I'm curious about this UK site - [handpicked.org](https://www.handpicked.org/) - which republishes images from from social media accounts and other online sources. The pics are linked to the source, but don't carry a full attribution - just an icon and name to indicate where they came from. In some cases images are taken from other publishers like BuzzFeed. Some of the images even have copyright watermarks showing they came from a picture agency.

The site isn't reproducing the pics for review, or research, but apparently for commercial purposes. The main website doesn't carry advertising, though ads are visible when you view it in the web view of the Facebook mobile app. In the back end, images are taken from the source's URL, resized and re-served from the site's own server. They seem to republish most or all of the original image.

Is there any justification for this in law? As far as I know, images published on social media remain the property of the person who posted them - you can't use them without permission. The lack of attribution suggests to me they're doing it without getting consent from the source.

How is handpicked.org able to republish and link other people's images? (UK)


I signed a contract with an attorney in the past and remember (vaguely) he made several standard statements. I want to remember what they are (I understand practices will vary.) I think these were to ensure the contract was enforceable. Here are the ones I remember:

* There is no hurry, we can do this later.
* Do you have any questions?

Are there other standard statements when presenting a contract? I want to follow best practices when I present others with something to sign.

What are standard statements when presenting a contract


Screenshot on the left: [*O'Sullivan & Hilliard's The Law of Contract*](https://www.amazon.co.uk/OSullivan-Hilliards-Law-Contract-Janet/dp/0198807821/ref=dp_ob_title_bk) (2018 8 ed). p. 328.

Right: Paul Davies. [*JC Smith's The Law of Contract* (2018 2 ed)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Smiths-Law-Contract-Paul-Davies/dp/0198807813/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p. 466.

>
> [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IIRBU.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IIRBU.jpg)
>
>
>

To what does the red underline refer? It can't be the green, as the green appears in Davies's definition of estoppel.

What "former requirement" certainly has no place in estoppel?


Imagine a UK-based company made an application to order food from restaurants. The company decided to share the following information with the restaurants to summarize orders made

* restaurant location
* food type
* user age
* user gender
* time and date of order

I believe this information is not personal because we can not know the user's identity from only this information, is this correct?

Is this information considered personal?


A federal law against FGM was ruled unconstitutional today on the grounds that the powers under which the law was written were not applicable to the activity being criminalized.

Are there any other powers the US federal government has to criminalize FGM?

Can the federal US government use any other powers to ban FGM?


A few years ago I worked for a software company and we discussed several hundred different ideas for software, but never did any kind of testing or prototyping, we simply discussed the ideas. In other words, there's no identifiable embodiment of any of the ideas. I left the company years ago and would like to build one of the ideas that we discussed while I worked there. Am I prohibited from building the idea on my own because the idea was conceived while I worked there? I'm sure I signed some kind of NDA when I was hired.

If a software concept is discussed on the job, does the software company own the concept?


I see that United Airlines publicly display the first few characters of the last name of their passengers taking a given flight.

Example from <https://www.united.com/en/us/flightstatus/details/855/2020-01-14/LIM/IAH/UA> ([mirror](http://archive.is/WCj0w)):

![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NxqBY.jpg)

Are airlines allowed to publicly display the first few characters of the last name of their passengers taking a given flight?


I have a website which has a link to a PDF form which users can print out and fill in. I'm wondering if somewhere I need to a statement in my privacy policy which justifies this?

GDPR - Is having a PDF with fields to fill out classed as data?


There was a strategy game where I and my friends played for several years. The original developers closed the game 3 years ago. We have asked them to open the source code when they did it but they did not reply. Their firm is liquidated now.

One of their previous domain names will expire in the next year. We have web archives, so we can recreate the game. It will be open source if we do it. Can we reuse images from the archives after a time or not in this case?

Reuse images from web archives


Is it a copyright violation to write a guidebook to a work of fiction? For example, there are guidebooks to Tolkien's Middle Earth and to Star Wars, etc.

I would have thought that it is fair use because a guidebook is "commentary". Is that right?

Is writing a guidebook to a work of fiction a copyright violation?


The EU has it's sui generis database law that provides intellectual property protection that goes beyond copyright. Does this apply to databases that are created outside of the EU and used within the EU?

Does EU sui generis database law protect only databases created in the EU or also foreign databases?


If I didn't register my copyrighted material, and another one did.
Do I lose my copyright?

Does a Copyright owner lose his copyright if another one registered before him?


Suppose there is open conflict between an executive administration and the federal judicial branch. The executive branch wants to curtail judicial power, but is hopefully limited by the Constitution in what it can do. Presumably there is also a certain precedence and decorum that discourages such conflicts from escalating. That said, were such a situation to escalate, would the executive have actions they could take that would weaken the judiciary? Likewise, does the judiciary have any proactive defenses against such measures?

My understanding is that Article III judges are fairly well protected from retaliation by their lifetime appointment. Rude remarks aside, are there actions that could, in practice, weaken their powers or imperil their jobs?

Executive/Judiciary Separation of Powers: Weaknesses?


If you purchase a movie bundle including multiple formats, is it legal to distribute one or more of those formats—at no cost—to varying family members and/or friends? When I say "distribute" I mean to give away the original without making copies.

The verbiage from one Blu-Ray + DVD + Digital HD combo reads "Unless expressly authorized in writing by the copyright owner, any copying, exhibition, export, *distribution* or other use of this product or any part of it is strictly prohibited."

I realize the above's intent is to prevent piracy and resale, but the way it's worded suggests that it's even illegal to give away the entire set, perhaps as a gift. That seems ridiculous and raises more questions than it addresses. Spirit of the law aside, I'm trying to understand my rights with each original copy found in a bundle.

Is it legal to give away the Blu-Ray, DVD, or Digital Copy of a purchased combo pack?


I noticed some water damage under the bathroom sink a few weeks ago. The plumber said that it's not the faucet, but something above the sink. Being that we live on the top floor it could be a roof leak or damage to the pipe above the sink. There is no way to say for sure unless more drywall is removed. According to the HOA the pipes are my responsiblity, while the roof is HOA/property management.

If the leak was caused by something HOA could be responsible for,

1) As I take the steps to repair the leak, what can I do to have a better case in a situation where the HOA can be held responsible for the repair?

2) Should I notify the HOA before opening up the wall?

3) Would I be able to request/collect reimbursement for what I spent on the repairs caused by the damage they are responsible to fix?

4) If the pipe was damaged by recent roof repairs, would the HOA still be liable?

I don't have much experience in legal matters and appreciate any help

Thank you

How to approach a potential HOA dispute over a water leak


If I was with a group of friends, we weren't causing any trouble, not intoxicated,

but a police car happened to drive by and seen the bat, would I be in trouble?

It's a 24" bat which I believe is the shortened version of a regular bat, solid wood.

Is carrying a 24" solid wood baseball bat on Halloween as a prop in public illegal in the UK?


Assume a bank robbery with one or more armed gunmen, in the City of Los Angeles, such as occur in movies or real life, who arrive yelling demands and brandishing firearms at victims but have not shot anyone. In fact, the robber(s) initially announce that **"no one will be harmed if everyone cooperates"**.

Obviously, any number of bad things could happen to innocent victims if some self-appointed vigilante assaults a robber, takes a robber's gun, or opens fire with their own weapon, say, from a cracked restroom door, or some other position where the advantage of surprise might exist. Or, they could be the hero of the day.

To be clear, this question is limited to the case where the bank robbers have not physically harmed anyone at the moment the heroic civilian decides to be the first to initiate deadly combat. This civilian is not acting out of fear for himself or the lives of others, but simply believes they stand a decent chance of ending the robbery through superior position, tactics, or knowledge of deadly force or perhaps is hyped up on adrenaline and simply wants to "spin the wheel".

How does the modern legal system deal with such a person?

Note: The question is hypothetical, and I am not currently in California. There are a number of bank robberies there, so precedents may exist in case law.

Can a civilian lawfully use deadly force against bank robbers in California?


I'm a Russian citizen. I've noticed that literally all online EU shops and service providers (e.g. web hosting) add VAT to the price. I've spent some time looking for an article that implicitly states that VAT should be paid by foreign non-EU citizens when shopping or purchasing services online but couldn't find one. What article or articles make this statement?

What article implies that foreign non-EU citizens have to pay VAT for goods and services purchased online?


I am writing Lovecraftian horror short fiction. I know I can use Lovecraft's material written 1923 and prior. However, I would love to use parts of the genealogy he noted in some of his letters. These letters, and others, were published in <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selected_Letters_of_H._P._Lovecraft_IV_(1932%E2%80%931934)> in 1976. The letters themselves were written from 1932-1934.

Are these letters considered in the public domain, as unpublished works (by the author) written 88 years ago? If not, when would they enter the public domain?

Copyright status of an author's letters published posthumously?


This [video\_1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t36jZG07MYc&list=PLUl4u3cNGP63oMNUHXqIUcrkS2PivhN3k&index=2) claims it is under "Creative Commons BY-NC-SA", while this [video\_2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qfdCwys2ew) does not.

How can I determine what license a video (such as video\_2) is under on youtube.

How can I determine what license a video is under on youtube?


This morning, I was reading [this article](https://consumerist.com/2016/06/22/comcast-admits-it-incorrectly-debited-1775-from-account-tells-me-to-sort-it-out-with-bank/) on the Consumerist about a man who cancelled his business service with Comcast. In summary, he had an early termination fee of $1,775 debited from his bank account, which shouldn't have happened because it was past the term of his two-year contract. Comcast do not dispute those facts, and have repeatedly told him that a check was on its way but, two years later, the man has still not been unable to get a refund. At one point, he was told by a company representative that refunds are not issued in these circumstances, and that he should instead dispute the charge with his bank.

I am interested in the potential criminal liability in a situation like this (not necessarily this one) where a company knowingly takes money it is not due from someone's bank account and clearly has no intention of returning it.

Specifically:

1. Could the victim report this as fraud, theft or some other related crime?
2. Would the answer to the previous question differ based on whether the victim was eventually able to recover the money through litigation or by disputing the charge with their bank?
3. Would the company itself or the specific employees involved be liable?
4. Would a binding arbitration clause in the contract have any effect on criminal liability (I believe not)?

I would be especially (but not exclusively) interested in answers covering either the United States or Canada (especially Québec).

Company knowingly debit fees it is not due from bank account and does not return it: is this fraud or theft?


Here's the image in question:

[![Image in question](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0gCZr.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0gCZr.jpg)

Basically, the subject in the foreground is showcasing a company's product for an advertisement. The graffiti holder has argued that the image infringes on their copyright. My guess would be that this image does not infringe on the copyright, because it is novel and the graffiti is not the subject matter in the photo.

The applicable jurisdiction here would be the state of California.

**EDIT**

The building that the art was placed on has been abandoned for many years, therefore giving me the impression that the art was illegally placed. A recent google street view image has identified that the building has been condemned and is the future location of a Boys & Girls Club SF:

(you can still see the top of the artwork in question in the link below, if you look closely above the retaining wall to the south east).

<https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7833553,-122.4099403,3a,75y,115.75h,91.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAF1QipP6ITMX-YKQ0z4JaGpbcEliZmC0KahDOcDdo6CQ!2e10!7i11000!8i5500>

Does this image with a subject containing graffiti in the background infringe on the graffiti artist's copyright?


To briefly summarize the situation, a video game was made fifteen years ago. Two development companies and one publisher were involved. All three companies have now been sold to other companies, some of them several times, and some copyrights they held were sold independently of the companies themselves. There doesn't seem to be a record of this particular game's copyright in any of these deals (the game did not sell particularly well).

Speaking with members of the original development team, it is believed the publisher had the original copyrights, but none of them are sure. The copyright does not appear on <http://cocatalog.loc.gov/> using any conceivable search. The company most likely to have picked up copyrights from the original publisher is not responding to communication attempts.

**In the US, is it possible to find out who owns a copyright? If so, how is this done?**

**UPDATE** The game was first published in Europe, then the [PAL region](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL_region), finally being published in the US. I'm only concerned with the US copyright, but it appears the dates and locations of original release may be important to consider. At least some development occurred in England.

Is it possible to learn who has a copyright? (USA)


What can bind a party to a contract other than executing it by signing it by hand or electronically and delivering it? My question is only about this element in making a contract, not consideration or other elements. The other topic cited mentions that signing per se is not required, but something is, and therein is my question.

I'm thinking of a situation in which person A imposes a burden on person B and person B wants to be paid for fulfilling that burden, but person A would decline to sign a contract, claims the burden is mandatory when it's not, and might worsen the burden if asked, so isn't asked to.

Example: If someone visits a doctor for an office consultation, gets the consultation, and leaves and then the doctor sends a bill to the visitor, the fact that neither one ever discussed a contract or a price and that the office had no price posted would be irrelevant and a court would rule that the visitor owed. Maybe that's the case only for medicine and some other professions and not for, say, home party hosts, although I think that could be answered by establishing, somehow, that the service provider's service is commercially valuable and deserving of compensation even if the provider is not classified as a professional.

In one case, a jury was persuaded by a photo of a handshake. The parties were major companies, one well known and the other able to build or buy a factory for a big contract. I've also run into people who try not to sign anything due to a religious reason (I think), but they doubtless enter into contracts and execute them somehow, but I don't know how.

Hypothetical case: In the U.S., a person writes a letter to a carpenter known to make a living as a carpenter. (Any occupation will do for this purpose, especially one for which compensation is not always expected, such as house-cleaning.) Both are adult individuals. In the letter, the person asks the carpenter to make a chair. Assume nothing else is in the letter. The carpenter makes the chair and delivers it. The carpenter bills the person for the service. The person says there was no intention to make a purchase, just a thought that the carpenter would like to practice making a chair and seeing someone gladly sit in it. The person has sat in it, is glad for the experience, and happily accepts the chair as a gift. The carpenter never said anything about a gift. Would the person owe?

alternatives to other party signing a contract


A student asked me which license suited best for her project, but I couldn't reply.

Here's what she told me:

* The student project was in collaboration with a brand;
* The goal of the project was to help to brand to make new tools and to grow;
* She didn't sign anything, no legal document, at first. But when the project was finished, her professor told the students their had to sign a document he forgot to give. This document stated the "[student] yields graciously to [the brand] every work...". She didn't sign it as is, but added that she wanted the following point;
* All she wants is if [the brand] uses the whole project or part of it, internally or publically, they mention her name noticeably everywhere her work can be visible.

Is there a license or something she can write on a `LICENSE` file, or at the top of the header of the files?

Licensing header for protecting the idea


As many tabletop and also computer games have quite unique themes for characters I'm wondering there if those can be copyrighted and thus similar ideas brought to court for copyright infringement?

As example if we take a computer game like Prototype. Then the character theme would be "undead shapechanger who needs to absorb others in order to take on their shape and needs to absorb his own kind in order to increase his powers".

Going mainly there about European law, but I think US law is similar enough there.

Is it possible to copyright general game character themes?


So, to cut a long story short. There's an employee I work with that has stolen money and property multiple times, and that has created a hostile environment for the rest of us via the use of intimidation and threats of violence. However, our HR have their hands tied regarding any form of further discipline due to our country's laws, and his threat of a lawsuit if he is ever fired. Some employees have decided to see if they can not provoke, more trick, him into losing his cool (he has a history of a foul temperament) and attack a colleague physically, ergo providing HR a credible excuse to finally fire him, and protect themselves at the same time. The main part of the plan is not to involve the cops, as we have no intention of causing unnecessary hassle, we just want rid of him. Would such an action be illegal under law?

Is it illegal to create a scenario in which someone could inflict violence on another person, if said person had volunteered as part of the scenario?


"Similarly, if you received specified foreign property as a gift, or inheritance, the cost amount is its fair market value at the time of the gift or inheritance"

Question:
If I am the beneficiary of a foreign non qualified annuity and I opt to leave the annuity in place for a few years (five year rule) and take out a distribution here and there.....

What is the timing of this gift? would I be in receipt, time of death, time of reporting death to insurance company, time of receipt of distributions?

Would the full amount of the annuity be a part of my calculation of ACB for currency gains/losses or just the distribution?

When is "at the time of the gift or inheritance"?


A case recently came up in my area of Kentucky in a district court where a man had been convicted of growing and selling marijuana. The sheriff had drove by his residence on a hot day and smelled marijuana emanating from the man's property. The sheriff was able to narrow the location down to a mobile home which was on the man's property. The sheriff then obtained a search warrant to search the mobile home for marijuana, with the smell of marijuana being probable cause. Upon conducting the search, the sheriff found 154 marijuana plants and several firearms in the man's possession. The man is a convicted felon, so they were also seized. When the case went to court, the case was dismissed. The judge said that the smell of marijuana was not probable cause to have issued a search warrant. If the prosecutor will not ask for an appeal of the court's decision, can the sheriff ask for an appeal himself?

Can a court decision be appealed by a sheriff?


What does the United States Patent and Trademark Office status  [604 Abandoned after inter partes decision](http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/con/files/cons181.htm) mean for the trademark? Is the trademark in the public domain or so clouded that it could be used as such? Does the original claimant involved have more rights or explicitly zero rights to the mark than a third party?

The concrete reason I ask is the monthly transit pass I happened to buy today uses the old [Pennsylvania Railroad PRR trademark](https://trademarks.justia.com/860/21/prr-pennsylvania-86021658.html) as the authenticity hologram. (The transit agency, SEPTA, was a customer of the PRR and its successor, Conrail, 1962-1982, and currently leases track from another PRR successor, Amtrak, but is not itself a successor to the PRR bankruptcy) A little googling found the Justia link above, showing this status change very recently, in October 2015. I naturally wonder what this means.

Is SEPTA in the clear? Given decades of operating agreements, they may have explicit unexpired contract rights to use logos in printed schedules or fare media without owning them?

How about historical rail collectors who [paint](https://m.facebook.com/Juniata-Terminal-PRR-E8s-171921079527695/) the PRR livery and logo on rail equipment?

If I, wholly unrelated, wanted to make PRR memorabilia (or hypothetically paint a PRR logo on a van then employ it as an Uber or similar to trade on the 150 year transportation history of the mark) does the abandoned trademark status permit this?

What does USPTO status 604 "Abandoned after inter partes decision" mean for a trademark?


Does the author of university coursework retain copyright to it after submission?

When submitting coursework to a university does the author retain copyright?


Scrolling about one day I noticed some text beneath the header of the YouTube page:

[![screenshot described](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bbIqn.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bbIqn.png)

When I release the scroll, the underlay of the page returns to normal and the text is hidden once more.

Are they legally required to do this, or is there some other reason for putting this text on the page? And, if it is required by law, how do they get away with hiding it as such?

Why does YouTube hide "Ad displayed" or "Ad can be skipped messages" under the header?


I work for a company in the UK and my employment contract states that I must not discuss my salary with colleagues. I know that this is illegal in the USA but cant find any information about in the UK

Are there any laws in the UK that relate to this??

Employment contract prohibiting salary discussion in the UK?


[This answer](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/147145/i-was-offered-software-developer-position-in-a-multi-billion-dollar-company-base/147150#147150) on S.E's "the Workplace" says

>
> The employment agreement might prohibit disclosing the names of specific clients.
>
>
>

To what extent is that legally enforceable?

I can understand that I may not be allowed to say on my CV/resume that I worked for certain government departments, but how is it in general? Further, I can see how a government department can, and can require the agency to pass that requirement on, but I do not believe that such a clause by an agency would hold up, as it is liable to deprive the signer of the the means of earning a living.

Can Agency, Inc really take legal action if my CV and my statements at interview say that I worked ***at*** (not for) BigCompany, Inc, on a contract basis?

As per my answer to [Working for a big company “through” another small company. Can I say I'm working for the first?](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/146133/working-for-a-big-company-through-another-small-company-can-i-say-im-working/146145#146145)

>
> If you want to keep you conscience clear(ish), you could always say "I work at BigCompany, Inc" and let others draw their own conclusions.
>
>
> I will enlarge a little.
>
>
> I have been a software contractor for much longer than you have been alive, and use "I work for" since BigCompany gains from my work (more than the middle-man); they use the software that I develop, while the agent only takes a cut.
>
>
> But, the important part here is where you ask
>
>
>

`Now, the question is, am I wrong in writing on my resume that I'm a consultant for BigCompany?`

>
> You could do that.
>
>
> 2017 - 2109 BigCompany, Inc, Position: consultant
>
>
> Personally, I put
>
>
> 2017 - 2109 BigCompany, Inc, Position: senior software engineer
>
>
> But I would never, ever, ever name an agency on my CV.
>
>
> The reason is that hiring managers in the industry can gauge your suitability from companies where you have worked. So, having experience at British Aerospace is of interest to a hiring manager at Boeing, etc
>
>
>

It may also be worth mentioning that I am security cleared in Europe and work on sensitive government/military projects, and find risible the idea that a potential employer not be allowed to know of my employment history.

Tl;dr - can an employment agency enforce a clause forbidding those who work for it disclosing for which companies they have worked?

I have added a[united-states](/questions/tagged/united-states "show questions tagged 'united-states'") tag, as that is where the original question is based.

Can an employment agency enforce a clause forbidding those who work for it disclosing for which companies they have worked?


I am a UK citizen and a US citizen owes me money. We have written confirmation of repayment, the US party has defaulted
Can I apply to Small Claims Court in the US without personally attending the Court? Hearing?

Thanks for any clear advice

LOAN DEFAULT UK-US Citizens


Is it unlawful in the United States to sell passwords of other people?

If the passwords were obtained through malicious attacks on an organization's database, does that affect the legality?

Is It Illegal to sell passwords?


I believe my question to be reasonably succinct,
Am I able to sell other students my lecture notes?
There may well be conditions attached which I am unaware of, though I would not be including any copy pasted material from textbooks or university notes. This is likely a grey area, though I would like to know if this would be possible without breaching copyright law.

Do I have the right to sell my lecture notes?


I live in a mobile home park in California. Recently, the park announced that our TV service will be provided by the park and instead of paying the TV provider, we will be paying the park directly.

[CA Civ Code S. 798.25(e)](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=798.25) says

>
> Any amendment to the park’s rules and regulations that creates a new fee payable by the homeowner and that has not been expressly agreed upon by the homeowner and management in the written rental agreement or lease, shall be void and unenforceable."
>
>
>

However, [CA Civ Code S. 798.32](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=798.32) says

>
> (a) A homeowner shall not be charged a fee for services actually rendered which are not listed in the rental agreement unless he or she has been given written notice thereof by the management, at least 60 days before imposition of the charge.
>
>
> (b) Those fees and charges specified in subdivision (a) shall be separately stated on any monthly or other periodic billing to the homeowner. If the fee or charge has a limited duration or is amortized for a specified period, the expiration date shall be stated on the initial notice and each subsequent billing to the homeowner while the fee or charge is billed to the homeowner.
>
>
>

These 2 sections seem to contradict each other. Is this a violation of the first section? Or is this in compliance with the second section? Or something else completely?

Mobile home park in California charging extra fees for television service


While poorly worded, another [question](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/17218/linux-questions-when-moderator-do-not-care-about-keeping-the-laws-of-a-forum), which is currently on hold, brings up a good point: does a company have a contractual obligation to uphold its TOS, or can its moderators arbitrarily enforce its internal rules.

As an example, can Facebook choose whether or not to enforce its TOS for some posts, and yet ignore their standards for others? It seems like the TOS is a contract, and it would specifically need to say in the contract that enforcement is at the company's discretion. Does Facebook have such a clause?

Does a company have a legal obligation to uphold its TOS?


I am creating application where you can manage your incomes/expenses e.g. on eBay. Main functionality is:

1. create new item and specify price you've payed to get it
2. set price that you've

All other information is derived from this like monthly profit, statistics of sold item categories etc.

This is Android application, so user will install it from Google Play. Information will only be stored on user device. Possibly in the future it could be exported to device memory and user could share it on own will.

**Is this information classified as personally identifiable in therms of GDPR (like finance related)?**

Is information only about financial transactions personally identifiable in terms of GDPR?


First an introduction to what i am doing! I am creating a tool for players and DMs of D&D. The reason i've been trying to understand the copyright law in regards to this issue is that upon using any information from the books created by WotC you'd violate their copyright. Luckily, WotC has a "Open Gaming License" that you can use, to have much of the rules, items and monsters in your book, program, etc. for free (Link to the link of the SRD-OGL: <http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd>)

My issue is that WotC has intentionally left out some of the unique monsters that they themselves has created over the years. Which in itself is fine, but i have no idea if i would violate their copyright for these unique monsters if i were to create a module in my program where the enduser would be able to build a custom monster from a blank template (name: input here, armor class: input here etc. - you can look at an example on, say, page 279 with the Tyrannosaurus Rex. Here name would be Tyrannosaurus Rex and Armor class would be 13 (natural armor))

If the enduser were to create a totally custom, madeup creature i'd imagine that tool would be fine, but i can also see the scenario where a enduser could copy letter for letter the information of a copyrighted monster into my custom monster template and essentially adding a copyright-violating item into the program.

So. I guess in essence what i am asking is: By making a tool in my program that can enable the user to create their own monsters, will i then be in trouble because i've also, if the user is malicious, by extension enabled the user to violate the copyright of WotC?

I am from Denmark if that makes any difference, which i'd guess it doesn't.
I have no real legal experience which is why i thought it'd be a good place to ask such a question. Thanks for your time!

Is it legal to have a "Create custom x" in your D&D program, if that can result in the enduser violating the copyright?


There many articles in the web

if I translate an article to another language and put it in another website (with mentioning the source)

will it be illegal to do that?

Do I need author's permission before doing that?

Is it legal to translate an article without author's' permission


I've recently come across a newspaper illustration from the mid-1920s which I'd like to reprint. Here in the US, the term of copyright for written material is the life of the author + 70 years. What is the law with regards to reprinting newspaper illustrations (where the rights were likely sold) and what are the laws for copyright on artwork ?

The work is an illustration of the London Beis Din by Bryan de Grineau (1882-1957) discussed [here](https://onthemainline.blogspot.com/2010/07/bet-din-1920s-style.html).

Copyright and newspaper illustrations


Some Co-workers of mine have been sending customer's personal information, that includes banking details through unsecured plaintext emails. This feels to me like it is definitely breaking laws/regulations but I am not sure what ones. This is going on in the US and in the UK

Is this an illegal practice?

EDIT:
By unsecured email I just mean a normal email sent between employees over outlook, this is also used to send emails externally and there is no blocker for sending attachments to external emails if someone was to mistype an email address there is nothing to stop this being sent out.

By Plaintext I mean what is sent and received is readable, no hashing, etc. I don't know if this is encrypted decrypted on the send but as the email can be sent externally and internally I doubt it

Data Protection Laws


Ireland tax rate is low. 15%.

However, Seychelles tax rate is even lower. It's 0%.

So why bother incorporating in Ireland?

I mean are there any laws in US, Ireland, or Seychelles that motivate IT companies to incorporate in Ireland instead of tax haven like Belize?

Why do tech companies incorporate in Ireland instead of Seychelles?


Is is a breach of ethics in California for an attorney representing a client in a civil matter to discuss their client's case in detail with potential co-counsel without the client's knowledge or consent?

In this case I found out about the conversations only when told by my [long-since former] attorney that they had engaged co-counsel. *Speaking of which, is is ethically acceptable in California for an attorney to bring onboard co-counsel without mentioning it first?*

(Obviously this is not hypothetical. The matter was settled - by a different attorney - years ago. I was reminded of it when going through some old records and am asking about it now so I can properly calibrate my gauge of appropriate behavior in the future.)

California Legal Ethics: Attorney Bringing On Co-Counsel w/o Client Knowledge?


I started a small real estate rental business by renting out a property for residential tenants. At the end of a 4.5 month lease, then tenant and I came into a dispute about paying for a partial day on the final day of the lease.

The contract says the lease ends on Sunday, August 14th. The tenant wants to vacate the morning of Aug 14th but not pay for Aug 14th because he will not stay a full day on Aug 14th. I offered him a partial day, so that he would only pay half of the day if he leaves before noon. But he rejected my proposal. The tenant wants to stay the night Saturday night and depart Sunday morning without paying for Sunday. The tenant refuses to pay for even a partial day on Sunday, even though he will occupy the unit until departing Sunday morning.

Who is right, the tenant or me, the landlord?

Partial rental days at end of a long-term lease


I have created an app which is basicly a tool for some other trademarked product.
Because I want users looking for an app like this to know what is it for, I would like to use the trademarked name of the product as part of the app title, for example: "Product name tool". Also I would like to use the trademarked name in the description of the app a few times (Keyword search optimization) but I would put something like "App is not affiliated with Product name" in short description and in both top and bottom of long description.

Could this cause a trademark infringement or some other problems?

Can I use a trademarked name as part of mobile app title?


Suppose I am detained by a police officer and ordered to remain in the exact spot. However, the officer doesn't notice that I am three seconds away from potentially being impaled by someone or something. Or, the officer knows and still refuses to allow me to move. Am I legally free to ignore the order to stay?

Can I disobey a police order if I have reason to believe that to obey would put my life in imminent danger?


I was recently watching a video of a police officer who lied to a driver that "a new law passed" that allows police officers to stop someone from recording. The driver was an attorney and knew better.

I was curious about this situation where a law changes that you may not be aware of because it only very recently passes. It seems wrong that someone who may have been not aware it was recently changed would be punished. I imagine it depends on the severity of the law, but is there some sort of grace period due to information not travelling fast enough?

While I think the above scenario is a little extreme, any advice is appreciated.

If a law changes very recently, is there a grace period due to not knowing the new law change?


I am looking at getting a trademark through Legalzoom for a new product my startup is about to launch. If the logo for the product includes the name of the brand and the product, do I really need to also trademark the names on their own?

Is it more important to trademark your brand name or your logo?


I'm working on a project and the best way I've found to sum it up, essentially my elevator pitch, is by saying:

>
> It's like X for Y.
>
>
>

Can I use the brand in this context as the tag line for my project?

To use a specific example, could the (now defunct) app [Texture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texture_(app)), which allowed users to access hundreds of magazines, have advertised itself with the tagline:

>
> Like Netflix for magazines.
>
>
>

From [reading on the topic](https://www.gfrlaw.com/what-we-do/insights/beyond-brand-x-using-another%E2%80%99s-trademark-your-own-advertising), it seems like there are four categories for using another brand in an ad:

* Comparative
* Tarnishment
* Parody
* Fair Use

**Tarnishment & Parody**: I think it's safe to say the example above is not tarnishment or parody.

**Comparative**: Comparative seems to center around doing some sort of actual comparison with a competitor, like comparing Coke to Pepsi.

**Fair Use**: It seems like the statement above would fall under fair use, but I'm unclear if it's acceptable fair use. I don't think anyone would mistake the statement as implying in any way that Netflix endorses Texture, but the comparison does make use of the value of the Netflix brand (namely, it being a comprehensive repository of an entertainment product).

Can a company use another brand's name when describing their product?


I want to create an app to search flights for different airlines (probably 3-4).

I will not use airlines names (or part of names) in my app name and I will not use airlines logo in my logo.

All I want is to use their logo and their name in my app in a list of results of flights and in different places in the app similar to this.

Also Apple and Google should allow the app for stores (App Store and Play) so I will not get a ban for copyrighting.

I want to know if I am allowed to do this without any contract with airlines and without contacting airlines before. So just to create only by my own without talking to someone.

This will be for European market.

Can I use logos and names of other companies in my application?


Currently, the only charges form the British side against him are, that he avoided the criminal procedure (he was, on the British law, a fugitive) by his "visit" on the Ecuadorian Embassy.

Meanwhile, the British police has spent £11million.

Now consider the case if he wouldn't be extradited to the U.S on some reason, and any other "extra-judicial measurement" (for example, "committing suicide" in his cell) wouldn't happen.

What is the punishment for that in English law?

Update: [he got 50 weeks](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/julian-assange-prison-jail-time-weeks-bail-embassy-a8894326.html?amp), what nears the 1 year maximum. There is no news from financial punishment or extradition.

What would be Julian Assange's expected punishment, on the current English criminal law?


I received a letter of intent to sign and the signature block has a line after "Accepted" as though I should put something there.

>
> <Legal Entity Name>
>
>
> ACCEPTED: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
>
> BY: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
>
> Date: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
>
>

This is new to me. After a cursory search I could not find any info or even any examples of this. What goes there?

What do I put on an "Accepted" line?


This might sound off, at first, but bear with me as I explain.

As a thought I have had for sometime, and then later brought to light by other people like in [this article](http://futurism.com/why-you-can-never-actually-touch-anything/), it is not possible to actually touch anything or anyone.

The sensation of touch is fulfilled essentially by electrons repelling where the waves pass through.

Given this is the case, there are many laws which do not have a clear definition of what touch actually consists of, instead focusing more on the action and implied state of matter making contact with matter (which is not possible) and what matter can be (an object, person, etc.).

Given that touch is not possible except under the theory of nuclear fusion where the state of an atom is fused with another atom both requiring an enormous amount of energy of an inconvenienced amount, and releasing under the theory, an unending source of energy, it is safe to say that this doesn't happen in (for example) a fist fight (even though the participants may feel like it had]).

In court, means, motive and opportunity must exist beyond a reasonable doubt. In a case involving a physical contact allegation, wouldn't quantum mechanics and spacetime eliminate the possibility of means?

Can quantum mechanics and the fabric of spacetime be a viable defense to battery (or an offense that requires making contact)?


The GitHub help pages says that

>
> You're under no obligation to choose a license. It's your right not to include one with your code or project, but please be aware of the implications. Generally speaking, the absence of a license means that the default copyright laws apply. This means that you retain all rights to your source code and that nobody else may reproduce, distribute, or create derivative works from your work. This might not be what you intend.
>
>
> Even if this is what you intend, if you publish your source code in a public repository on GitHub, you have accepted the Terms of Service which do allow other GitHub users some rights. Specifically, you allow others to view and fork your repository.
>
>
>

Would a forked repository be able to be used to produce something commercially?

If no open source license is given on a github account, what rules apply?


per [Andrew W. Moore's self introduction](https://twitter.com/awmcmu?lang=en), he is the "Dean of the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University" and the "head of Google Cloud AI" at the same time. Is this legal?

Could a person be the Dean of a University and the head of a company?


If I make a question and answer game based on a mix of popular licences such as *Harry Potter*, Marvel, *Lord Of The Rings* and so on, do I need rightsholder permission?

Do short quiz questions on copyrighed material need permission?


When an employee receives a paycheck in the United States, one of the deductions from the check is social security. I once tried to get this removed from my paycheck and the payroll company told me that they can not do this. Due to this, I was wondering if there is some sort of law that requires employees to pay Social Security?

Is there a law that forces an employee to pay into social security?


I noticed my bank's offer for a custom-design credit cards and so I decided to create a fancy card with an artwork from a movie (*My Neighbour Totoro* to be precise). The bank however wouldn't agree to accept anything that can have even a small chance of being copyright protected and the artwork was rejected. So I got a crazy idea of contacting the copyright holder and kindly asking him if I could make this happen because I doesn't feel I'm actually stealing any profit with it; nor do I earn something (sorry for being so down-to-earth here - I'm not a law guy at all).

**Question**

Before digging deeper into it just wanted to ask for an advice, if it's actually worth it? I.e. maybe there are regulations/laws that won't let any sane copyright holder to do so (e.g. AFAIK bank cards are the bank's property meaning the rights for the artwork should be granted to bank and not by me)? And in general, is it even possible to get a personal clearance from a copyright holder for one single artwork?

ps: the bank is an Estonian branch of a Swedish one.

Copyright for image for custom-design bank card


I'm reading through a lease agreement that a friend has been offered for renting a space for a business, and one of the clauses just says "TIME OF THE ESSENCE OF THIS LEASE", with no other explanation. From reading [this web page](http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Time+is+of+the+Essence), I think they meant to say "time **is** of the essence". What I'm curious about is how enforceable this aspect of the contract is. As they provide no real explanation (such as what I found on the linked page), and they've left out a word, would this be considered as legally binding as if they had put the word in, as well as a full explanation?

Typing errors in legal contract


I’ve already signed documents related to a house closing ( im the seller). I’ve deposited and spent most of the check. The realtor called me and said they wrote the wrong amount for the realtor commission. Now they want me to write a check to correct their error. Is it as simple as writing a check or will the contract have to be redone? Do I have to repay the money if the contract is already signed?

House Contract law


I'm trying to interpret my contact and work out whether I'm entitled to time off in lieu if required to attend training. I normally have a fixed set of working hours per day.

It states that `I may be required to attend training` and that this may `take place outside of normal working hours`. It also states `no additional remuneration` will be provided - but it doesn't say either way whether I can take off time in Lieu.

Does `no additional remuneration` implicitly indicate that I'm not entitled to this?

Time off in Lieu after training?


Assuming a two-party consent state.

If a company notifies you that all calls are (or may be) being recorded, can you then record your conversation with the customer service representative without notification?

Rationale: notification has already been served and there can be no assumption of privacy on the CSR's part.

If a company notifies you that calls may be recorded, can you record the call?


After the ruling of [USA v David Nosal](https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/07/05/14-10037.pdf) in the Ninth Circuit Court, a news article ["Federal court rules that sharing your Netflix password is a federal crime"](http://fusion.net/story/322602/password-sharing-illegal-rules-federal-court/) indicates that this would give companies additional reason to say that password sharing, breaking ToS, is criminal. While it would be bad publicity for these big media companies (Netflix, HBO), how would a large internet company use the criminal ruling against customers (in the USA) violating the ToS? This is considering beyond specifically closing/canceling the account.

How would a company use this result of USA v David Nosal?


What are unalienable rights? Surely, noone actually has these rights, correct?

>
> We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...
>
>
>

Unalienable Rights


My employer has recently undergone a number of changes internally, involving the move to different premises (with the argument about the new building being larger, however will accommodate roughly the same number of staff as the current building will occupy). As part of this, they have sent around an update to the employment contract which basically nullifies the flexible working hours which previously has been in effect. Many people I work with vary their working hours to fit in with their lives, and has been accepted - up to this point.

The business operated a core working hours of 10am to 4pm, but are changing this to 9am - 5pm, with a 30 minute "flexible start/end" that employees can start and end their working day (e.g; 8.30am to 5pm, or 9am to 5.30pm) - effectively removing the concept of flexible working hours completely. This affects many people's lives, and some of my colleagues are petitioning to retain their flexible working hours, of which are being met with strict rules surrounding a mandatory lunch hour/half hour, no option to work less than this to make up the time (despite being willing to), and one has been forced to drop their hours to 36/week.

They also put in a clause to the portion that they're wanting everyone to sign which says that everyone must specify when, between the hours to 12pm to 2pm, they will take their lunch, and must be rigid over this (unless a meeting is occurring, in which case that overrides your lunch hour and you must take it later). This was also met with protest, and they eventually caved and relaxed this rigidity slightly, then sent across some minutes from that meeting ratifying this. They will not, however, update the contract to reflect this as they've said that the meeting minutes ratifies it. However, we don't believe this would ever stand up in court if a dispute ever arose. Is this true?

The final part of this demands flexibility from the employee for the business's requirements (e.g; if a meeting runs late/starts early, the employee is expected to be there), but will not offer the same level of flexibilities to staff who currently have lives (unless they offer a rigid, business-valid justification for doing so). It's almost as if they're "offering" this 30 minutes of flexibility to save face because on paper the revision is a load of rubbish.

Many people do not want to sign this, as it significantly affects their lives (I myself work earlier in the morning to finish at 4pm to miss rush hour traffic in both directions, and so I have a little bit of daylight left at the end of the day - however I've been told that I would not be able to petition for flexible working hours with these reasons as they are not valid and would be rejected..and have also been told that I would be one of the worst affected by the change in rules). The move to the new building also offers no car parking space, so those that currently park on the company's property are effectively having to take a pay cut in order to pay for parking, or obtain an alternative means of getting to the office - usually at the additional expensive of significantly increased commute times.

My question is basically this - Can they legally do this? What are the options for employees if they disagree to the new rigid rules and will (or have) get a formal request for flexible working hours rejected because their reasons are not "valid" in the eyes of the business? If the company lets staff go as a result of not agreeing to these rigid terms, are there grounds for constructive/unfair dismissal?

Sorry I've rambled on a bit, but it's quite difficult to get a lot of this across. Hope someone can help.

Edit: sorry, jurisdiction is England & Wales. Company is based in England.

Employer forcing everyone to sign new contract which significantly affects working hours


Can the constitutionality of a law in the United States be challenged other than through the Supreme Court?

How can the constitutionality of a Law be challenged in the USA?


I am based in the UK and I have run the [opendomesday.org](https://opendomesday.org) website as a free, non-profit history site for many years.

When I originally built the site, about 8 years ago, I registered it at [domesdaymap.co.uk](http://domesdaymap.co.uk). After a couple of years, I decided a .org domain was more appropriate for the project since it is non-profit. For several years I paid for the .co.uk address and redirected it to the .org address.

In about 2016 I decided I didn't want to pay for the .co.uk address any more, since all it was doing was redirecting, so let it lapse.

Now I find that someone has re-registered the <http://domesdaymap.co.uk> address. This is not in itself a problem, but the problem is that they have set up a mirror of all my content there.

What can I do about this? The copied content has my name on, and people are contacting me to tell me that the content is broken (which it is).

I don't mind someone else owning that domain, but I do mind my content being on it and being broken.

I have tried contacting the registered owner of the .co.uk domain without success.

What can I do?

What recourse do I have when someone has bought an old domain of mine, and mirrored my content (badly)?


What protections are available for images owned by me and published via social media when they are taken, edited, then re-published?

For example I publish an image which belongs to me on Facebook.
The image is then taken, modified, and republished.

The image is edited with comments beneath them which causes upset and alarm to me and close family.

Photographs on social media being altered and reposted


My friend recently received an email regarding copyright infringement of app title in the app store. What surprises him is that, that company is asking for compensation from him individually, or would file a legal complaint.

I am wondering if this is possible. I mean, when copyright infringement takes place in the app store, is it legitimate to ask for compensation from that individual?

Could copyright infringement in an app result in a legal complaint?


A customer walks into a car dealership and buys a car, signing a contract with a down payment and monthly payments. The customer makes the down payment (partial performance). But when he wants to drive off with the car, the dealer says something like, "You can't have it today because we need to do one last safety check. We'll even deliver to your home in a day or to so you don't have to come down again." (Non performance).

At the beginning of the next month, the car still hasn't been delivered to the customer, but the dealer asks for a monthly payment.

What are the respective rights of the parties? Can the dealer compel a monthly payment without having delivered the car? Can the customer compel delivery of the car, or ask for his down payment back, withholding the monthly payment in the meantime?

Can a non-performing party to a contract hold the "partially performing" party to it?


In this context, I have in mind a typical business transaction, not a complex contract with explicit terms and so forth.

Suppose a business receives an order from a customer, and payment for the order is received in whole or part, but the business has issues with delivering on it's end because of circumstances outside of it's control, like a bad receiving address, or a bad email (often used as the customer's gateway to access virtual products). The business surely has a duty to attempt to contact the customer to complete the order, but what if the customer proves unreachable based on the means available to the company (phone, email, mail, etc.)? In other words, you call, but they never call back, or your only contact method is email, but it bounces back.

If the order was placed via a credit card, the business can easily issue a refund despite the inability to contact the customer. Even with payment by check, the business can send out a refund check to a mail address, assuming there's been no evidence of a bad receiving address. The question is, does this business have a legal duty to any such actions? I know credit card companies will typically not process refunds for transactions older than 60 days, so is there a time limitation after which the company may assume the order "complete" and retain the funds?

I'm concerned only with US Law. Specifically, the business I have in mind is in the State of Idaho, but most customers are not Idaho residents.

Can a business keep funds it has collected if it cannot complete an order agreement because the paying party proves unreachable?


I have written a script that fetches some information that is on a website and upon command it publishes it on another place. Is it illegal to publish it on Github and also if you use it?

Is publishing a web scraping script on Github to get data from a website to publish it on another place, illegal?


I am in the process of creating an online version of a popular board game. The rules of the game are taken from a version in a particular language.

The game would be completely free to play and all of the graphical components were produced independently (although very similar to the original ones).

The name of my game is different from the trademarked name, but the game rules are almost identical to the original board game.

Is this legal? What are the risks I would incur if I decide to make it publicly available?

---

**Note:** This question si diffent from "[Does reproducing a board game as a video game violate copyright?](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/8687/does-reproducing-a-board-game-as-a-video-game-violate-copyright?noredirect=1&lq=1)" since it is specific to the game of Risk.
Moreover, it explicitely asks about the legal consequences arising from distributing such an online game.

Online version of the "Risk" board game


If a contract contains both of the following clauses, how do they not contradict each other?

>
> 24.3 Each party agrees that it shall have no right or remedy (other than for breach of contract) in respect of any statement,
>  representation, assurance or warranty (whether made negligently or
>  innocently) other than as expressly set out in this Agreement.
>
>
> 24.4 Neither party shall have any liability to the other party, whether in contract, tort (including negligence), breach of statutory
>  duty, or otherwise, for any loss of profit, or for any indirect or
>  consequential loss arising under or in connection with this Agreement.
>
>
>

How to reconcile waiver and liability terms of a contract?


I believe the author has published it online. However, I am unsure if I'm allowed to read it. I found it when searching.

It says unauthorised reprint or use is not permitted. All rights reserved.

Here's the link: <http://ppstest2.com/PreAlgebraBook.pdf>

Please tell me if it's legal

Is this PDF book legal?


I live in the UK. A few months ago, I registered at a gym. The employee there told me that I could cancel the subscription at any time. I didn't sign any contract, just gave my information.

Fast forward last month, I asked to cancel my subscription. They responded that "a welcome email was sent to me after my registration containing the terms and conditions of the gym and a 12-month obligation". Since I did not contest that email, I am bound by a contract.

I never received this email and I cannot find such an email anywhere (might had gone in the spam and then deleted, I'll never know). I asked them in writing (registered letter) to provide me of a proof that they sent the email to my account (including the email headers) or any other proof that I entered into a contract with them, but they haven't responded in 2 weeks.

**Is what they did legal?** For instance, if I send to someone an email saying "you will pay me £x per month for 12 months for this service and this is a binding contract unless you reply to me in 14 days rejecting", is it legally binding?

**Can I cancel the payments unilaterally?** They don't have any signed or verbal contract. Who has the burden of proving if I received the email or not?

This is not about the money. I am just upset by their business model. The employee clearly told me I would be able to cancel with 1 month notice which he now refuses to have said. Sending at email as a binding contract without verification of receipt is sneaky at the best.

Canceling an "email" contract


I have a document from Science.gov and i wish to copy a graph of it in a commercial document. The document is described as:

Distribution Category UC-42

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Does that mean that there is no copyright protection the document?

It's at the top of the third page:
<http://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/1130326/>

here is another document with a copyright statement on line 10, i don't understand it.
<http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/2007/076781.pdf>

Distribution Category UC42 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited?


Is it a crime or otherwise problematic to use the symbol for registered trademarks in the U.S. if there is, in fact, no registered trademark present? And, if so, what is the penalty?

Symbol in question: ®

[Inspired by this question](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/1576/794).

What is the penalty for unauthorized use of the registered trademark symbol ®?


In this question, I'm talking about the unsupported or discontinued software or the old versions of programs that are no available to buy on their official websites as there is already newer versions (e.g. MS Office 2007).

I would like to crack those programs to be able to use them without buying them (which was illegal). Is that okay according to the US law?

Is it legal to use old software illegally?


An individual has an Interpol Red Notice issued against him, requesting his detention and extradition. The Notice comes to the attention of the London Metropolitan Police, who discover this individual in London.

Is a constable entitled to arrest him solely on the basis of the Interpol Red Notice, or must the constable first seek out a warrant from a UK court?

Can someone be arrested in the UK solely on the basis of the Interpol Red Notice against him/her?


As I understand it, Hitler's book *Mein Kampf* was originally copyrighted by Hitler, but, after the war, the Allies gave the copyright to Bavaria. (Was this legal? I guess I should post that as a separate question.)

I just learned that Bavaria's copyright expired in 2016. I'd like to learn if there are any English translations that are also in the public domain.

In particular, I suspect an English version published by the Germans in 1940 for the planned invasion of England might be in the public domain.

A copy is available online [here](https://archive.org/details/MeinKampf.StalagEditionOfficiallyAuthorizedByTheNSDAPIn1940ForTheInvasionOfBritain/page/n17). It is described as open source, contributed by the community, suggesting it's in the public domain. However, I wondered if the government of Bavaria could claim ownership of this work as a derivative of the original, German language edition.

So my specific question is this: Is the English-version edition of *Mein Kampf* linked to in the paragraph above in the public domain?

Public domain English translation of Mein Kampf


Say you hire someone, such as an electrician or plumber, without price even being mentioned by either party. The contractor later bills you: you're taken aback by the price. Maybe the expected rate is £100 and you get charged £1000. More fool you, right? Fair enough.

But is there any practical limit in English law? £1,000,000, your house? Is there any reasonableness limit in law?

Limits on contract work without pre-agreed price/contract (UK)


Quite a few EU based customers are requesting data locality information in preparation for GDPR which becomes effective on May 25, 2018.

However as far as I can tell GDPR contains no requirements for data locality. Are there other EU or EU member state provisions becoming active in 2018 which mandate EU citizen data be stored in the EU or is this simply carryover for EU member state DPA compliance?

If a US company is already certified by Privacy Shield shouldn't any data locality issues be covered by complying with GDPR?

EU data locality


In 2003, the Copyright Board of Canada released [this opinion](http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/decisions/c12122003-b.pdf).

They held that downloading a music file for private use was okay, no matter the source:

>
> There is no requirement
>  in Part VIII that the source copy be a
>  non-infringing copy. Hence, it is not relevant
>  whether the source of the track is a pre-owned
>  recording, a borrowed CD, or a track
>  downloaded from the Internet.
>
>
>

However, they didn't really answer the question about whether the destination medium mattered:

>
> It is, however, for the courts of
>  civil jurisdiction to ultimately determine
>  whether or not there is an infringement of
>  copyright for private copies made onto a
>  specific medium,
>
>
>

Is this still controlling? Was it affected by the Copyright Modernization Act? Has any court clarified whether certain destination media are outside of the private copying exception?

Is downloading copyrighted music for private use legal in Canada?


I understand that if I sell things online, I need to calculate Taxes based on customer location.

Can I use IP(Internet Protocol address) to locate customer or should I ask them explicitly?

If it is fine to use IP to identify customer's Country, is it fine to locate customer State/Province.

I need it because Canada has different taxes in different Provinces.

Using IP(Internet Protocol address) to calculate Tax


Most digital downloads (music, ebooks) today are protected by watermarks. But I'm not aware of *any* high-profile cases where these watermarks have been used to prosecute uploaders of said works to e.g. download sites. Instead it's my impression that most court cases on illegal downloads centred on *users* of file sharing.

Have watermarks been used and are they used to prosecute *uploaders* in North America or the EU?

Have watermarks in digital downloads ever been used to prosecute uploaders?


I see this in many Android devices, the picture below:
[![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XVMtL.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XVMtL.png)

So, if Apple or a new technology company uses not exactly that method but similar in any way of alerting a user from high volume listening.

Can a `New Company` or `Apple` have the right to alert users?

Is this a copyright?


I read an article that says that copyrights last life of author plus 70 years.

Can I make a derivative work from a book that was written 150 years ago without making a copyright infringement?


If I approach a person and offer to pay them to assault a third party and the assault took place, I assume that I would be guilty of some crime myself.

If, however, I approach a person and offer to pay their legal fees if they assault a third party, but not pay for the assault itself, would I also be guilty of a crime ??

Soliciting a Criminal Action


In what circumstances can you go to jail for not paying taxes in the US/UK?

For instance the company doesn't pay taxes for very long time and government can't take any money from the company. Is it different whether it's sole-trader or sole-member LTD/LLC company?

Can you go to jail for not paying taxes?


How can the federal government set a minimum wage? It seems like that would be reserved to the states under the 10th Amendment.

Is the interstate commerce clause? That seems iffy to me.

What gives the US federal government the power to set a minimum wage?


Both the original (Roy Orbison) version and the Two Live Crew version began, ["Pretty woman walking down the street..."](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell_v._Acuff-Rose_Music,_Inc.) Was this seen as copying under the "five word" plagiarism rule?

According to the Supreme Court, the Two Live Crew version veered sharply away from the original, to the point of being "opposite." That is, the original celebrated a white woman, while the Two Live Crew version mocked a black woman. Was this what made it was parody, and after the appeals court decision was overturned, could therefore possibly make it fair use?

In the end, there was a settlement, under which Acuff-Rose, the owner of the original, received no damages, but did receive licensing fees. Two Live Crew had earlier sought (and been refused) such a licensing arrangement, meaning that it got to its starting point. Apparently this was an equitable result given the hazards of further litigation. But was it possible that Two Live Crew could have performed its version "for free" if the appeals court had later found that "parody" made it fair use?

Explanation of the key elements of the Supreme Court "Pretty Woman" Parody Case?


Copyright law works, differently in different, countries. For example in my locale, Finland, small code snippets do not qualify as works and thus do not get copyright. Same applies to architectural drawings of mundane nature and same applies to several forms of technical drawings. These are then covered by different laws.

First: Even if i do not get copyright over these entities in my locale am I entitled to copyright in those locales that allow such things? For example in the US many of these entities are possible to put under the umbrella copyright.

Second: If an external entity owns the copyright of something that does not fall under copyright in my region does that mean that copyright does not apply to me? With the understanding that i do not use it outside my area.

Copyright over borders


If I got arrested 2 years ago but the case was never picked up and never got the chance to see the judge because the state didnt press charges and the person never pressed charges will it still show up on my background? I went to the. Courthouse to get a background check and they said I have nothing and if I was arrested 2 yrs ago it was never filed. What does that mean?

Arrest records. Case never filed


Traditionally it has been the constitutional power of the monarch to dissolve parliament and trigger a general election at will.

Ostensibly, the Fixed Term Parliaments Act of 2011 removed this power.

However, since parliament derives its power from delegated royal prerogative and acts can only become law with royal assent. Is this actually binding and could the Queen still dissolve parliament if she so wished, even if she had to take a few steps to repeal that law first?

Can the Queen still dissolve parliament?


In the following, all parties live and all actions are taken entirely within the United States.

>
> Let us say that a person (Bob) has purchased a book from the book
>  store. Bob likes the book enough to give one or more copies to
>  friends. Bob does not want to part with his own copy, and Bob does not
>  want to pay more than he already has, so Bob photocopies the book and
>  gives the copy to Sue.
>
>
> Sue knows that the copy she is receiving is a copied book that Bob made for her and that
>  copying an entire book is a copyright violation in the United States.
>  Still, Sue accepts the book, reads it, and enjoys it enough that she
>  passes it along to Alice.
>
>
> Alice knows that the copy she is receiving is a copied book and that
>  copying an entire book is a copyright violation in the United States, though she is not aware of its origins.
>  Still, Alice accepts the book, reads it, and enjoys it.
>
>
>

In doing my research, I can easily see that Bob has violated the copyright. In trying to figure out whether Sue or Alice are also in violation, all the material I am finding is focusing entirely on the act of reproducing the work or of giving it away. I am having difficulty finding anything about receiving such a copied work.

I understand that Sue and Alice could possibly be held accountable for being complicit if they requested the book, especially if Bob copied the book as a direct consequence of such a request. For the purposes of this question, I would like to ignore the "complicit in Bob's copying" aspect of this situation.

**Is accepting the book a violation of anything (except being complicit, as mentioned above)? Especially, does is it a violation of copyright?** Does the answer change at all between Sue and Alice since Alice can see the book is copied, knows Sue herself did not copy it, but knows nothing of its origins?

Since the receivers of copies are rarely targeted by the copyright holders (or publishers) and generally the illegal distributors are targeted instead, I realize that this may not have been pressed in court, and maybe never will be. If that is the case, "There is no precedent." could be an acceptable answer, and it would explain why I cannot find an answer. However, I expect that there are at least some cases where a precedent of some sort was set and that they are merely being drowned out by all the other information.

Is it unlawful to receive a photocopied book?


There are many cases where a federal law is passed that includes language that pre-empts state laws that are stronger (or weaker, depending).

Under what authority is this allowed?

What U.S. Constitutional or statutory authority gives Congress the right to pre-empt state law?


Imagine that somebody plans to create a work of an art (say, a comic or computer game), that depicts various religious forces from an attitude that can be perceived as extremely critical by their representatives.

While it's generally safe to assume that followers of most major religions (say, Christians, Buddhists, Hinduists and so on) can take criticism without violence, potential author might be worried about reaction from radical Muslim community. Given somewhat recent example of Charlie Hebdo slaughter, it's not uncommon for this community to react inadequately to even mild criticism.

While choosing **not** to create such a work might sound like a solution, essentially it's just indirectly accepting the fear of death threats, "thinking of consequences" and so on — the ill constructs this work of art is meant to fight with.

So, the question is — is there any legal way (so, no fake IDs) to ensure personal safety of such an author, if author wants to create this product, and sell it via online distribution platforms? Would it possible to create a company that does not disclose the identity of who had created it and owns it, to act as an alias for a person? If yes, can it be still considered safe, or names can be still obtained via requests?

What kind of legal counselor should potential author contact to discuss this matter?

Exact jurisdiction does not matter as long as they allow foreigners to create companies with desired properties.

Can company hide an identity of creator for personal safety reasons?


It hasn't been 100% confirmed in writing, but my boss has told our team verbally, that due to the lack of work in our backlog, we wont be able to sustain all of us, and that one of us will likely go in quarter 1 of 2016.

As a result, I have been trying to look into my redundancy rights. I am currently employed in the UK, and joined 20th April 2014. So my two year work anniversary will be 20th April 2016.

Due to the fact my boss said it will be likely the first quarter if it did happen, what are my rights for redundancy in terms of pay and notice.

On my contract it states:

>
> Once you have completed your probationary period, this notice period will increase to one month's written notice on either side...
>
>
>

Online though, it states:

>
> At least 1 week - if you have been employed continuously by your employer for more than 1 month but less than 2 years.
>
>
>

So is my notice under redundancy 1 week or 1 month.

Thanks for any answers and any advice you feel may be useful or any knowledge of the law which I can use for my own empowerment.

Redundancy notice for less than two years of employment (UK)


Over the past few months I paid for a 1 year subscription to an online tabletop roleplay gaming service. The seller had no ToS to be signed and recently after critique about the service began circulating, the seller made a ToS. The first condition was was that any complaints about the service was to be brought up only to staff(the seller) as well as making mention of punishment to violations to the terms. From what I knew of the seller with my personal interactions with him over these past few months he was basically telling me(and the other customers) to not speak poorly of his service in the public domain of his server.

When confronted with this ToS, I responded with how I did not agree to such restrictions and that I would be withdrawing from his service if this was the way he intended to go.

Not 7 hours later I receive an email stating that my subscription was being terminated. Before this I had intended to just walk away and leave it at that. But after seeing as how he was banning multiple people who spoke out about being dissatisfied, I decided I would be requesting a refund for the 9 months of service I will not be able to get now.

I went through paypal's refund claim process and was met with the seller stating that the services I paid for had already been delivered in full(his company has not even existed for a full year yet) and with his mention of resorting to a lawyer in his response, though not directly saying he would. I recalled him once bragging about how good his lawyer friend was and can not say I'd put it past him to try to sue me if he thought he could.

Can I be sued for demanding a refund for a service that was not provided?


We entered into a work contract with an outside contractor who has not completed their scope of work but want compensation. The contract was written with our old LLC name which is no longer active. We now have a different LLC in a new state, completely different name. It was actually already changed at the time of signing.
 and does not reflect the new name in the contract. Would this help our case with them. It does not say anywhere in the contract by any other name.

LLC change contract dispute


You may have seen [The MIT License – Clarity on Using Code on Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the-mit-license-clarity-on-using-code-on-stack-overflow-and-stack-exchange) and [A New Code License: The MIT, this time with Attribution Required](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272956/a-new-code-license-the-mit-this-time-with-attribution-required/).

But I'm no legal expert, and I'm confused what the changes would include. What's the difference between CC-By-SA and MIT, and what about with attribution?

What is the difference between CC-BY-SA with attribution and MIT with attribution?


Imagine a disorderly charge for a first-time offender who pleaded guilty.

The defendant appealed the case and was granted a remand.The defendant now has a charge on his record for disorderly conduct, and has paid high court costs and fines.

Could the defendant file a motion to vacate, withdraw plea or what?

Municipal Court Remand New Jersey Help


I registered myself as a Ltd company a year ago with the UK government to ready myself for working freelance as a web developer. Since then I have been involved in other projects (mostly voluntary, some conventionally paid employment, on which I paid taxes) and have not done any freelance/company work whatsoever.

Now I'm getting bills from the UK government for ever escalating amounts (they are saying £1300 last letter I got) for not filing taxes for a company that has not traded at all in any meaningful sense of the word (have paid out for some artworks and server rental, but never actually charged for any services).

What can I do about this? I don't have £13 spare cash, let alone £1300. Is there anything I can do to stop the government charging me money I do not have for tax returns it would have made no sense to file and the forms for which I don't understand anyway?

I already paid them £15 to register the company with Companies House and they have done literally nothing for me in return, so I really don't see how they can be wanting £1300 as a result of my not trading whatsoever.

Registered as a Ltd company but not traded yet; government threatening me for not filing taxes


Several times has happened that the definition of mental disorders/ psychological-psychiatrist therapies/theories have been proven wrong. Yet they have been applied over people causing them problems and harm in their lives. Usually graduated psychologists/ psychiatrists are ignorant which is the supposed proof of these theories. They've been told they have been proven sometimes, sometimes they've been given some details, and they don't know they don't have a real basis behind them until it's massively accepted they are wrong. Personally, I see little to no responsibilities in them. In the other hand, governments and states promote these theories in secondary schools, they teach them and form professionals in national universities, and they hold the power to treat people in trials and to internate someone for being ill under these theories. Some other organizations, which I'm not very aware who they are, but I assume they might be colleges or agrupations of psychiatrists/psychologists regulate their professional's activities, and I assume they might be the ones giving the content to national universities for the formation of professionals under these theories. When one of these theories/therapies are proven wrong and have caused harm over people, who is the legal responsibility?

I assume there aren't many cases like this, but I make the parallelism with biological sciences. If an association or group produces a medicament which is proven harmful for people later, and that association teaches doctors to give this medicament to people, with the approval and fundings/places of national government created universities, it would be pretty much the same. Then, in the case stated in the topic question, who would be legally responsible for the application of these mainstream wrong psychological/psychiatrist therapies?

Who would be legally responsible for the application of mainstream wrong psychological/psychiatrist therapies?


I am paying a girls bills who has a restraining order against me, is it stalking/harrasment to pay her bills when she won't contact me?

Is it stalking to pay someone's bills?


I posted another question recently relating to the same person but I didn't want to include two questions in the same post.

My father is an extremely abusive person and has been physically, mentally, and emotionally abusive throughout my life. When I was in college, he came to my apartment and forced me to sign a "contract" in which I would be forced to pay him $30000. This contract was essentially me writing out "I promise to pay $30000" with my signature at the bottom. I told him numerous times I did not want to sign anything without a lawyer present, and he threatened to hit me if I did not sign it. I even tried telling him I would sign it if it included that he never contact me after college, but he cornered me and raised his fist up in an attempt to punch me.

That was 2 years ago, and he still has the contract and threatens to use it if I don't listen to him. Is there any way I can prove to someone that I was essentially forced to sign this contract, assuming he did try to use it?

How can one prove that a contract was signed by force?


I'm willing to remake an old video game, first as a hobby project, but in the future I'd like to publish it online, for free or as a commercial project.

I've been reading for a while about copyright infringement, and despite not copying any artistic assets, lore, names, or things like that, I'm afraid I could run into copyright infringement.

The reason why I think so, is because I would be using some very specific mechanics that are key to the gameplay, and I suspect those mechanics can be subject of copyright.

Without entering into much detail, are there any kind of rules that apply to gameplay or game mechanics regarding copyright?

Are gameplay mechanics subject to copyright?


Please give me legal, black-and-white answer.

Winklevoss Twins say someone stole their idea for Facebook and Judge awarded them some millions.

But how could have Winklevoss Twins protected themselves from being cheated in the beginning.

What legal things could they have in place so

1. They are not cheated to begin with (hence get credit for their idea)
2. If programmer decides to cheat them anyway, the case is open-and-shut and Judge rules in their favor without case dragging for years.

On the flip side, let say programmer did in fact create Facebook.

How does programmer legally protect himself from people who claim idea was stolen, takes him to court, and ends up paying the accuser (even though the idea was his from the start)?

How Could the Winklevoss Twins Have Legally Prevented Anyone from Stealing their Facebook Idea


If somebody registered a distinctive website name, that has no content or services related to it (i.e. it's an empty page), is the name trademarked?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_parking>

Are the names of parked domain websites trademarked?


I run a small software consulting company. It is organized as a LLC in California, filing as an S-Corp.

I want to start a second business, but something unrelated to computers. I will need to purchase equipment to start the new venture.

Can I simply make this a new division of my existing company, and write off the equipment purchases as a business expense in the same way I would if I was buying equipment for he existing operation?

If the answer is no, what if they were proximately related? Where is the line drawn typically?

Can I write off equipment purchases for unrelated business


Suppose a customer enters into a lease- or subscription-type agreement with a business, where the business either provides a physical thing that the customer takes and uses, or the business does a thing for the customer such as mows the lawn every other week, or provides the customer with remote access to something such as internet access, web service hosting, or some online content-access service: the point is that the customer need never see or interact with any person from the business, after the agreement is reached. What passes for a written agreement simply states that the business provides that access or use of the thing to the customer for 1 year, and the customer pays a specified fee which is due up front (and was paid). There is, in particular, no clause allowing either party to terminate the contract with or without a refund (pro-rated or otherwise), no clause allows either party to unilaterally change the terms of the agreement, and no clause requires the parties to renegotiate if one side wants something.

However, there is also nothing that *prohibits* one party from attempting to modify the terms of the agreement. The business could propose a new term in the contract, and the customer might accept that term. I am interested in the case where the business sets forth a new term, and the customer is not interested. The customer might explicitly reject the new term; if he does not explicitly reject the term, and also does not explicitly accept it, does silence have the same effect as explicit rejection? To be concrete about the new term, assume that it is a clause about the agreement and not the service, so for example a mandatory arbitration clause, a waiver of liability, or a non-disparagement clause.

In this scenario, the customer has a continuing right to that service, and by accessing the web site, using the equipment or allowing the mowers to mow the lawn as usual, it is reasonable to assume that they are simply exercising their rights under the old contract, and have not implicitly accepted the new terms. On the other hand, it might not be inconceivable that the courts have discovered an obligation to explicitly respond, whereby failing to reject is as good as accepting. Is it a clearly settled matter of law how silence along with continued use of the paid-for service is treated? (I’m looking for a leading case citation: US law if there's a difference between US and the rest of the common law world).

There is a general [Prescott v. Jones](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3574312/prescott-v-jones/), 41 A. 352 (N.H. 1898), exemplified in insurance contracts, that

>
> it is well settled that "a party cannot, by the wording of his offer,
>  turn the absence of communication of acceptance into an acceptance,
>  and compel the recipient of his offer to refuse it at the peril of
>  being held to have accepted it"
>
>
>

There is a realm of "exceptions" with [National Union Fire Insurance v. Ehrlich](https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/2161), where an insurance contract had ended and the company sent a renewal offer along with a bill (which was 2 months later rejected). The court ruled in favor of the company, citing Williston On Contracts:

>
> Generally speaking an offeree has a right to make no reply to offers.
>  But the relations between the parties may have been such as to have
>  justified the offeror in expecting a reply. *When property is sent to
>  another though not ordered but under such circumstances that the
>  latter knows that payment is expected, the silent acceptance of the
>  property is in effect an assent to the offer of sale implied by the
>  sending of the property*.
>
>
>

See also [Austin v. Burge, 137 S.W. 618](https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/2155) for renewal of a newspaper subscription. These kinds of cases fall outside of the scope of this question, for two reasons. First, they involve a customer using the service when they have no existing contractual right to do so, second, automatic renewals are commonplace and to be expected, whereas one party unilaterally changing a contract is not at all commonplace. In the situation covered by the question, the customer is still within the period of the existing contract.

Can a business unilaterally change a contract?


I have a friend who left home at 18 to join the Marines. He used his parents' address for mail. He then worked for various overseas companies (doing oil related things) and continued to use his parents' address for mail, tax forms, and employer records. Now he lives in the US again, but in a different state than his parents. He says that since he moves every year or two, his parents' address is his "state of legal residence" and he uses it on tax forms, for insurance (he works remotely now), etc.

I'm guessing after a year or so de-facto state of legal residence changes (even though he has a history of moving often), and he should use his physical address on tax forms, insurance, and everything else. Is he right, or am I right?

State of Legal Residence - is this person filing taxes right?


As far as I know, international students can't work off-campus in the USA (according to the law). What about Google AdSense?

I will be a graduate student in the upcoming fall 2016.

I have been working on my personal websites and I have activated AdSense on these websites. I have been getting paid in my native country and Google sends the payment to my local bank account.

Could I link my US bank account after I reach there? Will it be considered as off-campus job?

My earing isn't huge right now. I get paid around $200 to $500 per month right now. it may increase in future depending on my activites on website.

Off-campus job and Internet earning


It's not like talking about using weeds that you tell your friends about but you don't go in public shouting about it. Instead people go to online forums sometimes posting with their real names- bragging about using pirated software.

What is exactly stopping the police from having them arrested?

How is it possible for millions to use pirated software at home and never get arrested?


Many small companies California that have no paternity policy and are less than 50 people?

What paid, or unpaid paternity leave entitlements do employees generally have (under federal and California law)?

Update: (from @dw1's links)

* FMLA and CFRA provide job protected leave (but only apply to companies > 50 people, and do no guarantee pay)
* SDI and PFL provide income if time off is taken (but do not, I think, require companies to allow time off -- i.e. you can be fired for taking time off).

Are small companies required to allow male employees ANY time off? (other than sickness)

What entitlements for paternity leave in a small company in California?


My friend visited Heathrow airport and he used their public wifi. He said that he had to provide only his name and email and got access to the Internet. He had not validated his email to get access, I mean, there wasn't an email verification process.

But as far as I understand, there are some laws in Europe about public wifi. And that law says (I'm not sure, I found only Data Retention Regulations of 2009 related to this) that the provider of free wifi has some kind of responsibility for any illegal actions via wifi.

So I guess the provider of public wifi has to somehow map a wifi user to a real-world person for the case if a person has done some illegal. But it looks like the name and un-verified email is only data airport takes from the person

From:
[Heathrow Terms and Conditions & Privacy Notice for Wi-Fi Services](https://www.heathrow.com/file_source/Heathrow/Static/PDF/More/heathrow-Wi-Fi-privacy-notice.pdf).

How does it actually work? Am I right that they still have to be able to connect their wifi user with a real person?

Heathrow public wi-fi and Data Retention Regulations


There's a song that's been with me for the past 10-12 years (song was released in 1975 by record label Reprise), and its lyrics vividly describe various scenes of a historical event in human history. At the same time, I'm an amateur artist/musician in both piano and graphite/charcoal sketching, and over the past year or so I've created a series of artworks that were derived from/directly inspired by the lyrics of this song.

Well, I now have a friend who's interested in purchasing this art ($700 - $1000 USD), and so, I'm wondering if I'd be breaking any copyright law by selling it to him..

For the song, every two to three lines describes a "scene", and I've created a body of work for each scene in the song. Also, the artwork itself is quite consistent with the lyrics. Which is to say that, if you were to see this artwork in a certain order, it'd almost be like "watching the song".

So, ultimately, what I'm asking is..

is copyright law for songs confined to that medium of art? Or, does it also apply *across* medium types?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know that if I were to create a movie that's based off a book, and then make profit from the movie, I'd probably be breaking some kind of copyright/IP law.. but, what about going from song to graphite/charcoal art, and for my situation?

Creating and then selling artwork that was derived from a song.. copyright infingement?