse to
  rent to a person who is only perceived by the landlord to be such a
  member.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The general principle identified by the court is that </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>there is no reasoned basis to hold that the LAD protects those who are
  perceived to be members of one class of persons enumerated by the Act
  and does not protect those who are perceived to be members of a
  different class, as to which the LAD offers its protections in equal
  measure</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><strong>Would Bob be protected by anti-discrimination laws?</strong></p>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a></p>
<p><strong>Yes</strong></p>
<p>If the employer fires Bob on the basis of him being gay, then the employer would commit direct discrimination even though they are mistaken about Bob's actual sexual orientation.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/4?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Section 4</a> Equity Act 2010 establishes sexual orientation as a protected characteristic, and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/13?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 13</a> creates the offence of direct discrimination:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>(1) A person (A) [<em>employer</em>] discriminates against another (B) [<em>Bob</em>] if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.</p>
<p>...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is no requirement for victims to have the relevant protected characteristic to be unlawfully discriminated against - it's the motivation behind the discrimination that makes it unlawful.  The supporting <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/2/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Explanatory Notes</a> to section 13 states that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This definition is broad enough to cover cases where the less favourable treatment is because .... the victim is wrongly thought to have [a protected characteristic].</p>
<p>...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Notes then go on to offer an example of a similar scenario to the OP:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Notes then go on to offer an example of a similar scenario to the OP:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If an employer rejects a job application form from a white man who he wrongly thinks is black, because the applicant has an African-sounding name, this would constitute direct race <strong>discrimination based on the employer’s mistaken perception.</strong></p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>In the U.S. most hate crime laws will include the phrase &quot;actual or perceived&quot; when discussing protected classes.  As such, the hate crime occurs when someone is victimized in criminal manner because of the offender's belief (whether correct or not) that the victim is a member of a protected class of people and they are committing the crime because of the victim's status as a member of a protected class.  While the scenario is not an example of a hate crime, in a scenario where Bob was a victim of a crime due to his perceived status as a gay man when he is in fact a straight man, than his attackers would still be guilty of a hate crime since they perceived Bob to be gay and were motivated by homophobia to attack Bob.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>For a real example, there was a marked rise in hate crimes against members of the Sikh community in the U.S. following the 9/11 attacks.  In the Sikh religion, men are forbidden from cutting their hair, which means that many Sikh men have long thick beards and will wear turbans to keep their long head hair in check (I believe it's also done for modesty purposes).  This makes them look like a stereotypical Arabic/Mid-East/Muslim stereotype to Americans who are ignorant of the difference, resulting in many Sikh's being the target of hate crimes for the mistaken belief that they were Arabic or Muslim.  These crimes were charged as hate crimes when prosecuted despite the fact that they believed their victims were Muslim and/or Arabic, despite the fact that most Sikhs in the U.S. are of Indian decent and the religion is Dharmic and not remotely related to the Abrahamic faiths, let alone to Islam (and in fact, has historically been persecuted during the Mughal Empire period of Indian


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Indian decent and the religion is Dharmic and not remotely related to the Abrahamic faiths, let alone to Islam (and in fact, has historically been persecuted during the Mughal Empire period of Indian History, which was Muslim in nature.).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What is the consequence of failing to allow the water company to install a meter?

Question Body: <p>Under the water industry act 1991 water providers must have a plan to manage the demand for water in certain areas. If they choose to install compulsory water meters but aren’t allowed to because a resident fails to contact them, what is the consequence for the resident?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>If the residence falls within one of the categories for which a water company can insist on a water meter, then the resident cannot refuse. See House of Commons, &quot;<a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7342/" rel="noreferrer">Water meters: the rights of customers and water companies</a>&quot;.</p>
<p>That brief says that a water company can insist on installing a meter if the customer:</p>
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>uses an automatic watering device (such as a garden sprinkler);</li>
<li>automatically fills a swimming pool or pond;</li>
<li>has a large bath;</li>
<li>uses a reverse osmosis softening unit;</li>
<li>has a power shower;</li>
<li>is the new occupier of a property (provided an unmetered bill has not already been sent to that occupier); or</li>
<li>lives in an area which has been determined by the Secretary of State to be an area of serious water stress and subject to a metering


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>lives in an area which has been determined by the Secretary of State to be an area of serious water stress and subject to a metering
programme as part of a plan to maintain secure water supplies.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>See also Tom Haynes and Ruth Emery, &quot;<a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/water-meters-cheaper-increase-bills-refuse/" rel="noreferrer">What a water meter could do to your bills – and why you may be forced to have one</a>&quot;, <em>The Telegraph</em> (1 June 2023):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If your water supplier has been granted legal powers to fit compulsory water meters, you don't have any right to refuse one. As Andy White, of the Consumer Council for Water, puts it: “It's not possible for a customer to refuse where a water company has approval for compulsory metering from Defra.”</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>If a water company has the statutory right to install a meter, and the customer has no right to refuse, this could be enforced by injunction.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Are amateur radio transmissions in the public domain?

Question Body: <p>I've heard from many non-authoritative sources that all US amateur radio transmissions (except copyright-infringing ones, of course) are automatically released into the public domain, but I have never seen a citation either to copyright law or to FCC rules, and Part 97 does not contain the words &quot;domain&quot; or &quot;copyright.&quot; Is it true that transmitting something over amateur radio in the United States constitutes a release of the material into the public domain?</p>
<p>I'm asking here rather than on Amateur Radio SE because this question is about copyright law, not just Part 97.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>No* in the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></h2>
<p>Waht falls under copyright in the US is described in
<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102" rel="nofollow noreferrer">17 USC §102</a>, and the whole question hinges on the bolded part:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(a)<em>Copyright protection subsists</em>, in accordance with this title, in <em>original works of authorship</em> <strong>fixed in any tangible medium of expression,</strong> [...]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The radio transmission itself thus does not fall under copyright, as it is not <em>fixed in a tangible medium</em> while it travels through the air, and it is not a <strong>sound recording</strong> under 17 USC 102 (a)7 either.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>As such, normal discussions on the bands like Alice talking to Bob, does not even create a copyright in the first place. That is not regulated in FCC rules, it falls directly from the copyright law: because the material is not fixed, it is not copyrighted in the first place. That is, if nobody fixed or fixes the transmission, nobody owns them. That doesn't mean the contents are public domain:</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>However</strong> the contents of the transmission can be under copyright anyway and transmitting them might be copyright infringement (aka <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_radio" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;Radio Piracy&quot; or &quot;Pirate Radio&quot;</a>): you could play a recording of a song via amateur radio, which is under copyright, or you could read a book which is under copyright, and that would violate the author's copyrights if you don't have license to do so. But even if you <em>have</em> a license, transmitting does not put the materials into the public domain: it is a fixed expression (replayed on amateur band) and thus copyrighted.</p>
<p>Nothing in copyright law would turn a transmitted copyrighted material into the public domain - that requires an express release into it.</p>
<h2>But it's complicated...</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Nothing in copyright law would turn a transmitted copyrighted material into the public domain - that requires an express release into it.</p>
<h2>But it's complicated...</h2>
<p>Now, it gets <em>really</em> complicated if we introduce simultaneously fixing the material. <a href="https://artquest.org.uk/artlaw-article/recording-visiting-speakers/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Now, the same rules apply as they do when you record a visiting speaker.</a> Or rather, the same setup as a studio and the musicians using it.</p>
<h3>Alice creates copyrighted material at home</h3>
<p>If Alice loops her signal through a recording box somewhere on her side, the material gets fixed while she is sending. That means it is copyrighted material, and Alice has the copyrights in the original recording, as she both creates the material <strong>and</strong> records it.</p>
<p>Alice also might own the copyright in the script or notes she used, but that's beside the point.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Alice also might own the copyright in the script or notes she used, but that's beside the point.</p>
<h3>Bob creates copyrighted material from afar</h3>
<p>Let's assume Alice never thought about recording and just airs her material into the night without infringing on other people's copyrights.</p>
<p>But now let's assume Bob, 3 counties over, is also recording Alice signal, and thus fixing the material. Bob had no creative input besides the recording, but the material is now fixed. Bob had some technical and arguably creative input into that recording by choosing the filter settings on his radio setup, antenna placement, and such.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Bob for sure does own a copyright in the recording itself, especially in the alterations he made. However, he would <strong>not</strong> gain copyright over the material that Alice introduced, which now became fixed by Bob's action. In a strange fashion, Bob turned Alice's speech into a copyrighted tangible expression, and the recording is in a very strange place:</p>
<ul>
<li>Bob owns the &quot;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Master</a>&quot; itself, and the technical changes that he did.</li>
<li>Alice owns the contents of the recording, as in her voice input and choice of words.</li>
</ul>
<p>Distribution of this recording would require <strong>both</strong> Bob's and Alice's consent now, or Fair Use.</p>
<h3>Alice clawing back the rights!</h3>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>Distribution of this recording would require <strong>both</strong> Bob's and Alice's consent now, or Fair Use.</p>
<h3>Alice clawing back the rights!</h3>
<p>But Alice can circumvent Bob's copyright at any time by simply re-recording her show, and Bob can not claim copyright on that <strong>different</strong> recording - that was <strong>exactly</strong> what <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Swift_masters_controversy" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Taylor Swift did in 2019.</a></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is a foreign indepedent contractor allowed to receive payment into a US bank account?

Question Body: <p>Suppose that I do work for a US company as an independent contractor, and I'm neither in the US, a US citizen or a US resident. As such, I would fill in a <a href="https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-w-8-ben" rel="nofollow noreferrer">W-8BEN form</a> for tax purposes. Would I then be allowed to receive payment for my services into a US bank account in my name?</p>

<p>Such a bank account could for instance be the <a href="https://transferwise.com/help/17/borderless-account/2827506/how-do-i-use-my-usd-bank-details" rel="nofollow noreferrer">one offered by TransferWise</a>, which is easy to open for someone living, say, in the UK. I'm not asking whether it is technically possible, but whether it would be legal under US tax law.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Online search suggests this is an option, however I'm aware of a specific business (whose name I won't disclose) which claims to be unable to pay foreign independent contractors in a US bank account.</p>


Answer 1: <p>Yes, it is legal under US tax law.  US tax law is concerned with collecting tax.  The questions that tax law asks are</p>

<ol>
<li>Must the income be declared to the IRS?</li>
<li>Is the income taxable?</li>
<li>How much tax is due?</li>
</ol>

<p>Whether US tax law requires the income to be declared or considers it taxable does not depend on whether it is paid to a US or foreign bank account.  This also has no effect on the rate of taxation.  US tax law is not concerned with the specific route the money takes to get from your client to you.</p>

<p>If the income is in fact taxable, and you declare it and pay tax accordingly, you will not have violated any US tax law.</p>


Tags: united-states, federal-tax-law


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does the First Amendment apply to amateur radio?

Question Body: <p>Is speech over amateur radio constitutionally protected?</p>
<p>Could I theoretically sue the FCC for the right to broadcast music on 20 meters, and have a chance of winning on free speech grounds?</p>
<p>If the FCC made a rule, at the direction of Congress, prohibiting political speech over amateur radio, would that be enforceable? What if the rule allowed promotion of party X but not party Y?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>Is speech over amateur radio constitutionally protected?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Of course.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Could I theoretically sue the FCC for the right to broadcast music on 20 meters, and have a chance of winning on free speech grounds?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You can certainly sue.  I don't know enough about existing jurisprudence to comment on the likelihood of success.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If the FCC made a rule, at the direction of Congress, prohibiting political speech over amateur radio, would that be enforceable? What if the rule allowed promotion of party X but not party Y?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Of course not.</p>
<hr />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Of course not.</p>
<hr />
<p>The entire concept of regulation of telecommunications is in some tension with the first amendment, but the fact that the judiciary has upheld such regulation does not imply that telecommunications are beyond the reach of the first amendment.  Instead, it means that the first amendment permits the regulation.  Other regulation could still be found impermissible under the first amendment, as regulation prohibiting political speech or likely would and regulation giving preferential treatment to certain political parties certainly would.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How (and how effectively) is complete corporate self-ownership prevented?

Question Body: <p>Corporations are not supposed to be able to have no ultimate beneficial owners. If A Inc. holds 100% of B Group, B Group is not supposed to be able to own 100% of A Inc.</p>
<p>How effectively are these dead-end loops in corporate ownership prevented, especially when the involved entities are in different jurisdictions that might not communicate? If such a loop is discovered to have occurred, how is it usually unwound, and by whom? Who ends up with the assets?</p>
<p>This isn't about whether or not the arrangement is allowed, it is about what is done about it if it manages to arise or how it is prevented from arising.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Usually, the only reason to set up an &quot;ownerless&quot; corporation is to set up a non-profit. Non-profit corporations can have self-perpetuating boards and are very similar to charitable trusts. If it ends up without any board members and has a self-perpetuating board, any person affected by the corporation or a suitable government representative (in the U.S., usually a state attorney general in the place of incorporation) can apply to a court to have new board members appointed.</p>
<p>In a &quot;for profit&quot; context, this generally doesn't happen because the people investing in the company want to be able to profit from it and/or obtain a return of their investment. So, the question is largely hypothetical in that case.</p>


Tags: international, corporate-law, ownership


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is the usage of an OCR service causing copyright issues when a photo of a book page is analyzed?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p><em>Here's the scenario</em></p>
<ol>
<li>A user takes a photo using an app from a book, which might have be <strong>copyrighted</strong>.</li>
<li>The app then uploads the photo to a cloud service in order to analyze it using <strong>OCR</strong></li>
<li>The app receives the OCR result and extracts 100 (most used) words from it in order to process the result within the app</li>
</ol>
<p>According to the cloud provider the data gets deleted on call of the app or within 24 hours. The data is only accessible by the app once. Neither is more than an excerpt extracted nor is the photo accessible once it has been send to that server. Also there is no way the result contains a whole sentence of the page (only single words).</p>
<p><em>My major questions in my head for that case would be:</em></p>
<p><strong>Does making a photo of copyrighted material equals to making an illegal copy?</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><em>My major questions in my head for that case would be:</em></p>
<p><strong>Does making a photo of copyrighted material equals to making an illegal copy?</strong></p>
<p><strong>Does sending that photo to a server to process count as distribution?</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>If there is a copyright violation then it is by the user; the service would presumably work the same, and be as useful, for text where the user owns the copyright or has a license to do this. As long as the service doesn't actively encourage copyright violation then it is in the clear.</p>
<p>The user might be able to claim fair use or fair dealing (depending on the country). The rules vary between countries and are too fact-specific to analyse here; it would depend on things like whether the end user is making money out of it and if the result is used in scholarship. However the fact that only the 100 most-used words are retained would generally count in favour of fair use.</p>


Tags: copyright, gdpr, software, artificial-intelligence


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Are attorneys legally or ethically bound to share evidence in civil cases before complaints are filed?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Are attorneys legally or ethically bound to share evidence or discovery materials in civil matters before actual complaints are filed?</p>
<p>Let's say Person A (a non-public figure) suspects Person B (a non-public figure) of a civil tort, such as defamation.</p>
<p>Person A gets Lawyer A to send a cease and desist letter to Person B. Person B shows the letter to their Lawyer (B). Lawyer B asks Person B if they have indeed defamed Person A. Person B says they have and outlines the incidents. Lawyer B determines there is enough evidence that the defamation did damage the reputation of Person A and more than likely resulted in monetarily loses in business for Person A.</p>
<p>Is Lawyer B obligated in any legal or ethical sense to inform Lawyer A of what Person B said before a complaint is filed? Or only after a complaint is filed? And only when discovery takes place? Or would Lawyer B inform Lawyer A out of common and/or professional courtesy?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a></p>
<p>There are two issues here:</p>
<ol>
<li>B's &quot;confession&quot; to their lawyer would fall within the definition of legal professional privilege, specifically <a href="https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/civil-litigation/legal-professional-privilege-guide#:%7E:text=Litigation%20privilege%20protects%20communications%20between,existing%20or%20reasonably%20contemplated%20litigation" rel="nofollow noreferrer">litigation privilege</a>:</li>
</ol>
<blockquote>
<p>Litigation privilege protects communications between lawyers or their clients and any third party for the purpose of obtaining advice or information in connection with existing <strong>or reasonably contemplated litigation</strong>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>So unless B gives their permission, this cannot be disclosed.</p>
<ol start="2">
<li>A party's duty for disclosure, under <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31#31.1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Part 31</a> Civil Procedure Rules, begins once proceedings have started by a claim being issued under <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part07#7.2" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Rule 7.2(1)</a> <strong>unless</strong> <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31#31.16" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Rule 31.16</a> applies as <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/54/section/33?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 33</a> Supreme Court Act 1981<sup>1</sup> permits disclosure before proceedings have started.</li>
</ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ol>
<p>So unless A makes, and is successful with, a section 33 application there is no legal obligation on B for disclosure that is not protected by legal professionalprivilege.</p>
<hr />
<p><sup>1</sup> Defamation is dealt with as a &quot;media and communications claim&quot; under <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part53#IDA1B1HC" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Rule 53.1(3)</a> in the High Court so the other method of pre-proceedings disclosure at section 52 County Courts Act 1984 does not apply here.</p>
<hr />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<hr />
<p><sub>Although tagged <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a>, I have answered as per the <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic">Help Centre</a>: &quot;<em>we expect and encourage answers dealing with other jurisdictions ... please tag your answer using the tag markdown: [tag: some-tag]</em>&quot;</sub></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>Client B's confession is a privileged communication.</p>
<p>In the absence of special circumstances, Lawyer B is legally and ethically obligated to never share it with Lawyer A.</p>


Tags: united-states, civil-law, tort, attorney-client-privilege


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Why do Pride flags fly over British police stations, prisons and other government buildings?

Question Body: <p>Insofar as this question may have a legal answer, by what provisions or instruments are they flown or allowed to be flown? Who would have the power to decide what flags are flown over such institutions? For example, the Daniel Quasar “progress pride” flag flies over HMP Pentonville. What provisions might govern such a practise?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Google england law flying flags</p>
<p>First result <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/flying-flags-a-plain-english-guide/flying-flags-a-plain-english-guide" rel="noreferrer">Flying flags: a plain English guide - GOV.UK</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>... Some flags require formal consent (permission) from the local
planning authority, whereas others like the Union Flag do not. The
detailed controls over flag flying are set out in detailed regulations
(see links below). ...</p>
<p>All flag flying is subject to some standard conditions</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Subject to compliance with the standard conditions, there are 3
categories of flag:</p>
<p>(a) flags which can be flown without consent of the local planning
authority</p>
<p>(b) flags which do not need consent provided they comply with further
restrictions (referred to as “deemed consent” in the Regulations)</p>
<p>(c) flags which require consent (“express consent”)</p>
<p>...</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
restrictions (referred to as “deemed consent” in the Regulations)</p>
<p>(c) flags which require consent (“express consent”)</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>(b) Flags which do not require consent provided they comply with
certain restrictions [include for example] ... the Rainbow flag (6 horizontal equal stripes
of red, orange, yellow, green, blue and violet).</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>The regulations governing the flying of flags in England are set out
in the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements)
Regulations 2007 (as amended in 2012 and in 2021).</p>
<p>These regulations, including relevant amendments to flying of flags,
can be viewed on the government legislation website:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/783/contents/made" rel="noreferrer">Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007</a></p>
</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<ul>
<li><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/783/contents/made" rel="noreferrer">Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007</a></p>
</li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/2372/contents/made" rel="noreferrer">The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2012</a></p>
</li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/617/contents/made" rel="noreferrer">The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021</a> ...</p>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is religious confession legally privileged?

Question Body: <p>I'm referring to Catholic confession to a priest. I'm sure, like attorney-client privilege, that if you disclose a future crime you are planning to commit then they can and will tell the police. I'm wondering, is the secrecy of confession an actual legal privilege? If you confessed to a previous murder, would they legally be able to report it? Is the secrecy of confession just a rule within the religion to encourage people to confess their most often non criminal sins?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/germany" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-germany-tooltip-container">germany</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__53.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§53 StPO</a> (1) 1. allows clerics to refuse to testify about things they were told during spiritual care. This does not require the setting to be exactly the Catholic sacrament of confession: it would be enough if a troubled person seeks the cleric to talk to <em>because</em> the cleric is a cleric.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Sections 2. to 5. list other groups with or without restrictions. Lawyers, notaries, tax advisors, physicians, pharmacists, midwives, drug abuse counselors and similar people, members of parliament, and journalists can refuse to testify about some or all they learned <em>in the course of their protected profession</em>. For many of them, including physicians, the subject can waive the right to secrecy, then they cannot avoid testimony any more.</p>
<p>The same applies to professional assistants of these people, e.g. the sexton who allows someone in or the clerk who makes an appointment.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>In the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a>, that privilege exists, but its availability and parameters vary from one jurisdiction to the next. <em>See</em>, <em>e.g.</em>, <a href="https://casetext.com/case/totten-administrator-v-united-states#p107" rel="noreferrer"><em>Totten, Administrator, v. United States</em>, 92 U.S. 105, 107 (1875)</a> (“Suits cannot be maintained which would require a disclosure of the confidences of the confessional.”).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>In <a href="/questions/tagged/wisconsin" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;wisconsin&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;wisconsin&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-wisconsin-tooltip-container">wisconsin</a> statute <a href="https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/905.06" rel="noreferrer">905.06</a> says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Communications to members of the clergy.<br />
(1)  Definitions. As used in this section:<br />
(a) A “member of the clergy&quot; is a minister, priest, rabbi, or other similar functionary of a religious organization, or an individual reasonably believed so to be by the person consulting the individual.<br />
(b) A communication is “confidential&quot; if made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication.<br />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
(b) A communication is “confidential&quot; if made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication.<br />
(2)  General rule of privilege. A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent another from disclosing a confidential communication by the person to a member of the clergy in the member's professional character as a spiritual adviser.<br />
(3)  Who may claim the privilege. The privilege may be claimed by the person, by the person's guardian or conservator, or by the person's personal representative if the person is deceased. The member of the clergy may claim the privilege on behalf of the person. The member of the clergy's authority so to do is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary.<br />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
(4)  Exceptions. There is no privilege under this section concerning observations or information that a member of the clergy, as defined in s. 48.981 (1) (cx), is required to report as suspected or threatened child abuse under s. 48.981 (2) (bm) or as a threat of violence in or targeted at a school under s. 175.32.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The exceptions turn out not to be exceptions, however, if a confession is involved. According to <a href="https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/48.981(2)(bm)3." rel="noreferrer">48.981(2)(bm)(3):</a></p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>A member of the clergy is not required to report child abuse information under subd. 1. or 2. that he or she receives solely through confidential communications made to him or her privately or in a confessional setting if he or she is authorized to hear or is accustomed to hearing such communications and, under the disciplines, tenets, or traditions of his or her religion, has a duty or is expected to keep those communications secret. Those disciplines, tenets, or traditions need not be in writing.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/175.32(2)(c)2." rel="noreferrer">175.32(2)(c)(2)</a> has similar language.</p>
<p>So, in Wisconsin, the answer is yes. A confession to a past murder, or any other crime, would be legally privileged by statute.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>So, in Wisconsin, the answer is yes. A confession to a past murder, or any other crime, would be legally privileged by statute.</p>
<p>A &quot;confession&quot; to a <em>future</em> murder runs into the problem that this would not be considered a valid confession by the Catholic Church - you can't ask to be absolved from a sin you haven't committed yet; if you were truly repentant you wouldn't still be planning to do it. This would likely release the priest from the religious obligation to not tell, and that in turn could at least result in it not being covered by the exceptions to 48.981 and 175.32 (since there's no longer a religious duty to keep it confidential.)</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 4: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a></p>
<p>Per <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priest%E2%80%93penitent_privilege_in_England#:%7E:text=The%20doctrine%20of%20priest%E2%80%93penitent,obtained%20from%20a%20professional%20adviser." rel="noreferrer">Wikipedia</a>, confession to a priest isn't legally privileged.</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>The doctrine of priest–penitent privilege does not appear to apply in English law. The orthodox view is that under the law of England and Wales <strong>privileged communication exists only in the context of legal advice obtained from a professional adviser.</strong> A statement of the law on priest–penitent privilege is contained in the nineteenth century case of <a href="https://swarb.co.uk/wheeler-v-le-marchant-ca-1881/" rel="noreferrer">Wheeler v. Le Marchant</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the first place, the principle protecting confidential communications is of a very limited character. ... There are many communications, which, though absolutely necessary because without them the ordinary business of life cannot be carried on, still are not privileged. ... Communications made to a priest in the confessional on matters perhaps considered by the penitent to be more important than his life or his fortune, are not protected.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>— Sir George Jessel MR, Wheeler v. Le Marchant (1881) 17 Ch.D 681[3]</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 5: <h2>Yes, but …</h2>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/new-south-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-new-south-wales-tooltip-container">new-south-wales</a></p>
<p><a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025#sec.127" rel="noreferrer">s127</a> of the uniform Evidence Act allows a member of the clergy to refuse to reveal the contents of or existence of a confession.</p>
<p>However, unlike a lawyer’s privilege, if the cleric chooses to testify, the evidence is admissible.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 6: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<h3>The common law only provides privilege to religious communications on a case-by-case basis</h3>
<p>At common law, there is no categorical privilege for religious communications. Instead, each claim to privilege for a religious communication is dealt with on a case-by-case basis under the &quot;Wigmore test&quot; (from John Henry Wigmore). See <em>R. v. Gruenke</em>, <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1991/1991canlii40/1991canlii40.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">[1991] 3 S.C.R. 263</a>:</p>
<ol>
<li>The communications must originate in a confidence that they will not be disclosed.</li>
<li>This element of confidentiality must be essential to the full and satisfactory maintenance of the relation between the parties.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>This element of confidentiality must be essential to the full and satisfactory maintenance of the relation between the parties.</li>
<li>The relation must be one which in the opinion of the community ought to be sedulously fostered.</li>
<li>The injury that would inure to the relation by the disclosure of the communications must be greater than the benefit thereby gained for the correct disposal of litigation.</li>
</ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ol>
<p>In recognition of the guarantee of religious freedom in s. 2 of the <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11/latest/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Charter</em></a> and the interpretive statement in s. 27 of the <em>Charter</em> that the <em>Charter</em> is to be interpreted &quot;in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians&quot;: &quot;all of the relevant circumstances must be considered and the Wigmore criteria applied in a manner which is sensitive to the fact of Canada's multicultural heritage&quot; (<em>Gruenke</em>, <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1991/1991canlii40/1991canlii40.pdf#page=29" rel="nofollow noreferrer">p. 291</a>).</p>
<h3>Two provincial jurisdictions provide statutory privilege</h3>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h3>Two provincial jurisdictions provide statutory privilege</h3>
<p>The province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the province of Québec both provide a statutory clergy privilege. See Newfoundland and Labrador's <em>Evidence Act</em>, <a href="https://www.assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/statutes/e16.htm#8_" rel="nofollow noreferrer">R.S.N.L. 1990, c. E-16, s. 8</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A member of the clergy or a priest shall not be compellable to give evidence as to a confession made to him or her in his or her professional capacity.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And see Québec's <em>Charter of human rights and freedoms</em>, <a href="https://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/document/cs/C-12?langCont=en#se:9" rel="nofollow noreferrer">L.Q., c. c-12, art. 9</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Every person has a right to non-disclosure of confidential
information.</p>
<p>No person bound to professional secrecy by law and no priest or other
minister of religion may, even in judicial proceedings, disclose


key: chroma:document
string_value:
information.</p>
<p>No person bound to professional secrecy by law and no priest or other
minister of religion may, even in judicial proceedings, disclose
confidential information revealed to him by reason of his position or
profession, unless he is authorized to do so by the person who
confided such information to him or by an express provision of law.</p>
<p>The tribunal must, exofficio, ensure that professional secrecy is
respected.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 7: <p>In <a href="/questions/tagged/sweden" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;sweden&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;sweden&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-sweden-tooltip-container">sweden</a>, yes, it's privileged as priests have a particularly strong confidentiality, often called &quot;absolute confidentiality&quot;. The information received by a priest during a confession or an individual pastoral conversation may not, at all, be used in any other process. The priest may not be called to testify in a trial and is exempt from mandatory reporting laws.</p>
<p>This is by the <a href="https://www.regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/departementsserien-och-promemorior/1998/01/ds-199865/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure</a>, where <a href="https://lagen.nu/1942:740#K36P5S1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Chapter 36, section 5</a> prohibits calling priests as witnesses.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Before 2000, this would <em>not</em> have applied to Catholic confession as the confidentiality was limited to the Church of Sweden, a Lutheran church that was then the official state church and the confidentiality was stipulated in the <a href="https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/kyrkolag-1992300_sfs-1992-300/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Church Law</a> that applied to the Church of Sweden.</p>
<p>The restriction is no longer there because Sweden fully separated church and state in 2000. The confidentiality is currently not limited to Christian priests either, the law refers to &quot;a priest in a religious organization or a person of equivalent standing in such an organization&quot; so the confidentiality would apply to priest-equivalent members of registered religious organizations.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 8: <h2>Confession in a seal of secrecy is much older than much current law</h2>
<p>The practice of regular or devotional confession and absolute
confidentiality was confirmed and codified from the 13th century in Europe. <em>More recent developments in mandatory reporting and legislation intended to prevent abuse seem to conflict with the 'seal of confession'.</em></p>
<h2>Confession is unbounded in terms of the scope of the sins that can be confessed and absolved</h2>
<p>Here is an example statement about confession from the document cited below:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>Confession is unbounded in terms of the scope of the sins that can be confessed and absolved</h2>
<p>Here is an example statement about confession from the document cited below:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Provided always, That if any Man confess his secret and hidden Sins to the Minister for the unburdening of his Conscience, and to receive spiritual Consolation and Ease of Mind from him: We do not any way bind the said Minister by this our Constitution, but do straitly charge and admonish him [...], that he do not at any time reveal and make known to any Person whatsoever, any Crime or Offence so committed to his Trust and Secrecy (except they be such Crimes as by the Laws of this Realm, his own Life may be called into question for concealing the same)25 under pain of Irregularity...</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>European law and practice varies</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<h2>European law and practice varies</h2>
<p>From the <a href="https://ecclawsoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/The-Report-of-the-ELS-Working-Part-on-the-Seal-of-Confession.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ecumenical Summary of the Ecclesiastical Law Society's Report of its Working Party on the Seal of Confession</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In
Germany while there is a criminal law duty to report planned crimes an exception is made for those
engaged in pastoral care.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>In the Nordic and Baltic Churches there are similarities with the Church of
England.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Denmark has an older law imposing secrecy but also a modern law duty to report.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>In
Finland there is a duty to encourage self-reporting and (as in Germany) a duty to alert the authorities
of potential future crimes yet maintaining confidentiality.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>For the Roman Catholic Church, having a


key: chroma:document
string_value:
of potential future crimes yet maintaining confidentiality.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>For the Roman Catholic Church, having a
universal Canon Law, no Bishops’ Conference has the authority to change the absolute seal of
confession. Nevertheless, there are continuing official discussions in the Vatican covering all aspects
of safeguarding questions and the sacrament of reconciliation. These include the necessity of far
more effective training of priests, especially on the question of how to help either a penitent or
victim/survivor to move from the confidentiality of their confession to God to seeking professional
help and disclosure to the authorities where appropriate.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The same report furnishes the practice of the Church of England, which operates under Canon Law, which carries legal privileges in England:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>The same report furnishes the practice of the Church of England, which operates under Canon Law, which carries legal privileges in England:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The <em>Guidelines for the Professional Conduct of the Clergy</em> [...] begins by referring to the ministry of reconciliation and then proceed[s] via the formal ministry of absolution to deal with the inviolability of the Seal. It sets


key: chroma:document
string_value:
out the restrictions upon which and where ministers may exercise the ministry [...]  It draws the distinction between on the one hand pastoral conversations and on the other hand confessions in the context of this ministry. It states the absolute inviolability of the Seal even after the death of the penitent. It states that if a penitent discloses serious crime (such as abuse) the priest must require the penitent to report that conduct to the police or other statutory authority and if the penitent refuses to do so absolution should be withheld. It makes clear that any disclosure outside the confessional should be dealt with by following established procedures of reporting.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 9: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/england" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-tooltip-container">england</a></p>
<p>The Canons of the Church of England, which are part of statute law, protect sacramental confessions within the Church of England:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Provided always, that if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the minister, for the unburdening of his conscience, and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him; we do not in any way bind the said minister by this our Constitution, but do straitly charge and admonish him, that he do not at any time reveal and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy (except they be such crimes as by the laws of this realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same), under pain of irregularity.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>The effect of that proviso has actually been widened over time, as the perils to the priest's own life have been diminished. There are now no crimes for which the death penalty applies.</p>
<p>This protection only applies to clergy of the Church of England.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Can someone get protection under Double Jeopardy for a crime by arranging to be put on trial with fake evidence that is then disproven?

Question Body: <p>Lets say I just killed Bob (I'm doing a lot of that today).  The police suspect me but currently have little evidence that I killed Bob.  However, I haven't hidden the murder weapon and body well and can't move them now, so it's just a matter of time before someone finds them and provides the police with enough evidence to convict me.</p>

<p>To avoid jail time when the body is found, I try to protect myself with a claim of double jeopardy.  I have two friends claim to have witnessed my killing Bob and I leave a suspicious weapon that looks like it could be the murder weapon somewhere the police will find it.  With all this evidence, the police decide to press charges and have me arrested.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Only after my trial starts do I reveal my pre-planned proof that the evidence is false.  My friends fly back to their home in some country without an extradition treaty before calling the judge and telling them that they made up the story about seeing me kill Bob.  I present proof that the suspected murder weapon was purchased after Bob disappeared and a better explanation for why it looked so suspicious, etc.</p>

<p>With my being able to disprove all the central pieces of evidence, the jury finds me not guilty of Bob's murder.  Not long afterwards, Bob's body, and the actual murder weapon, are found.  This new evidence is damning and with it, they likely could convict me, but I claim double jeopardy when they try to charge me.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Of key importance, I argue that the last trial was for the same murder. My friends were claiming to witness me murder Bob at the very time and place that the actual murder took place (maybe they even did watch the murder).  The police had already suspected me of murdering Bob at this time as well, and had presented some, less effective, evidence at the first trial that they possessed due to the fact that I had actually murdered Bob. </p>

<p>Can I get away with murder?</p>

<p>Does the answer change if the police can prove I planted the original fake evidence which I used to inspire the first murder trial?</p>


Answer 1: <p>The double jeopardy clause would prevent you from being retried by the government that tried you for murder (probably a U.S. state). </p>

<p>But, you could be tried for fraud and obstruction of justice at the state level, and you could be tried for murder if an appropriate federal offense were located, at the federal level. </p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>But, you could be tried for fraud and obstruction of justice at the state level, and you could be tried for murder if an appropriate federal offense were located, at the federal level. </p>

<p>Often conspiracy to deprive someone of their civil rights is used as a federal offense when there is a state level acquittal, and it isn't impossible to imagine that happening in this case as the victim had a right to the protection of the laws, and the state had a right to enforce the criminal laws, which was deprived in a manner that could be called "under color of state law.'</p>


Answer 2: <p>Chicago mobster <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Aleman" rel="noreferrer">Harry Aleman</a> was acquitted of a murder in his first bench trial because the judge had been paid off. An appeals court later ruled that he could be retried. Double jeopardy did not apply because the first trial was fixed, so he was not in jeopardy.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Wikipedia doesn't say so, but I believe part of what led to that ruling was proof that Aleman knew the judge had been bribed.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>Well, I think it <em>could</em> work. I don't think perjured testimony would be enough to make jeopardy not attach in the same way that bribing a judge would. But it's not the best plan, either.</p>
<p>So your friends testify that you did it, take a plane ride, and call the judge. What effect do you expect that to have? The jury will never hear about that phone call; it's just hearsay unless your friends come back and testify under oath again (and thus subject themselves to a perjury charge.) So you're stuck with the jury only hearing the original testimony that you did it. Two eyewitnesses could be enough to convict you all by themselves even if there's problems with the physical evidence. And if your plan rests on the police not finding badly-hidden evidence, that may be a problem since even if you invoke the right to a speedy trial it will likely be <em>months</em> between your arrest and your trial.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If you're acquitted, then once this comes to light, the prosecution is going to look for every possible crime which could apply that they're still allowed to charge you with. Oh, you hid the body (or conspired with your friends to do so)? That's separate from the murder; they're still allowed to go after you for that. In my state that has a maximum sentence of 12 years 6 months. Two counts of conspiracy to commit perjury? Distinct from the murder; up to 6 years each. Placing false evidence? That's another 10 years. Etc. You may not get life like you would with the murder, but you're going away for a long time, unless you've already fled the country.</p>
<p>In general, I'd say that if you have multiple people willing to lie under oath for you, it's not surprising that you have a nonzero chance of getting away with stuff. It might be better to use such people to just lie and say you have an alibi, or that someone else did it, instead of this convoluted plan.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Using Sentry in an app targeting children below 13 years

Question Body: <p>We have created a children game using Unity and therein we use SentrySDK for automatic bug reporting.
Since our app is targeting children under 13 years, we need to comply with</p>
<ul>
<li>COPPA</li>
<li>GDPR</li>
<li>Google's Familiy Policy</li>
</ul>
<p>We use sentry like this. If an error occurs in the app, the app sends a message with the stacktrace and an anonymous user id to the Sentry Cloud.</p>
<p>Is this legal or do I need user consent for this?
And if so, does it have to be &quot;opt-in&quot; or &quot;opt-out&quot;?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>Are you collecting personal information?</h2>
<p>A user id, assuming that it is the same per user across time, is personally identifiable information for both COPPA and GDPR, and would need to meet Google’s requirements as well.</p>
<p>This is true even if there is no obvious way of linking this back to an identifiable person. If the id is instead a session id that is never used more than once, then it is not personal information.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<p>If an error occurs in the app, the app sends a message with the stacktrace and an anonymous user id to the Sentry Cloud.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is no such thing as an &quot;an anonymous user id&quot;. It either identifies a user, then it is personal data, or it doesn't, then it's just random byte garbage. Since your app is contacting this cloud service <em>directly</em>, not via your servers as a proxy, you also exposing the customers IP address to a third party.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is this legal or do I need user consent for this?</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Is this legal or do I need user consent for this?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>An IP address is PII, exposing it to a third part needs consent.</strong> Given that your app would be perfectly usable if this feature did not exist, you cannot claim it is absolutely neccessary for the operation (like sending the IP address to your <em>own</em> servers, which is simply how the internet works). If you would send all that to your own servers, strip the user id and ip address and send just the stacktrace devoid of any personal information to a third party, I would say you are safe. But the user id and ip address are PII that you need consent for, before sending them to a third party.</p>
<p>Normally, this is done in the fine print of the terms of use one has to accept before being able to sign up for an account in the app.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Normally, this is done in the fine print of the terms of use one has to accept before being able to sign up for an account in the app.</p>
<p>If you don't have an app with accounts, you could simply let the user <em>chose</em> to do this (or not) at the first app start. That is more user friendly and it established explicit consent to either do it, or not.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>By default, our SDKs are configured not to send any PII data, see: <a href="https://docs.sentry.io/platforms/unity/configuration/options/#send-default-pii" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://docs.sentry.io/platforms/unity/configuration/options/#send-default-pii</a></p>
<p>So if you, the developer, don't explicitly turn it on or add other data to the events sent to Sentry, you should be safe.</p>


Tags: gdpr, google, coppa


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What happens if a witness that has been subpoenaed refuses to speak to the opposing party&#39;s lawyers?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>I'm not a lawyer, and this is a hypothetical situation that I thought about while watching a trial.</p>
<p>If a prosecutor issues a subpoena for someone to testify at a trial, it's my understanding that the prosecutor needs to tell the defense about it by providing them the list of possible witnesses.</p>
<p>If so, the defense generally has the ability to speak to each of the witnesses, correct?  What if a witness refuses to speak to the defense lawyers?  For example, if they witnessed a crime and dislike the defendant because of it, so they don't want to speak to his lawyers.  Or, what if a defendant is (stupidly) representing himself and the witness doesn't want to speak to the defendant?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>I believe the subpoena requires the witness to testify <strong>at trial</strong>, but does it also require them to speak to the lawyers if the lawyers reach out to them to get their story prior to the trial?  Or maybe is the prosecution required to provide the defense team the information that the witness will testify to in the trial anyway, so this is irrelevant?  Can this come up in pre-trial hearings, and can a judge require information to be shared prior to trial if deemed appropriate?</p>
<p>I'm also assuming that the information has to be shared in some way, but maybe that's incorrect as well.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>the defense generally has the ability to speak to each of the witnesses, correct?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No.</p>
<p>The defense is only entitled to see what evidence the witnesses have provided so far, and what they are intending to give at the trial. The prosecutor must pass that info to the defense. This is called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_(law)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">discovery</a> (or disclosure).</p>


Tags: united-states, discovery


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: employee contract methods for working in multiple countries

Question Body: <p>What are legal methods of writing an employee contract so that an employee of one company can work in multiple coutries? Eg one week in country A, one week in country B, one week in country C, etc.</p>


Answer 1: <p>Nothing special other than saying it is required in the contract. For example, such contracts are typical for airplane pilots and flight attendants.</p>
<p>The hard questions are not what a contract has to say to do it.</p>
<p>The hard questions, instead, are whether what the contract provides for is allowed by the immigration laws of the countries where the employee is to work, what tax implications the employment relationship has for the employee and the employer, and what choice of law decisions arise from this with regard to labor law (when the law of the company's headquarters applies, and when the laws of a particular place of work applies).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Am I liable for a school zone speeding ticket in New York State when blinking lights don&#39;t have a notice sign?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>Long story short, I have received six citations for speeding in a school zone posted 15 MPH. I received my first citation in the mail two weeks after the event occurred, thus, I racked up six tickets before realizing I was doing so.</p>
<p>The school zone speeding sign looks like the attached image. I apologize for it being blurry, but the sign reads: &quot;School Speed Limit 15: 7AM - 4PM School Days&quot; It is also attached with lights that flash.<a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/wOOgt.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/wOOgtm.jpg" alt="School Speed Limit Sign" /></a></p>
<p>New York State Vehicle Traffic Law (NY Veh &amp; Traf L § 1180 (2014)) states:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>...no person shall drive in excess of  such maximum school speed limits during:</p>
<p>1.) school  days  at  times  indicated on the school zone speed limit
sign, provided, however, that such times shall be between the hours


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>1.) school  days  at  times  indicated on the school zone speed limit
sign, provided, however, that such times shall be between the hours
of seven o'clock A.M. and six o'clock P.M. or alternative times
within such   hours; or</p>
<p>2.)  a period when the beacons attached to the school zone speed limit
sign are flashing and such sign is equipped with a notice that
indicates   that the school zone speed limit is in  effect  when  such
beacons  are   flashing,  provided,  however, that such beacons shall
only flash during   student activities at the school and up to  thirty
minutes  immediately   before   and  up  to  thirty  minutes
immediately  after  such  student   activities.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It seems to me that this sign doesn't fit either criterion. The flashing beacons do not have the attached sign, but the flashing beacons are still there and operating.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>It seems to me that this sign doesn't fit either criterion. The flashing beacons do not have the attached sign, but the flashing beacons are still there and operating.</p>
<p>I am trying to question whether or not the lights were flashing when I was flashed by the ticketing camera, and I'm wondering if this is a reasonable thing to question based on the law I attached and the image.</p>
<p>Various links to the NYS Laws are <a href="https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/2014/vat/title-7/article-30/1180/#:%7E:text=1180.,and%20potential%20hazards%20then%20existing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a> and <a href="http://ypdcrime.com/vt/article30.htm?zoom_highlight=school%20zone" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>This clearly meets the first criterion:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>1.) school days at times indicated on the school zone speed limit sign, provided, however, that such times shall be between the hours of seven o'clock A.M. and six o'clock P.M...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The times are clearly listed on the sign and are within the allowed times (assuming the sign isn't blurry in real-lfe of course). Whether the lights were blinking or not is moot.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><strong>The lights do not need to be flashing from 7 am - 4 pm</strong></p>
<p>Part 2 says beacons are for &quot;student activities at the school&quot; and implies outside the regular hours, because if it is within the regular hours then part 1 covers it. Say there is a dance or game at 6:30 pm, they can have the public safety authorities activate the lights. You are correct that if you got the ticket outside the posted hours (7a-4p), but when the lights were flashing that you would have a beef- because this particular sign does not have a notice that says speed limit is in effect when the lights are flashing. If it had such notice and the lights were flashing, then you would be out of luck based on part 2.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>It is always in effect 7-4 on school days, lights or no lights, based on part 1 and the sign that states the hours (which are within the hours listed in the law). You don't need to memorize the school calendar, just assume it is Monday-Friday but not obvious days like Dec. 25.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtN1YnoL46Q" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtN1YnoL46Q</a></p>
<p>Let's take the song in a different direction:</p>
<h2>TL;DR version</h2>
<p>A duck repeatedly visits a lemonade stand, asking for grapes. Each time the proprietor says he has no grapes. After many repetitions the proprietor says &quot;If you come back, duck, I'll glue you to a tree and leave you all day, stuck!&quot;</p>
<p>The duck reports this exchange to the police as an illegal threat. The proprietor claims that the duck harassed him.</p>
<p>Is the proprietor guilty of some crime? Is the duck guilty of some crime? Assume that the duck is considered a person.</p>
<h2>Long version</h2>
<p>🎶 A duck walked up to a lemonade stand, and he said to the man running the stand, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum] got any grapes?&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>Long version</h2>
<p>🎶 A duck walked up to a lemonade stand, and he said to the man running the stand, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum] got any grapes?&quot;</p>
<p>The man said, &quot;no,&quot; and the duck did go; he just waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], he waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], till the very next day [bum bum bum bum bum bum babum],</p>
<p>When the duck came back to the lemonade stand, and again asked the man running the stand, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum] got any grapes?&quot;</p>
<p>He still heard a &quot;no,&quot; and again he did go; he just waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], he waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], till the very next day [bum bum bum bum bum bum babum],</p>
<p>He kept coming back to the lemonade stand, kept asking the man running the stand, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum] got any grapes?&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>He kept coming back to the lemonade stand, kept asking the man running the stand, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum] got any grapes?&quot;</p>
<p>This went on for days, he just wouldn't part ways, though he waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], he waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], till the very next day [bum bum bum bum bum bum babum],</p>
<p>The duck came back to the lemonade stand, again asked the man running the stand, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum] got any grapes?&quot;</p>
<p>The man'd had enough, this was getting to tough, and he said to the duck who came to his stand, &quot;If you come back, duck, I'll glue you to a tree and leave you all day, stuck!&quot;</p>
<p>After this louder no, the duck decided to go; he just waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], he waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], till the very next day [bum bum bum bum bum bum babum],</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>After this louder no, the duck decided to go; he just waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], he waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], till the very next day [bum bum bum bum bum bum babum],</p>
<p>When the duck walked up to the city police, and he said to the cop at the city PD, &quot;Hey, [bum bum bum], is this an illegal threat?&quot;</p>
<p>The man went to court, accused of assault, and he looked at the judge, wanting the trial to halt; he said, &quot;I plead not guilty! This duck harassed me!&quot;</p>
<p>The judge asked the duck, &quot;So what did you do? Was the lemonade man harassed by you?&quot;</p>
<p>The duck answered back, &quot;Well, in part it is true. I wanted some grapes, but he had not even two. I went back every day, until the threat yesterday. Then I waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], I waddled away [waddle waddle waddle], I waddled away [waddle waddle waddle] and I told the DA.&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Now I'd like to know what this judge will say. Did the duck harass the man, coming every day? Did the man commit a crime, or is he OK this time? 🎶</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <h2>Ducks are ducks, not people.</h2>
<p>It might surprise you, but even a hypothetical duck that could talk is a type of bird and is considered a waterfowl and wild game but not a person or human. As such, you can not commit any crime such as assault against it. In fact, provided that the lemonade stand owner has a hunting license and this is not in a zone where you can not hunt, such as inside a town, he could have shot the bird without repercussions - because a duck can be hunted. Threatening game birds is not covered by any law.</p>
<p>Only would the lemonade stand owner have glued the bird to a tree he would have committed a crime, because gluing birds somewhere would be considered animal cruelty in most jurisdictions.</p>
<p>As the duck is a bird and not a person, it can not commit any crimes, such as harassment.</p>
<h2>If a duck is a person...</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>As the duck is a bird and not a person, it can not commit any crimes, such as harassment.</p>
<h2>If a duck is a person...</h2>
<p>Assuming that there is such a place where duck is a slang term for a person, or where ducks are considered people, then the pattern is different:</p>
<p>Such as duck would indeed perform a repeated action that is very much aimed at annoying the lemonade stand owner. But that is not necessarily legally harassment:</p>
<ul>
<li>In Germany, § 238 StGB is aimed at stalking and requires the aim of inciting fear, § 185 StGB is for insulting speech, including harassing speech, § 186 StGB is for defamation, and § 240 StGB for coercion through harassment. A charge under those would be tedious.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>In the United Kingdom, the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">English Protection from Harassment Act 1997,</a> does not define harassment as any specific pattern. <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Scotland's variant</a> reads a little simpler, and makes harassment for harassment's sake illegal. These laws might be applied to the duck.</li>
<li>Many of the United States federal laws will simply not apply to the situation. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is about sexual harassment in the workplace, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 is for schools, and the Fair Housing Act does deal with home purchases and renting. All seem inapplicable.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>If the threat of gluing someone to a tree is a <strong>real</strong> threat under the law depends very much again. In Germany, it might be interpreted as too hilarious to be considered a true threat, but humiliating enough to constitute one of the insult laws, but the lyrics do not offer enough facts to make a proper analysis for this part.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>The song question is a variation of a joke with the punchline being about the proprietor's inability to follow through on the threat made and the duck calling the bluff.  In the U.S., generally when one has no ability to follow through with a threat and the threat is so outlandish, most courts would not consider it to constitute a legal threat and would assume the proprietor was being hyperbolic in nature.  What's more, the duck returning to clarify the lack of resources to carry out the threat as a sign that not even the duck took it as a threat and he is merely trying to use the legal system to further his harassment of the lemonade stand owner, which most judges in the U.S. do not take kindly to at all (This is called Abuse of Process and generally refers to a pattern of behavior in which one uses the court system to further vex a target and not to actually resolve a legal dispute in a just and equitable manner.).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>On the other side, it would be hard to enforce a harassment charge against the duck, as the business is a lemonade stand and clearly mobile in it's depiction.  As such, the proprietor does not own the property where he does business nor does the duck, so he cannot trespass the duck.  His legal options are to move to another area (if the duck still follows, the owner would have a stronger case for harassment, as the owner is trying to avoid the unwelcomed behavior) or, failing that, secure a restraining order or injunction (depending on the jurisdiction) against the duck, which requires the duck to not come within a certain distance of the lemonade stand owner or his business or employees.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Considering the nature of the business, we should also consider the age of the owner, as traditionally the average age of lemonade stand owners is such that the owner might not be above the age of criminal liability (that is, the law prevents the owner from being charged with a crime at all because he is two young.).  Typically, in the U.S., the Age of Criminal Liability depends on the jurisdiction.  North Carolina has the youngest age, which children 6 years old or older can be charged, and Massachusetts has the highest, with only children 12 years and older being liable for crimes.  Federally, this age is 11 years old.  28 states have no statutory age of criminal liability, but this might mean case law in the state would provide an age. So depending on the age of the lemonade stand owner and the location of the state, the cops would be unable to affect an arrest.  In this case, the cops would likely remand the owner to the custody of his legal guardian with a recommendation of


key: chroma:document
string_value:
owner and the location of the state, the cops would be unable to affect an arrest.  In this case, the cops would likely remand the owner to the custody of his legal guardian with a recommendation of some time in the time-out chair and/or loss of video game privileges (because that's the corrupting media influence these days, right?) at best.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it illegal to honk at a police officer in the USA?

Question Body: <p>Suppose a police car is stopped at a green light and not moving. Is it illegal for me to honk at him? What if I can't drive around him?</p>
<p>What if it happens to be a civilian vehicle and a plainclothes officer? Is it illegal in this case?</p>
<p>I see several videos of uniformed and plainclothes officers stopping cars for honking at them.</p>
<p>As a context I'm giving a link to this video:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAl2UBSgCZU" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAl2UBSgCZU</a></p>
<p>I find this video shocking behavior behavior from the police. But I want to know legally what's allowed and not allowed. Is the police legally allowed to stop at a yield sign for police related business which is a phone call?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a></p>
<p>In England, the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158#rule112" rel="noreferrer">use of a horn when stationary</a> is restricted solely to advise other road users of your presence &quot;<em>at times of danger</em>&quot;. Not spotting that the light has gone green would certainly <strong>not</strong> fit that description.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Use of audible warning instruments</strong></p>
<p>99.—(1) Subject to the following paragraphs, no person shall sound, or cause or permit to be sounded, any horn, gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is—</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>99.—(1) Subject to the following paragraphs, no person shall sound, or cause or permit to be sounded, any horn, gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is—</p>
<p>(a) stationary on a road, at any time, other than at times of danger due to another moving vehicle on or near the road...</p>
<p><sub><Sup><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/99/made" rel="noreferrer">The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986</a></sub></Sup></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The policeman would be well within his rights and duties to provide you with a fixed penalty notice of £30.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/germany" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;germany&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-germany-tooltip-container">germany</a></p>
<p>In Germany, the horn can only be used for two reasons:</p>
<ul>
<li>As a signal for overtaking <em>outside of city limits only</em>.</li>
<li>As a warning signal for imminent danger.</li>
</ul>
<p>So, in the situation described in the question, it would be illegal to honk at the police officer, but the fact that they are a police officer is actually irrelevant – it would be illegal to honk in that situation, <em>period</em>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/france" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;france&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-france-tooltip-container">france</a> : Yes, unless</p>
<ul>
<li>you are outside a city</li>
<li>it is daytime</li>
<li>you can convince the cop or the judge that doing so is a &quot;necessary warning for other road users&quot;. Not my specialty, but barring extraordinary circumstances, I expect that defense to fail.</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006074228/LEGISCTA000006177132" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Code de la Route, articles R416-1 and R416-2</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hors agglomération, l'usage des avertisseurs sonores n'est autorisé que pour donner les avertissements nécessaires aux autres usagers de la route.</p>
<p>En agglomération, l'usage de l'avertisseur sonore n'est autorisé qu'en cas de danger immédiat.</p>
<p>(...)</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>En agglomération, l'usage de l'avertisseur sonore n'est autorisé qu'en cas de danger immédiat.</p>
<p>(...)</p>
<p>De nuit, les avertissements doivent être donnés par l'allumage intermittent soit des feux de croisement, soit des feux de route, les signaux sonores ne devant être utilisés qu'en cas d'absolue nécessité.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Outside city limits, klaxon may be used solely to give necessary warning to other road users. <em>[For instance, when driving around a mountainous road, you are supposed to honk when approaching a curve without visibility, so as to warn drivers coming ahead.]</em></p>
<p>Within city limits, klaxon may be used only in case of immediate danger.</p>
<p>(...)</p>
<p>At night, signals must be given by flashing headlights, klaxons must only be used in case of absolute necessity.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>(...)</p>
<p>At night, signals must be given by flashing headlights, klaxons must only be used in case of absolute necessity.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Failing to respect those rules is a second-class contravention (currently set at €35). Technically, those apply to <em>any</em> vehicle, including bikes (even if bike klaxons are much less noisy than car klaxons).</p>
<p>While <em>in theory</em> it is irrelevant whether there is a cop in the car in front, behind, or sideways of you... I imagine less than 0.1% of wrong klaxon uses are penalized, and all of those occur when a cop was on-site.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What are the consequences of being party to a OFAC prohibited transaction?

Question Body: <p>The US Treasury <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0916" rel="nofollow noreferrer">has sanctioned</a> Tornado Cash which is a tool for mixing Cryptocurrency. Since the sanctions don't actually stop this tool from working someone has used it to <a href="https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/tornado-cash-ofac-sanction-trolls/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">send small amounts of funds to various celebrities</a>. In my understanding these qualify as prohibited transactions as defined by the US treasury which US persons are forbidden from engaging in.</p>
<p>For those recipients that are US persons, what are the consequences? Do they have to report those funds? Could they get in any trouble if they just ignore this? Or if they spend those funds?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>Could they get in any trouble if they just ignore this?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Generally, a gift is not complete until both the donor and the recipient consent to it. If someone purports to give crypto-currency to someone they have no relationship with, and the recipient does not accept the gift, the transaction is not completed and the recipient is not exposed to civil or criminal liability.</p>
<p>A person who completely ignored a purported transfer of crypto-currency to them would not have taken acts sufficient to count as acceptance of the gift.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Or if they spend those funds?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Most sanctions and crimes require the person sanctioned to have some knowledge of the facts that make their actions crimes or subject to sanction.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>Most sanctions and crimes require the person sanctioned to have some knowledge of the facts that make their actions crimes or subject to sanction.</p>
<p>Ignorance of the law is no excuse, but if the person receiving a small amount of crypto-currency has no knowledge&lt;1&gt; of the facts that would make the transaction a prohibited transaction, this won't generally give rise to sanctions or criminal penalties.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>&lt;1&gt; Note that, in some circumstances, if there are facts that don't give you actual knowledge of the relevant facts that would let you know that conduct was illegal, but do alert you to the fact that the transaction is suspicious, if a further reasonable investigation of the facts would have revealed that the transaction was illegal, you have &quot;inquiry notice&quot; of the facts. When you have inquiry notice of the facts, you are treated as if you knew what you would have discovered if you'd follow up to investigate the suspicious circumstances.</p>
<p>On the other hand, if someone received crypto-currency and spent it, and then didn't check the box on their tax return asking if they had engaged in any crypto-currency transactions, they would be guilty of intentionally filing an inaccurate tax return and could be sanctioned for that.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Of course, if the person who received the funds was aware of the entire Tornado Cash situation and knew the facts that would make accepting it and spending it a prohibited transaction (before spending it), then they could be sanctioned.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/outdoor-civil-marriage-and-civil-partnership-ceremonies/guidance-for-venues-outdoor-civil-marriage-and-civil-partnership-ceremonies" rel="nofollow noreferrer">UK law has changed in recent years to allow outdoor marriage / civil partnership ceremonies</a>, as long as the land is at a venue approved for the purpose.</p>
<p>There is also provision for <a href="https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/birth-death-and-ceremonies/ceremonies/other/urgent-marriage-or-civil-partnership" rel="nofollow noreferrer">urgent marriages / civil partnership ceremonies to be at any location at short notice</a><sup>1</sup> in circumstances where one of the parties is seriously ill, not expected to recover and cannot be moved to a place where a marriage / civil partnership could normally take place. This is known as a <em>marriage by Registrar Generals Licence</em>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Given the other law changes allowing outdoor solemnizations, can such a marriage/civil partnership ceremony take place outside, for example in the garden of the housebound person's home, or the outdoor grounds of the hospice where the sick partner is receiving medical care?</p>
<hr />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<hr />
<p><sup>1. These are sometimes collquially called &quot;emergency marriages&quot;. See <a href="https://www.ashfordstpeters.info/images/other/PAS23.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals</a> (&quot;...speaking of emergency marriages in hospital...&quot;); <a href="https://www.shropshire.gov.uk/births-and-marriages/our-fees/fees-for-2023-2024/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Shropshire Council Fee Schedule</a> (&quot;Emergency Marriage/Civil Partnerships by Registrar Generals Licence/Special Procedure&quot;); <a href="https://www.ouh.nhs.uk/about/trust-board/2020/march/documents/TB2020.24-end-of-life-care.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Oxford University Hospitals—Learning from Feedback</a> (&quot;...asking if I can arrange an emergency marriage for a patient who has only days to live...&quot;).</sup></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>There's nothing in the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/34" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Marriage (Registrar General’s Licence) Act 1970</a> about the location of urgent marriages, <em>other than that you need to satisfy the registrar that you can't make it to a church or civil office</em>.</p>
<p>A simple guide would be;</p>
<ul>
<li>If you're talking about simply moving the death-bed outside of the hospice (for example into a hospital garden), then that would be fine.</li>
<li>If you're talking about transporting the person in an ambulance to a secondary location such as a park, then that wouldn't be fine.</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<blockquote>
<p>The Registrar General shall not issue any licence for the solemnising
of a marriage as is mentioned in subsection (1) above unless he is
satisfied that <strong>one of the persons to be married is seriously ill and
is not expected to recover and cannot be moved to a place at which


key: chroma:document
string_value:
satisfied that <strong>one of the persons to be married is seriously ill and
is not expected to recover and cannot be moved to a place at which
under the provisions of the Marriage Act 1949 (hereinafter called
the “principal Act”) the marriage could be solemnised</strong></p>
<p>[snip]</p>
<p>Any marriage to be solemnised on the authority of the Registrar General’s licence <strong>shall be solemnised at the wish of the persons</strong> to be married either—</p>
<p>(a) <strong>according to such form or ceremony,</strong> not being the rites or ceremonies of the Church of England or the Church in Wales, <strong>as the persons to be married shall see fit to adopt</strong></p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a><sup>1</sup></p>
<p><strong>Yes</strong></p>
<p>The &quot;<em>emergency marriage ceremony</em>&quot; provisions at <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/34/section/1?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 1</a> Marriage (Registrar General’s Licence) Act 1970 expressly remove the requirement for it to be conducted at an <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/primary+secondary?title=The%20Marriages%20and%20Civil%20Partnerships%20%28Approved%20Premises%29%20Regulations%20" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Approved Premises</a>:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>(1) Subject to the provisions of subsection (2) below, any marriage which may be solemnised on the authority of a marriage schedule may be solemnised on the authority of the Registrar General’s licence <strong>elsewhere than at a registered building, the office of a superintendent registrar or</strong> <em><strong>approved premises</strong></em>:</p>
<p>Provided that any such marriage shall not be solemnised according to the rites of the Church of England or the Church in Wales.</p>
<p>(2) The Registrar General shall not issue any licence for the solemnising of a marriage as is mentioned in subsection (1) above <strong>unless he is satisfied that one of the persons to be married is seriously ill and is not expected to recover and cannot be moved to a place at which under the provisions of the Marriage Act 1949 (hereinafter called the “principal Act”) the marriage could be solemnised</strong> ...</p>
<p>...</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The only requirements (relevant to the question) are for a <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/34/section/2?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">notice of marriage</a> to be given to the appropriate superintendent registrar, and for the notice to comply with <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/34/section/9?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 9</a> of the Act:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A marriage on the authority of the Registrar General’s licence shall be solemnised in the place stated in the notice of marriage.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>A marriage on the authority of the Registrar General’s licence shall be solemnised in the place stated in the notice of marriage.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p><sup>1</sup> Although the question asks about the procedures in the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-kingdom" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-kingdom&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-kingdom&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-kingdom-tooltip-container">united-kingdom</a>, the 1970 Act only extends to <a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-england-and-wales-tooltip-container">england-and-wales</a>. See <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/34/section/20?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 20(3)</a>:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>In <a href="/questions/tagged/scotland" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;scotland&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;scotland&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-scotland-tooltip-container">scotland</a>, which is part of the UK, a marriage can take place outdoors (assuming no other impediment to the location). An emergency marriage is the same. Certain religious bodies may have more specific rules  of their own, but the requirements of the law itself are minimal.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The Scottish process, whether for a religious or civil marriage, always entails the issue of a Marriage Schedule by the district registrar, which gives permission for the ceremony to take place between the named people, at the given place and time. Normally, the proposed marriage must be publicly advertised for 28 days, to give time for any objections to be registered, but this can be shortened at the discretion of the Registrar General for Scotland - see the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/15/section/6" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977, s.6(4)-(4A)</a>. So an emergency marriage is on the same footing as any other, rather than having a separate procedure. The only difference is convincing the registrars to expedite the request.</p>
<p>It is also possible for the registrar to alter the date and location on an existing Schedule, if there are new justifying circumstances, such as a change in someone's medical condition.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>It is also possible for the registrar to alter the date and location on an existing Schedule, if there are new justifying circumstances, such as a change in someone's medical condition.</p>
<p>As far as location, there is a difference between civil and religious marriages.</p>
<ul>
<li>Civil marriages must take place at an &quot;appropriate place&quot;, agreed by the parties to the marriage together with the local authority (the council), or else in the registrar's office. This can be indoors, outdoors, on a ship, etc. It can be your own home or garden, but it can't be a church or similar religious building. Each council will have its own policies on what they think is appropriate, which becomes relevant if the desired place isn't commonly used for weddings, but a hospice garden should present no problem in terms of dignity or safety.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li>The government imposes no rules on religious marriages as far as location, but leaves it to the discretion of the celebrant. The idea is that the state has decided some particular religious body is generally trusted to perform marriages in an appropriate way, and so its ministers are able to get on with it. The religion in question might have its own rules which would affect whether a minister/priest/etc. will agree to perform the ceremony. For example, while the Church of Scotland permits its ministers to celebrate marriages anywhere, at their discretion, the Catholic Church does not (but it does have well-established procedures for marriage when one of the couple is terminally ill, including dispensation from normal rules about the ceremony). Jewish ceremonies can happen outdoors - again, if the rabbi agrees - but likely under a chuppah; Sikh wedding logistics regarding the Guru Granth Sahib can be complicated even if the outdoors is possible in principle.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</ul>
<p>Further, the location on the Marriage Schedule is in the nature of a street address rather than anything more specific. A planned outdoor wedding can be moved indoors because of the weather without causing any problem with the paperwork. Similarly, as long as the registrar or celebrant is happy to do so, the marriage ceremony can take place anywhere at the agreed location, including outside. And if the location of the wedding is other than what was specified, that does not affect the validity of the marriage (per <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/55/section/22" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a reform in 1980</a>, extending an original exemption so that all merely procedural defects are now covered). The celebrant may get in trouble for breaking rules - either with the state or with their religious authorities - but in terms of civil law, the couple are in the clear.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: In what jurisdictions is trespassing a criminal matter?

Question Body: <p>In England trespass in itself is an entirely civil matter, but in the US it is apparently a crime. What other jurisdictions treat the fact of having improperly tread on another’s property as a crime?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<p>The <em>Criminal Code</em> makes it a summary offence to trespass at night (<a href="https://Every%20person%20who,%20without%20lawful%20excuse,%20loiters%20or%20prowls%20at%20night%20on%20the%20property%20of%20another%20person%20near%20a%20dwelling-house%20situated%20on%20that%20property%20is%20guilty%20of%20an%20offence%20punishable%20on%20summary%20conviction." rel="nofollow noreferrer">s. 177</a>)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Every person who, without lawful excuse, loiters or prowls at night on the property of another person near a dwelling-house situated on that property is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>And various provincial statutes make it a &quot;regulatory&quot; or &quot;public-welfare&quot; offence to trespass (e.g. <a href="https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/18003" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Trespass Act</em>, R.S.B.C. 2018, c. 3</a>, s. 2; <a href="https://nslegislature.ca/sites/default/files/legc/statutes/protect.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Protection of Property Act</em>, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 363</a>, s. 3(1)).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<p><em>In England trespass in itself is an entirely civil matter.</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>This has exceptions. This site by <a href="https://www.claims.co.uk/knowledge-base/land-law/trespass" rel="nofollow noreferrer">claims.co.uk</a> says</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Criminal trespass</strong></p>
<p>Since 2012, it is a criminal offence to trespass in residential property, effectively criminalising squatting. Under section 144 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 it is an offence for someone to be in a residential building as a trespasser, having entered as a trespasser; and that person knows or ought to know that they are a trespasser; and they are living in the building or intend to live there for any period.</p>
<p>The police have powers to permit forced entry and arrest for this offence. On conviction, an individual may be jailed for up to 51 weeks, or receive a fine up to level 5.</p>
</blockquote>
<HR>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The police have powers to permit forced entry and arrest for this offence. On conviction, an individual may be jailed for up to 51 weeks, or receive a fine up to level 5.</p>
</blockquote>
<HR>
<p>As for the 'travelling community' setting up on public or private land, this article in the <a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05116/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">UK House of Common Library</a> states:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Section 61 of the CJPO Act enables senior officers to direct those in an unauthorised encampment to leave land if they are in an encampment that consists of six or more vehicles...</p>
<p>... Failure to comply with a police direction to leave is an offence.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is why most trespassing encampments rarely consist of more than 5 caravans.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>Trespass is indeed a criminal offense in every U.S. jurisdiction of which I am aware, in addition to being a tort that can be enforced in a lawsuit without involving the criminal justice process.</p>
<p>For example, in Colorado, which is typical, trespass can be: <a href="https://www.shouselaw.com/co/defense/laws/trespassing/1st-degree/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">first-degree trespassing</a> (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-4-502), <a href="https://www.shouselaw.com/co/defense/laws/trespassing/2nd-degree/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">second-degree trespassing</a> (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-4-503), or <a href="https://www.shouselaw.com/co/defense/laws/trespassing/3rd-degree/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">third-degree trespassing</a> (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-4-504). As noted in the final link above:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Colorado Revised Statute § 18-4-504 defines third-degree trespass as
unlawfully entering or remaining on another’s property that is not


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Colorado Revised Statute § 18-4-504 defines third-degree trespass as
unlawfully entering or remaining on another’s property that is not
enclosed or fenced. Third-degree trespass is typically a Colorado
petty offense, carrying up to 10 days in jail and/or a fine of up to
$300.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>First and second degree trespass involves different kinds of property and aggravating factors.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
petty offense, carrying up to 10 days in jail and/or a fine of up to
$300.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>First and second degree trespass involves different kinds of property and aggravating factors.</p>
<p>Many countries in Europe have a &quot;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam" rel="nofollow noreferrer">right to roam</a>&quot; which legalizes, and immunizes people doing it from civil and criminal liability, what is called &quot;third-degree trespassing&quot; in Colorado, but not trespassing in buildings or fenced or enclosed areas. But, in Colorado, the right to roam is limited to travel on rivers and streams and lakes when you do not touch the steam bed or lake bed (i.e. the &quot;<a href="http://lawreview.colorado.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/10.-Helton-FINAL_s.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">right to float</a>&quot;) established in the state constitution. As Wikipedia explains at this link:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>In Scotland, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Belarus, Austria, the Czech Republic and Switzerland, the
freedom to roam takes the form of general public rights which are
sometimes codified in law. The access is ancient in parts of Northern
Europe and has been regarded as sufficiently fundamental that it was
not formalised in law until modern times. However, the right usually
does not include any substantial economic exploitation, such as
hunting or logging, or disruptive activities, such as making fires and
driving offroad vehicles.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the Western United States, the lack of a right to roam is mitigated by the fact that a very large percentage of all land is publicly owned. A majority of land is federal land in Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Alaska, and Oregon. None federal public lands probably tip this over to a majority in Wyoming and California as well.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>For example, a large share of cattle grazing is done on public lands for which ranchers rent grazing rights, rather than on private lands, so it is not trespassing to enter onto that land. The map below shows the percentage of federal land in each state, but omits state and local and Indian Reservation public lands.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/4yoJ5.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/4yoJ5.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>(<a href="https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/federal-land-by-state/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Source</a>)</p>
<p>There is very little public land, in contrast, in all but a few states in the Eastern United States.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it legal to intentionally wait before filing a copyright lawsuit to maximize profits?

Question Body: <p>Let's say someone uses my intellectual property without my consent and uses it for commercial purposes. Can I wait until they've made many millions of dollars off of my work, so that I can sue and take a large portion of or all of that money? This takes place in the United States</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/85675/what-are-equity-and-equitable-remedies">Equitable remedies</a> such as disgorgement (recovery of profits) are typically subject to equitable bars to recovery such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity)" rel="noreferrer">laches</a>. Laches reflects the maxim that &quot;equity aids the vigilant and not the idolent&quot; (<em>Snell's Equity</em>, § 5). The doctrine of laches gives a court discretion to bar a claim when the plaintiff unreasonably delays bringing a claim.</p>
<p>It is certainly &quot;legal&quot; for a plaintiff to sit on a potential claim for any amount of time before actually filing suit, but I take it you are asking whether such behaviour would limit the amount recoverable by disgorgement of profits under the Copyright Act.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The Supreme Court answered this in <em>Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/572BV.pdf#page=750" rel="noreferrer">572 U.S. 663</a> (2014).</p>
<p>The Court said that given the statutory three-year limitations period in the Copyright Act, <strong>laches typically play no role</strong>. The concerns about delays normally handled by laches were considered by Congress and reflected in the three-year limitations period (<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/572BV.pdf#page=772" rel="noreferrer">p. 685</a>):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>That regime leaves &quot;little place&quot; for a doctrine that would further limit the timeliness of a copyright owner's suit.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, <strong>in <em>extraordinary circumstances</em>, laches may still play a role</strong>. The Court gave two examples:</p>
<ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>However, <strong>in <em>extraordinary circumstances</em>, laches may still play a role</strong>. The Court gave two examples:</p>
<ul>
<li><em>Chirco v. Crosswinds Communities, Inc.</em>, <a href="https://casetext.com/case/chirco-v-crosswinds" rel="noreferrer">474 F. 3d 227</a> (CA6 2007): defendants were alleged to be using architectural designs without permission, in violation of the plaintiffs' copyright; the plaintiffs were aware of the building projects but took &quot;no steps to halt the housing development until more than 168 units were built&quot;; the Court of Appeals found that the order sought by the plaintiffs that the houses be destroyed was barred by laches, even though the lawsuit was brought within the three-year limitation period.</li>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<li><em>New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt &amp; Co.</em>, 873 F. 2d 576, 584–585 (CA2 1989): plaintiffs were aware for two years of a book being published in violation of their copyright; the Court of Appeals held that laches barred the injunctive relief of destruction, but allowed a damages remedy.</li>
</ul>
<p>The Court distinguished the remedy sought by Petrella from that sought in <em>Chirco</em> and <em>New Era</em>. In <em>Chirco</em> and <em>New Era</em>, the plaintiffs were seeking destruction of the works. The plaintiff Petrella was seeking only disgorgement.</p>
<p>The Court said (<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/572BV.pdf#page=774" rel="noreferrer">p. 687</a>):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the circumstances here may or may not (we need not decide) warrant limiting relief at the remedial stage, but they are not sufficiently extraordinary to justify threshold dismissal.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>the circumstances here may or may not (we need not decide) warrant limiting relief at the remedial stage, but they are not sufficiently extraordinary to justify threshold dismissal.</p>
<p>Should Petrella ultimately prevail on the merits, the District Court, in determining the appropriate injunctive relief and assessing profits, may take account of her delay in commencing suit. In doing so, however, that court should closely examine MGM's alleged reliance on Petrella's delay. This examination should take account of
MGM's early knowledge of Petrella's claims, the protection
MGM might have achieved through pursuit of a declaratory
judgment action, the extent to which MGM's investment was
protected by the separate-accrual rule, the court's authority
to order injunctive relief “on such terms as it may deem reasonable,” § 502(a), and any other considerations that would justify adjusting injunctive relief or profits.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
to order injunctive relief “on such terms as it may deem reasonable,” § 502(a), and any other considerations that would justify adjusting injunctive relief or profits.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That paragraph emphasizes that in equity, remedies and defences are discretionary and flexible.</p>
<p>My reading is that:</p>
<ol>
<li>it would have to be quite extraordinary for a disgorgement remedy under the Copyright Act to be completely barred due to laches; and</li>
<li>if the court came to believe that the delay was intentional and with the purpose of trying to run up the disgorgement amount, it may exercise its discretion to reduce the amount that is recoverable.</li>
</ol>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How is derivative text material copyrighted within an older manuscript?

Question Body: <p>This is an addendum to to a previous question: How is the copyright of the derivative work dated? For example; an author writes a book in 2009 and in 2020, re-edits the book with new material. Does this new material benefit from the earlier copyright? What if the author is suspected of infringement with this new material only, in 2021, by a second author who published his work in 2015? Is the first author accountable to the second? How can it be proven if all the old copies have been removed from the shelves?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag">united-states</a></p>
<p>The author of a derivative work only gets a copyright on content that is original to the derivative work. There is no new copyright on content from the source work. The author of a revised edition only gets  a new copyright on new content in the revised edition (provided that it is original).</p>
<p>This used to be more important when a copyright term was calculated from the year of publication.  Now it is important only in edge cases, such as when it is claimed that the new content was copied from another work, and is infringing. The date of publication is now less important because the copyright in most things that a specific author writes expires at the same time: 70 years after he or she dies (works published anonymously and works made for hire are exceptions to this rule).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The relevant US law is <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#103" rel="nofollow noreferrer">17 USC 103</a>,  which provides that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.</p>
<p>(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</blockquote>
<p>If Author A writes and has published a book in 2009, A owns the copyright on it (unless A sells or transfers it). Let us suppose that Author B writes a different book on a related subject in 2015, and then A publishes a revised edition of the 2009 book in 2020. In 2021 B accuses A of having copied content from the 2015 book without permission, and incorporating such infringing content into the 2020 edition. A claims that this content was already present in the 2009 edition. How can A prove this defense?</p>
<p>Commercial publishers pretty much always retain a few copies of every edition, even if a newer edition is the only one offered for sale. In any case, a commercially published US book will essentially always be registered with the Copyright office, whch means that a copy will have been sent to the Library of Congress, and that copy can be checked.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Moreover, B is not likely to even file such a suit unless B's lawyers have a copy of the 2009 edition and can show that the copied content was not found in it.</p>
<p>If it were proved to the satisfaction of a court that A had, in the 2020 edition, copied from B's 2015 book, A would be liable for damages to B, the amount determined by the court, and B could also get an injunction stopping distribution of the 2020 edition.</p>
<p>Laws in other countries on these points are generally similar.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Does being overturned on appeal have consequences for the careers of trial judges?

Question Body: <p>Would a 95% rate of being overturned on appeal have any effect on a judge's career?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<p>The mere fact of being frequently overturned on appeal would only have reputational consequences and secondary effects on career advancement (not suggesting these are minor effects).</p>
<p>But being overturned at a rate of 95% suggests that the judge might not be conducting themselves with integrity or not being diligent in the performance of their judicial duties. These are two core <a href="https://cjc-ccm.ca/cmslib/general/news_pub_judicialconduct_Principles_en.pdf" rel="noreferrer">ethical principles</a> set out by the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC). (However, the CJC is clear that these principles &quot;do not set out standards for defining judicial misconduct.&quot;)</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Depending on what is leading the judge to such a high rate of appellate intervention, the underlying cause may warrant removal. The possible reasons that the CJC can recommend a judge to be removed are listed at <a href="https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/j-1/page-10.html#h-337775" rel="noreferrer">s. 65(2)(a) to (d) of the <em>Judges Act</em></a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Where, in the opinion of the Council, the judge in respect of whom an inquiry or investigation has been made has become incapacitated or disabled from the due execution of the office of judge by reason of</p>
<p>(a) age or infirmity,</p>
<p>(b) having been guilty of misconduct,</p>
<p>(c) having failed in the due execution of that office, or</p>
<p>(d) having been placed, by his or her conduct or otherwise, in a position incompatible with the due execution of that office,</p>
<p>the Council, in its report to the Minister under subsection (1), may recommend that the judge be removed from office.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>the Council, in its report to the Minister under subsection (1), may recommend that the judge be removed from office.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>For some examples where the CJC recommended removal of a judge, see:</p>
<ul>
<li>the <a href="https://cjc-ccm.ca/cmslib/general/Report_to_Minister_Justice_Cosgrove.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Report to the Minister of Justice re: Paul Cosgrove (2009)</a> (in which the CJC declined to consider whether serious incompetence could be a ground for removal; instead basing the recommendation for removal on serious misconduct that was damaging to the administration of jusice and the public's confidence in the judiciary);</li>
<li>the <a href="https://cjc-ccm.ca/cmslib/general/Camp_Docs/2017-03-08%20Report%20to%20Minister.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Report to the Minister of Justice re: Robin Camp (2017)</a>.</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-states-tooltip-container">united-states</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Does being overturned on appeal have consequences for the careers of
trial judges?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In general no. Indeed, federal judges serve for life. And, judges in some state courts serve for life, or serve until a majority of voters vote to not allow them to serve another term, or they are impeached or reach a mandatory retirement age.</p>
<p>Merely making lots of incorrect decisions that are reversed on appeal isn't even a ground for impeaching a judge, although an impeachment decision of the legislature (which is exceedingly rare) is not subject to judicial review.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Would a 95% rate of being overturned on appeal have any effect on a
judge's career?</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>Would a 95% rate of being overturned on appeal have any effect on a
judge's career?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is unthinkable that a judge who had 95% of his or her trial court decisions overturned on appeal wasn't also guilty of other serious misconduct that could have the judge removed from office or impeached.</p>
<p>I can only think of two judges ever, in all time, who have had that kind of track record. It just doesn't happen outside a pervasively corrupt organized crime relationship.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The one case I can think of that approached that level involved <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/08/18/1118108084/michael-conahan-mark-ciavarella-kids-for-cash#:%7E:text=In%20what%20came%20to%20be,of%20two%20for%2Dprofit%20lockups." rel="nofollow noreferrer">two rural Pennsylvania juvenile judges</a> who were bribed to convict kids who were innocent or guilty of only minor crimes, and send them to juvenile prison by a private prison operator (the judges and the private prison operator were both later convicted of multiple felonies and the judges were also kicked off the bench and disbarred and successfully sued for about $206 million by the 300 or so victims of the scheme). After the fact, all of these judges' convictions were overturned in a collateral attack on the convictions (even though most of the kids who were convicted were guilty of at least something anyway), but even then, only a tiny percentage of the cases were appealed immediately (i.e., before the corruption scandal


key: chroma:document
string_value:
though most of the kids who were convicted were guilty of at least something anyway), but even then, only a tiny percentage of the cases were appealed immediately (i.e., before the corruption scandal was revealed), and only some of those direct appeals from the juvenile convictions prevailed.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Typically, about 10% of a judge's final orders, plus or minus, are appealed and about 30%-70% of them are overturned on appeal (so, 3-7% of their final orders are ultimately overturned on appeal). Appeal rates are higher for criminal cases, but success rates on appeal are lower. Appeal rates  are lower for civil cases, but success rates on appeal are higher.</p>
<p>But, if, for example, a judge final orders were only appealed 2% of them and 95% of the case appealed were reversed on appeal, that would actually be an exceptionally good track record.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>But, if, for example, a judge final orders were only appealed 2% of them and 95% of the case appealed were reversed on appeal, that would actually be an exceptionally good track record.</p>
<p>Almost always, if someone appeals a case and it is reversed on appeal, the case is sent back to the same judge after the appeal to do what the appellate court told the judge to do. But in perhaps 1 in 5,000 or 1 in 10,000 appeals, the appellate court orders that the judge be removed from that particular case. Usually this happens when the judge is reversed on appeal the first time, the case goes back to the judge, and the judge then defiantly disregards what the judge was told by the appellate case to do so the case is successfully appealed again.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The other scenario that comes up, usually long before it gets very extreme, is that an older judge begins to get Alzheimer's or some similar form of dementia, and begins to make more, and more obvious mistakes, or stops showing up to work. In the most state courts, in this fact pattern, a judge can be removed for having a disability that prevents the judge from doing the judge's job, if the judge doesn't voluntarily step down after strong persuasion from judicial regulatory officials and fellow judges (which is what happens the vast majority of the time in this fact pattern).</p>
<p>It is harder to force a judge to resign for disability in this fact pattern in the federal system, and indeed, one such case involving <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/doctor-cleared-96-year-old-newman-for-bench-amended-suit-says" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a 96 year old federal judge</a> is currently playing out in the federal courts right now. It is unclear how it will be resolved.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>N.B. In common law countries that strong default rule is that a case that is reversed on appeal is returned to the same judge if it has to be remanded for further trial court action as noted above. In most civil law legal systems, such as those of continental Europe, the default rule is that a case that is reversed on appeal is assigned to different judges for further proceedings in the trial court following the reversal on appeal, if further trial court proceedings are necessary.</p>
<p><strong>U.S. and Non-U.S. Judicial Career Paths Compared</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>U.S. and Non-U.S. Judicial Career Paths Compared</strong></p>
<p>In almost all civil law countries, and in most common law countries, the judiciary is a career that one moves up the ladder in after being appointed in a civil service merit based appointment system. In these systems, if you managed to get hired in competitive merit based applications for judgeships at all, you start as a judge handling small claims cases and petty criminal matters and you work your way up over time to a general jurisdiction trial court that handles the most serious matters and then to the appellate courts. And, non-lawyer judges are not allowed (except as &quot;lay judges&quot; who confer together with professional judges on a single case basis in serious criminal cases as quasi-jurors).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Thus, in most countries, the likelihood that a grossly incompetent judge who constantly makes incorrect legal rulings gets appointed in the first place, or that such a judge moves up beyond the lowest level limited jurisdiction court, is very low indeed (barring later in life disability for some reason or another, or corruption).</p>
<p>This is not the way that the judgeships in the U.S. are filled, so the damage that a high reversal rate might due to a judge's potential for career advancement in Canada or England or France or Japan or Germany is not nearly so significant a factor in the U.S.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The typical process in the U.S. is for a lawyer to be distinguished in a career as a lawyer and also politically connected, and then to either run for office as a judge in an election, or to obtain a political appointment as a judge to a particular court. Many low level elected judges in the U.S. (thousands of them since some big states like New York and Texas select their low level judges called justice of the peace on this basis) are not even lawyers.</p>
<p>Often, a lawyer's first judicial post will be as a general jurisdiction trial court lawyer or as an appellate court lawyer, despite having no prior judicial experience. U.S. Supreme Court judges often have prior experience (often brief) as a federal U.S. District Court or U.S. Court of Appeals or state supreme court judge, but this isn't a requirement and there have been many exceptions to that rule over the years.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The vast majority of U.S. judges appointed to serve as judges on a particular court will never serve as a judge on any other court later in their career. Working up the career ladder of courts from less important ones to more important ones, which is the predominant norm in most of the world, is the exception to the rule in the U.S. judicial system.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Ways to avoid a running Naturalization application being forwarded to another municipality/city


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>I have recently made a Naturalization application in Germany (1 month ago) in Bayern and am about to Move to Berlin in 2 months.  And after I do the anmeldung my application will also be forwarded to the Berlin office.</p>
<p>This appears quite hopeless to me since in Berlin my request will not be even looked at before the end of this year due to the centralization of the Einburgerung office in Berlin. Let alone normal cases, Berlin also has a significantly durable process on this topic compared to other cities, and can take years instead of months.</p>
<p>My question is, can you please suggest a few ways to me to keep my application running in Bayern not to be transferred to Berlin? Because otherwise, it would be really hopeless...</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>My question is, can you please suggest a few ways to me to keep my application running in Bayern not to be transferred to Berlin? Because otherwise, it would be really hopeless...</p>
<p>--Possible ways that I have thought of so far is mentioning my place in Berlin as a Zweitwohnsitz, but I doubt I can find a landlord to accept doing the Anmeldung with me in Bayern while I don't live there, and don't know about potential risks. Another option also not doing Anmeldiung for a while...</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>This answer is based on a legal greyzone and Berlin's notoriously inefficient bureaucracy. As @Trish noted, you are legally required to register your new residence within two weeks <a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bmg/__17.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§ 17 BMG</a>. In some (most?) German states you can just walk into a Bürgeramt and register your new residence so it is perfectly straightforward to do that within two weeks and that is expected.</p>
<p>This is not the case in Berlin, you need to get an appointment to register and these are hard to get. I just searched online for Bürgeramt in Berlin, picked <a href="https://service.berlin.de/standort/122231/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">one</a> and then you can choose the service your want (register new residence) and look at the available appointments. Right now on July 7th there were appointments available on exactly one date, September 1st. Note that this is nowhere near within two weeks.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>To my knowledge, if you have an appointment at the Bürgeramt to register your new residence than current legal opinion is that you did fullfill the two weeks requirement regardless of when the appointment actually is. After all it is not your fault if the city doesn't offer a faster registration.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>Don't move.</h2>
<p>Your application is by law to be handled by the office that is responsible for your primary place of residence. The only lawful way to keep your primary place of residence at your old residence is to not move your primary place of residence.</p>
<p>Not (starting the process of) informing Berlin within <strong>two weeks</strong> that you are now a resident is violating <a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bmg/__17.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§ 17 BMG.</a> Also, claiming a secondary residence when it is your first is a violation of <a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bmg/__21.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§ 21 BMG</a>. <a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bmg/__54.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">§ 54 BMG</a> regulates that it is a misdemeanor to not handle the Anmeldung properly.</p>


Tags: germany, immigration, passport, naturalization


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is an unauthorised appropriation with simultaneous deposit of another value a theft? &#127851;

Question Body: <p>Today I tried to explain to my daughter what the saying <em>&quot;opportunity makes the thief&quot;</em> means.</p>
<p><strong>My example:</strong> Someone forgets his expensive chocolate 20 euros on a table in the park. You see the chocolate and, of all things, you have a big appetite for chocolate. Because the chocolate is lying on the table so unobserved, the temptation to eat the chocolate immediately is great. But my daughter said she wouldn't do that. After a moment's thought, she said she would put 20 euros on the table and then eat the chocolate and leave a note saying that the chocolate tasted very good. Now I was irritated. Is that actually theft?</p>
<p>I suppose if the owner of the chocolate sees the note and accepts the 20 euros, it would be a legal transaction, wouldn't it?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>This is theft. While theft is defined in different ways in different places, the heartland of theft is &quot;larceny&quot; which involves knowingly taking property without permission of the owner, with an intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property taken.</p>
<p>In general, one of the defining qualities of something that is &quot;property&quot; is that it can't be transferred without the permission of the owner, except in narrowly defined circumstances where the government authorizes a taking.</p>
<p>In a very different but analogous context, if a lawyer takes money held in trust for a client out of the client's trust account with the lawyer, without a valid legal basis for doing so, even if the lawyer intends to and does replace the funds in the trust account later, the lawyer is guilty of a crime.</p>
<p><strong>Unintentional Conversion Compared</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>Unintentional Conversion Compared</strong></p>
<p>If you accidentally and unknowingly take someone else's property, for example, taking the wrong coat from a coat rack, or taking the wrong umbrella, and that item is later destroyed, you have committed the civil wrong (a.k.a. the tort) of conversion, but you haven't committed a crime. Crime usually (but not always) involves acts committed with a bad intent.</p>
<p>But taking someone else's property on purpose, without their permission, is the crime of theft and not just a tort.</p>
<p><strong>Implied Consent To A Purchase Compared</strong></p>
<p>The situation would be different, however, if there is implied permission to purchase the item taken from the person who owns it.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><strong>Implied Consent To A Purchase Compared</strong></p>
<p>The situation would be different, however, if there is implied permission to purchase the item taken from the person who owns it.</p>
<p>For example, suppose you walk into a convenience store which sells 20 euro candy bars, but there is no one available to sell it to you because the sole employee of the store is hung over and vomiting in the store's toilet. If you take the candy bar and leave a 20 euro bill at the cash register, you have not committed theft, because in that context, the owner of the property has implicitly consented to sell the candy bar to any member of the general public who wants to buy it for the stated price.</p>
<p>Similarly, this is why buying candy from a vending machine isn't theft.</p>
<p><strong>Abandonment Compared</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Similarly, this is why buying candy from a vending machine isn't theft.</p>
<p><strong>Abandonment Compared</strong></p>
<p>Also, it is important to distinguish property that has been abandoned by the owner, to which a &quot;finder's keepers&quot; rule generally applies, to property which there is no indication that the owner intended to abandon.</p>
<p>So, if someone throws something in the trash, or simply leaves what would generally be thought to be trash in public, like a bag of dog poop, that would not generally be theft, since a reasonable person would assume that the property had been abandoned and no longer had an owner.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Are complaints to hospital administration PHI under HIPAA&#39;s Privacy Rule

Question Body: <p>Paul has heart surgery. While he's recovering, staff is constantly distracted by their phones and fails to check in on him at required intervals, administer medication on time, and provide medically recommended therapy.</p>
<p>Before he checks out, Paul sees that the hospital's website has a form for making a complaint to hospital administration. Paul fills it out and notes all the information above.</p>
<p>The hospital's CEO reads the form, disciplines all the staff identified, and takes no further action with it.</p>
<p>To what extent is the form covered by HIPAA's Privacy Rule?</p>
<p>I'm looking for answers supported by law addressing similar facts.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>PHI is health information that is individually identifiable. Any record, even a post-it note, can be PHI.</p>
<p>In this case, the complaint form is PHI if it contains the patient's name or other identifier along with the details of treatment.</p>
<p>When PHI is held by a covered entity, including the hospital CEO, it is protected by HIPAA privacy regulations.</p>


Tags: united-states, privacy, hipaa


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CquiSjgJNc8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Here</a>  Neil DeGrasse Tyson says there was testing and a system in place assuring the safe production of the new vaccines. He addresses people who have claimed there was no testing. That got me curious about the process so I did some research. Looking to fill in some gaps.</p>
<p>Could the new mRNA vaccines have come to market without any testing? I keep hearing claims that the new Covid vaccines weren't tested before being brought to market, and that there's a law eliminating all liability, both criminal and civil, in the emergency situation. Lacking legal incentives to test, Pfizer, Moderna, and the rest did not, so it is claimed.  My own research suggests otherwise, perhaps on a technicality, but I'm no lawyer.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Best I can tell, limited liability for vaccine manufacturers comes from the 2005 law <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Readiness_and_Emergency_Preparedness_Act" rel="nofollow noreferrer">PREPA</a>. It still allows for prosecuting &quot;willful misconduct&quot;. Am I right to take that to mean criminal liability is still on the table? From what I can tell, an effort is made to rein in what qualifies as &quot;willful misconduct&quot; which could potentially reduce even criminal liability to nothing.</p>
<p>It's also been said that those potentially hurt by an emergency vaccine have no recourse when injured. From what I can tell, they may have no legal recourse but VICP and CICP of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_Systems_Bureau#Compensation_programs" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Healthcare Systems Bureau</a> will compensate people. This happens rarely and with a pittance, so arguably doesn't exist.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>If there are no legal consequences, what reason would pharmaceutical companies have to conduct clinical trials before going to market? A gesture of good faith?</p>
<p>I can't tell if companies are legally required to test before going to market. Is there a specific law about that?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <blockquote>
<p>Could the new mRNA vaccines have come to market without any testing?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No.</p>
<p>The FDA still has to approve emergency limited approvals of new vaccines. At least as a practical matter, the FDA requires some testing to grant this approval, although not the full testing regime of a non-emergency application for a new vaccine or drug approval.</p>
<p>FDA approval is the limiting principle that prevents emergency drug approval from being used recklessly despite a lack of civil liability.</p>
<p>I know this from news reports about the COVID vaccine approval process and can't cite chapter and verse of the relevant statutes.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If there are no legal consequences, what reason would pharmaceutical
companies have to conduct clinical trials before going to market?</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>If there are no legal consequences, what reason would pharmaceutical
companies have to conduct clinical trials before going to market?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Drug companies have to get FDA approval for every single product they make. If they act in bad faith to get emergency approval, the FDA will not treat them well in the future and could even revoke their authority to manufacture any drugs going forward.</p>
<p>Also, keep in mind that vaccines are not particularly high profit margin products for drug companies.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>No. If you plan to sell any pharmaceutical products in the US, you have three choices.</p>
<ol>
<li>Go through the FDA's <a href="https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/new-drug-application-nda" rel="noreferrer">New Drug application</a> process.</li>
<li>Sell it without FDA approval, which is a felony. You risk going to jail for a long time and paying a hefty fine.</li>
<li>Give up on the US market altogether. But most significant markets have an equally onerous process.</li>
</ol>
<p>BTW, the FDA aren't stupid, or willfully obstructive, whatever snake-oil merchants might claim. If urgency is justified, there are mechanisms such as the <a href="https://www.fda.gov/industry/medical-products-rare-diseases-and-conditions/designating-orphan-product-drugs-and-biological-products" rel="noreferrer">Orphan Drug Program</a> to expedite development and approval.</p>


Tags: united-states, medical, vaccination, emergencies


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Getting an EIN number for a Trust and Section 645

Question Body: <p>A person dies with a revocable trust that becomes irrevocable after the person's death. The trustee of the irrevocable trust wants to get an EIN number. If in the process of getting the EIN number he/she selects to have the trust file under Section 645 does that eliminate the need to file a separate tax return for the trust? That is, the income for the trust can be reported on the estate's income tax return.</p>
<p>Bob Sherry</p>


Answer 1: <p>If the trust's income is reported under the estate given an election under 26 U.S.C. § 645, it does not need to apply for a second EIN while the estate continues to exist.</p>


Tags: united-states, trusts-and-estates, income-tax


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How and when did trespass become a crime, or not a crime?

Question Body: <p>principally interested in the us and in England, but what are the origins of trespass being treated as not a crime in England, and conversely as a crime in the U.S.? As with terminology for civil burdens of truth? How did they diverge or who diverged from whom?</p>


Answer 1: <p>There hasn't really been any such divergence. The elements may vary, but trespass can be prosecuted both civilly and criminally in both jurisdictions.</p>


Tags: united-states, england-and-wales, trespass, any-jurisdiction


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How could submarine tours (or similar activities) in international waters be regulated?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>After the recent Oceangate Titan submersible disaster, much attention has been drawn to the fact that there was no requirement for licensing or certification, due to operating in international waters.  It has been said that Oceangate operated in a &quot;regulatory no man's land&quot; and that the results of an investigation may be of limited value, since no government has the jurisdiction to implement practical changes in the rules.</p>
<p>I imagine that there are ways to regulate such activities.  For instance, countries can make it illegal for a ship offering unlicensed deep-sea exploration tours to dock in its ports. (Of course, this can be circumvented by using a different country as a starting point).  Another measure might be to &quot;sanction&quot; a company, i.e. to prohibit the selling of parts or technology to a company offering uncertified ocean tours, which could be effective if most of the world's developed countries were on board.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>However, I say all this as someone who knows nothing of the relevant laws/treaties/practices. What do experts on this subject think?  For example, do you think that the results of an investigation into the Titan disaster could lead to practical changes?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Let's start with the bottom:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>For example, do you think that the results of an investigation into the Titan disaster could lead to practical changes?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, but it will depend on who does the investigation: The police or the responsive maritime safety board (the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transportation_Safety_Board" rel="nofollow noreferrer">National Transportation Safety Board</a> in the US). The police can present charges e.g. for negligent manslaughter, but the Transportation Safety Board cannot. Their job is to present ideas on how to improve the security of transportation, not to apportion blame.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>there was no requirement for licensing or certification, due to operating in international waters.</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>there was no requirement for licensing or certification, due to operating in international waters.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I would contest that. It is true that the open ocean is no-mans-land and you can do whatever you want there, unless it is against international law. And there <em>are</em> international regulations regulating the safety of shipping anywhere on the world. The must important such regulation is called SOLAS (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLAS_Convention" rel="nofollow noreferrer">International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea</a>). And all vessels need to adhere to it, at least in as far as the rules apply to them. The &quot;flag state&quot; is responsible that any vessel flying its flag are in compliance with these regulations.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Honestly, I'm no SOLAS expert, so I don't know what happens if a vessel doesn't comply to it. It is probably true that they won't be allowed to enter or leave a port if the non-compliance in any point is detected.</p>
<p>Interesting fact: The first version of the SOLAS convention was established as a result of the <em>Titanic</em> disaster. Yet still people die as a result of her sinking, even 111 years after the fact...</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The &quot;flag state&quot; is the state whichever flag the vessel flies. In the case of the Titan, this appears to be the US. So the US can indeed enforce the operator is in compliance with any safety regulations. Also, anyone on board a vessel is subject to the jurisdiction of said flag. So on board the Titan (and it's mother ship) the US jurisdiction is applicable. That means that the US police can indeed start an investigation and charge someone for manslaughter. Of course, as always, they can only charge living people. And the heirs of the deceased may sue the operator in the US.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>The assumption is incorrect</h2>
<p>All merchant vessels (which includes any vessel carrying paying passengers) is subject to the <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLAS_Convention" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SOLAS</a> convention (Safety of Life at Sea) ratified by 167 states including the United States and Canada. Most of the states that haven’t ratified are landlocked.</p>
<p>While this is not directly applicable to the submersible, as equipment carried on a covered vessel, it’s up to the flag state to decide if this equipment met the standards. One imagines they will look closer in future.</p>


Tags: law-of-the-sea


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: How long do restrictive covenants apply on property willed to the state?

Question Body: <p>If I devise real property to the state of Texas in my will, and it specifies that the homeless can not be evicted on the property, how long will that restriction apply for? <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/q/93376/218">Assume the state accepts the gift.</a></p>
<p>If the clause reads,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>this property is to be managed for the best interest of the homeless, and the homeless shall never be evicted from the premise. If the state violates this clause, the property is to return to the heirs of the estate of Evan Carroll.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the above there is a restrictive covenant tied to an express clause of reverter. How long would such a clause apply to the state for? Forever?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>Transfer of title must eventually occur, otherwise the property was never willed to another because the willing of the property is perpetually incomplete.</p>
<p>One can place conditions on the transfer of title, but those conditions cannot last forever.  They can last quite long, but there is a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_against_perpetuities" rel="nofollow noreferrer">rule against perpetuities</a>, especially created due to clauses constraining the transfer of of title in wills.</p>
<p>This rule applies to a person who is transferring title, with a conditional clause that bars the full use of the property.  If such a clause is limited, then it does not exist in perpetuity.  The rule specifically addressed the will's call to reassign title if the transfer's clauses were violated.  The maximum limitation historically was the lifetime of some person alive when the will was executed, plus 21 years, to permit an unborn grandchild to inherit.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The reason this rule came about was due to the will of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Howard,_15th_Earl_of_Arundel" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Henry Frederick Howard</a>, the Earl of Arundel and Surrey.  It effectively left the dead Earl managing his estates after his death, shifting properties that were bequeathed, based on the possibility of a &quot;more suitable&quot; heir being born after the Earl's death.  <a href="https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&amp;httpsredir=1&amp;article=4885&amp;context=penn_law_review" rel="nofollow noreferrer">This will eventually created the most complicated bit of common law that exists to date.</a></p>
<p>In my totally amatuer attempt to summarize it; it is a combination of at least two ideas:</p>
<ul>
<li>a &quot;dead hand&quot; (deceased person) cannot guide the activities of the living forever</li>
<li>transfer of property (title) must eventually be fully transferred</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<ul>
<li>a &quot;dead hand&quot; (deceased person) cannot guide the activities of the living forever</li>
<li>transfer of property (title) must eventually be fully transferred</li>
</ul>
<p>Exceptions to the rule exist for conditional transfer of title back to the person who originally owned the property, but these exceptions cannot apply when the transfer is to a third party.</p>
<p>This clause in Evan's will,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;If the state violates this clause, the property is to return to the
heirs of the estate of Evan Carroll.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>would only be enforceable for a limited amount of time.  First, the Estate of a dead Evan Carroll is not a lasting entity, eventually his estate would be closed.  Finally, the transfer to the &quot;heirs&quot; of Evan Carroll would be a transfer to a third party, subject to the rule.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Some states interpret their protections against the rule in different ways; but, nearly all states that have revoked the rule have done so by making a new rule (often with easier to manage time limits).  A handful claim to have revoked the rule; but, they use other legal approaches to prevent this problem from occurring.</p>
<p><a href="https://ryanreiffert.com/blog/estate-planning-texas-rule-perpetuities/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Texas has extended the rule to 300 years</a> while <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-1984-043" rel="nofollow noreferrer">New South Wales, puts the limit at 80 years</a>.  Texas's extension seemed to be primarily to permit trust funds to operate legally long after the person establishing it had died.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Consider what happens if such a rule doesn't exist.  The title of the property could never be fully transferred, because the clause could never be proven to not have been violated.  This would dramatically devalue the property, and clog the courts with suits claiming property held by one family for 100 years isn't theirs because of some evidence just uncovered about what happened 60 years ago.  It also would massively complicate the selling of the property, because a clean title could never be proven.</p>
<p>Note that this rule would have no bearing on a covenants not tied to the property's transfer of title.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1jkilao3MQ" rel="nofollow noreferrer">This rule even made it into a recent Disney case, which is explained far better than I can by the Legal Eagle, Devin James Stone</a></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>Until revoked</h2>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/new-south-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-new-south-wales-tooltip-container">new-south-wales</a></p>
<p>The fact that the land is state owned is irrelevant, a covenant lasts until it is deliberately removed.</p>
<p>There are three ways to do this:</p>
<ul>
<li>By the person(s) (if any) nominated as being able to do so,</li>
<li>By agreement of the parties benefitted by the covenant,</li>
<li>By order of the Supreme Court.</li>
</ul>
<p>For your question, the last is likely to be the only relevant one. There are several grounds but the most likely is <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-1919-006#sec.89" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s89(1)(b1)(2)</a> of the <em>Conveyancing Act 1919</em>:</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>that the obligation has become unreasonably expensive or unreasonably onerous to perform when compared with the benefit of its performance to the authority</p>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Can the Secret Service arrest someone who uses an illegal drug inside of the White House?

Question Body: <p>In light of the recent discovery of cocaine inside the West Wing of the White House, I am wondering if a person who either lives in, or works in, or makes a visit to the White House, is caught using an illegal drug within the White House by a member of the Secret Service, whether that Secret Service member can immediately arrest that person and then turn that person over the Washington D.C. police department for prosecution.</p>
<p>Or, is arresting someone in the White House for drug possession/drug use not one of the job duties of the Secret Service?</p>
<p>Can the Secret Service arrest someone who uses an illegal drug inside of the White House?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>The Secret Service is primarily concerned with protecting the people and information they oversee, not enforcing laws.</p>
<p>They have the power to arrest someone for any unlawful conduct, but unless a drug user is presenting as a threat to a protectee, they are unlikely to be arrested by the Secret Service.</p>
<p>More likely the Service would simply escort the person off the premises and refer the matter to the DC Metro Police to handle.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Edit</strong>:
Such a case would <em>not</em> be turned over to the US Capitol Police (as originally written)<br>
It would most likely be referred to the DC Metropolitan Police Department.<br>Corrected my answer above.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <p>See <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3056#c_1_C:%7E:text=(C)make%20arrests%20without%20warrant%20for%20any%20offense%20against%20the%20United%20States%20committed%20in%20their%20presence%2C%20or%20for%20any%20felony%20cognizable%20under%20the%20laws%20of%20the%20United%20States%20if%20they%20have%20reasonable%20grounds%20to%20believe%20that%20the%20person%20to%20be%20arrested%20has%20committed%20or%20is%20committing%20such%20felony" rel="noreferrer">18 U.S.C. § 3056(c)(1)(C) — Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(1) Under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, officers and agents of the Secret Service are authorized to —<br />
…</p>
<blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p>(1) Under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, officers and agents of the Secret Service are authorized to —<br />
…</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(C) make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony;</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>The Secret Service Uniformed Division <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3056A" rel="noreferrer">has powers “similar to those of the members of the Metropolitan Police of the District of Columbia”</a> and routinely makes arrests for both violations of nationwide federal law and violations of the DC Code. Leaving aside that possession of drugs can generally be charged under the federal Controlled Substances Act, the Uniformed Division has full authority to arrest for it under DC Code drug provisions. For instance, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=910412238331722719" rel="noreferrer">here’s a case from 2000</a> where Uniformed Division officers arrested someone in northwest DC for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. There was no question of their authority to make the arrest. The Secret Service is actually one of a handful of uniformed federal police forces that regularly exercises DC Code authority on public streets (along


key: chroma:document
string_value:
question of their authority to make the arrest. The Secret Service is actually one of a handful of uniformed federal police forces that regularly exercises DC Code authority on public streets (along with the Park Police), let alone inside the White House complex.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it illegal to obtain a travel agent license simply to get discounts in hotels and airfare?


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Body: <p>My friend told me about how she got incredible discounts on hotels and airfare because she registered as a travel agent (Utah/USA) and many places offer high discounts to agents.  She obtained her license by working through another agent in her neighborhood.  I wasn't aware she was working, so I asked her more about what the job entailed and she told me that she doesn't actually provide her services as an agent, she only uses the license to get deep discounts for her own travels.</p>
<p>I don't think I can convince her it's fraud, but I don't want to see her in jail.  I couldn't find any sources online that said one way or another whether it is fraudulent behavior.    Are there any referencable sources I can point her to that could be helpful?  Or is what is she doing entirely legal?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Also, unfortunately, I don't know any more details about her license or method of obtaining it as we spoke in casual passing about it.  I can probably ask her though, if necessary.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>The <a href="https://dopl.utah.gov/licenses/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Utah Department of Professional Licensing</a> does not issue licenses for travel agents, and there seems to be no evidence of a statutory requirement for licensing. Therefore it's unclear what status this license has. I did see a number of online places offering to train people to be travel agents, and perhaps one of them offers a certificate of training.</p>
<p>There is such a thing as an IATA number, and some hotel might require providing one's IATA number. If a person does not have an IATA number and the hotel does not verify the IATA number, then it would be fraud to falsely make up a number in order to obtain a benefit. The person could be sued to recover the amount of the discount. If the person has an IATA number, then there nothing obviously fraudulent, but you would have to inspect the conditions for using an agent discount.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p><a href="https://www.iatan.org/en/accreditation/idcard" rel="nofollow noreferrer">IATA</a> requires you to work at a registered agency to get an agent number, and the proof requirements are substantial enough that it would be surprising if a person could get away with just claiming to work at a travel agency. The organization would certainly be in a good position to sue a person for falsifying the application (note also that the application is subject to binding arbitration by the Travel Agency Commissioner).</p>
<p>So it depends on who gave the discount, what the required, what if any accreditation was used to get that discount, and what the actual facts are (i.e. does the person actually work for an agency making at least $10,000 a year).</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <h2>I'm a fraudster too</h2>
<p>I am a licensed pesticide applicator. That means I can walk into any wholesale supply house in 5 states and get the most potent pesticides. The trade-off is I forfeit the right to claim honest mistake if I poison a creek or something.  I only use it to spray my own properties.</p>
<p>My buddy is a licensed real estate agent but doesn't practice.  When buying houses to live in, my buddy gets the 3% kickback given to the buyer's agent. But has to follow professional rules.</p>
<p>Then there's Doctor Steven Strange, a fully qualified brain surgeon whose day job is running a magic shop.</p>
<p>So a lot of licensure is like that.  You get access to The Good Stuff <em>in exchange for</em> agreeing explicitly to the rules of the trade, paying professional fees, or what have you.</p>
<h2>But is it fraud if it opens job paths?</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>But is it fraud if it opens job paths?</h2>
<p>Consider a hypothetical world where an online booking site got caught out doing something horrible and everyone flocked back to real travel agents.  Problem: the pipeline for qualifying travel agents is finite and cannot bear surge demand.  In situations like that, they tend to fill surge demand with people like your friend. So yes, your friend does add value to society simply by being credentialed.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 3: <p>Business licensing of this type has 3 different tiers, really. Let's talk about each one.</p>
<h2>Government certification</h2>
<p>Where it's needed to protect citizens, governments will directly certify people to certain jobs. A structural engineer or airline pilot will be government licensed.</p>
<p>It wouldn't surprise me if the government is not involved in travel agent certification.</p>
<h2>NGO (non-profit) industry associations</h2>
<p>Who decides if you're a lawyer? Not the government - the Bar Association. The National Fire Protection Association writes the North American electrical code.</p>
<p>When a responsible NGO is already in place and doing a good job, the government often defers the role to them.  The NGO is at their discretion to make prudent decisions about who that is.  They can then sign contracts with that person, and that contract binds the person to whichever reasonable thing it says.</p>
<h2>Private company networks.</h2>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<h2>Private company networks.</h2>
<p>Some industry infrastructure is run by private companies.  A travel agent needs SABRE, a lawyer needs Lexis-Nexis.  The companies can give access to anyone they want, on contractual terms which they choose, consistent with their profit motive and health and happiness of their user base.</p>
<p>These companies would be most interested in you keeping your contractual agreement, so they'd be more interested in your credit score than your test score.</p>
<p>Hotels, airlines, and others within the travel industry can also grant discounts to anyone they please, on any contractual terms which they please.  So they are free to &quot;turn the knobs&quot; on those agent perks - they could say &quot;only travel agents who have made at least 100 bookings in the past year&quot;... <em>or not</em>.</p>
<p>In short: if these NGOs and private companies want to permit &quot;anyone&quot; to register and qualify as a travel agent, they are free to do that.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>In short: if these NGOs and private companies want to permit &quot;anyone&quot; to register and qualify as a travel agent, they are free to do that.</p>
<h2>A method to their madness?</h2>
<p>I suspect the industry is well aware of the &quot;abuse&quot; and tolerate it because <em>at the scale it's happening now</em>, it's more a benefit than a nuisance.  (that could change if it became too popular).  The benefit is such people are actually some of the most experienced candidates to be an <em>actual</em> travel agent.  So they are &quot;seeding&quot; future agent candidates for the cost of some perks.</p>
<p>It's hardly the strangest thing industries have done to recruit.  Airlines cut the &quot;number of flying hours&quot; required to become a commercial pilot to a paltry number, degrading safety in the eyes of many.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: In what sense is an Assured Tenancy “assured”?

Question Body: <p>Why was this term chosen for the standard type of tenancy brought in under the housing act 1988? Who is the one that is meant to have the assurance, and what is the assurance thought to be of?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>The assurance benefits both parties.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The tenant cannot be evicted before the minimum term expires, if they have adhered to the terms of the agreement (with some rare exceptions).</p>
</li>
<li><p>The landlord can gain possession under the terms of the agreement (subject to a minimum term). The Housing Act 1988 ended the &quot;sitting tenant&quot; trap for new lettings, where the landlord could not sell the house at market value.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>In practice, since 1997 most ATs are Assured Shorthold Tenancies with a 6-month fixed period which the agent renews. Though there are some ruthless agents who like to move tenants on so that they don't get too settled (and they can charge the landlord a re-letting fee). OTOH some landlords will want to keep a trouble-free tenant.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>Before 1988 tenancy laws were heavily skewed towards the tenant. Practically the only way a lawful tenant could be evicted, was if the owner needed to live in the property, and owned no other property (i.e. an owner of multiple lettings could not just shuffle around between them, to evict tenants).</p>
<p>So although the new style tenancies were called &quot;Assured&quot;, basically new tenants lost their &quot;security of tenure&quot; and IMO this eventually created a huge inflation in domestic property value between 1995 and 2007, as residential property became a commodity which individuals were encouraged to invest in: the buy-to-let market.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 2: <blockquote>
<p>In what sense is an Assured Tenancy “assured”?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is &quot;assured&quot; in the sense that it cannot be brought to an end by the landlord other than by the means set out in <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/section/5" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s. 5</a>:</p>
<ul>
<li>court order</li>
<li>when the tenancy was fixed-term and provided powers to the landlord to end the tenancy at the end of that term</li>
<li>disqualification of the occupants under the Immigration Act 2014, with notice</li>
</ul>


Tags: england-and-wales, legal-terms, assured-shorthold-tenancy


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: What provisions entitle a defendant in a possession claim to receive on-the-day representation/advice from a duty scheme?

Question Body: <p>Usually when facing a possession claim against oneself one is given access to a duty scheme advisor/representative. Suppose on one day there is no such representative present. Is a defendant who would have availed such advice had it been available seem to suffer any prejudice in the possession matter to which they are a party?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>If no duty solicitor is available on the day, the defendant may make a <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part23#23.5" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Part 23 Application</a> to the judge for an adjournment until they have had the opportunity to seek legal advice.</p>
<p>The power to adjourn in these circumstances may be found at <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#3.1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Rule 3.1(2)(b)</a> Civil Procedure Rules:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(2) ... the court may –</p>
<p>...</p>
<ul>
<li>(b) adjourn ... a hearing</li>
</ul>
<p>...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The only prejudice to the defendant that I can see with an adjournment is a prolonging of the process - but that needs to be balanced with ensuring the interests of justice are met.</p>
<hr />


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>The only prejudice to the defendant that I can see with an adjournment is a prolonging of the process - but that needs to be balanced with ensuring the interests of justice are met.</p>
<hr />
<p>For awareness, Shelter have a handy <a href="https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/eviction/free_legal_help_from_a_county_court_duty_scheme#:%7E:text=court%20duty%20scheme-,Free%20legal%20help%20from%20a%20court%20duty%20scheme,your%20income%20or%20financial%20situation." rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;<em>Free legal help from a court duty scheme</em>&quot;</a> guide, and there are a number of Housing Possession Court Duty Schemes <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/housing-possession-court-duty-schemes-hpcds" rel="nofollow noreferrer">(HPCDS)</a>, such as <a href="https://swllc.org/get-advice/housing/emergency-help-at-local-housing-courts/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this from SWLLC</a>.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: In the USA, is it legal for parents to take children to sexually oriented events?

Question Body: <p>In <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/93522/in-the-usa-is-it-legal-for-parents-to-take-children-to-strip-clubs?noredirect=1#comment214346_93522">this question</a> I asked about parents taking children to strip clubs, answer showed what the law has to say in the case of sexually oriented businesses in general.</p>
<p>But what about non-businesses, like sexually oriented events, like private or open to public parties, carnivals or any type of events where it has act(s) that might be considered sexual. Is it also illegal for parents to take children to them?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p>I would think that at that point, it would fall under federal obscenity laws.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/obscenity" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/obscenity</a></p>
<p>Specifically from that page: &quot;visual depictions, spoken words, or written text&quot;.  If a minor was at a private event and exposed to either materials or live acts of a sexual nature, that seems like it would be a &quot;visual depiction&quot;. Officially, the courts apply the Miller Test of Obscenity, but I would think a live sexual act would count just as much as a video.</p>
<p>Per the same page: &quot;Federal law strictly prohibits the distribution of obscene matter to minors. Any transfer or attempt to transfer such material to a minor under the age of 16, including over the Internet, is punishable under federal law.&quot;</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<p>There may be specific case law that defines whether a live act qualifies as &quot;matter&quot; and/or whether viewing constitutes &quot;transfer&quot;, but at the surface level, I don't see why they wouldn't.</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Question Title: Is it legal for a US military servicemember to disobey a lawful order that they reasonably believed was unlawful?

Question Body: <p>In the US military (and I would assume all militaries?) a servicemember must obey an order from a superior officer if the order is lawful; however, if complying would require the commission of a crime, the order is unlawful and must be disobeyed. Would a court-martial ever rule that it would have been legal to obey an order, but the servicemember reasonably believed it was unlawful and was therefore justified in refusing to comply? Has such a ruling ever actually happened?</p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
Answer 1: <p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-kingdom" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-kingdom&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;united-kingdom&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-united-kingdom-tooltip-container">united-kingdom</a><sup>1</sup></p>
<p>They would commit a <em>prima facie</em> offence contrary to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/52/section/12?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 12</a> Armed Forces Act 2006:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>12 Disobedience to lawful commands</strong></p>
<p>(1) A person subject to service law commits an offence if—</p>
<ul>
<li><p>(a) <em><strong>he disobeys a lawful command; and</strong></em></p>
</li>
<li><p>(b) <em><strong>he intends to disobey</strong></em>, or is reckless as to whether he disobeys, the command.</p>
</li>
</ul>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
</li>
<li><p>(b) <em><strong>he intends to disobey</strong></em>, or is reckless as to whether he disobeys, the command.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(2) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable to any punishment mentioned in the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/52/section/164?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Table in section 164</a>, but any sentence of imprisonment imposed in respect of the offence must not exceed ten years.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>HOWEVER...</p>
<p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/52/section/325?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Section 325</a> allows for <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/52/notes/division/5/1/13/5/3/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the defence to prove</a> there was a &quot;lawful or reasonable excuse&quot; to disobeying a lawful order:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>325 Evidential burden as respects excuses</strong></p>


key: chroma:document
string_value:
<blockquote>
<p><strong>325 Evidential burden as respects excuses</strong></p>
<p>(1) This section applies to an offence under any of sections 1 to 41, 93A, 93E, 93G, 107, 229, 232G and 266 which is such that a person who would otherwise commit the offence—</p>
<ul>
<li><p>(a) <em><strong>does not do so if he has a lawful excuse; or</strong></em></p>
</li>
<li><p>(b) <em><strong>does not do so if he has a reasonable excuse.</strong></em></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>(2) In proceedings for an offence to which this section applies, the defendant is to be treated as not having had a lawful excuse or reasonable excuse (as the case may be) unless sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue as to whether he had such an excuse.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />


