Week 8 EOC: Bratz Brawl

“One of the more epic IP battles has come to an end. Mattel (Barbie) and MGA Entertainment (Bratz), have spent most of a decade in various courtrooms hashing out the ultra-serious question about which of these companies is entitled to the Bratz millions. Long story short, a former Mattel employee left the company and crafted one of the first serious threats to Barbie's dominance, the Bratz dolls. Mattel, of course, was none too happy because the designer was still employed by Mattel when he came up with the idea. Mattel felt it owned the idea and sued the designer in an effort to make that a reality. The trial jury awarded MGA $88.5 million in damages on its claims that Mattel employees used fake business cards to get access to MGA’s booths at toy fairs and obtain MGA’s trade secrets. The judge later reduced the verdict to $85 million and then doubled it by adding $85 million in punitive damages. Carter had also awarded MGA $2.5 million in lawyer fees and costs for its trade secret-theft claims, which was vacated by the appeal court’s ruling together with the $170 million in compensatory and punitive damages. The appellate panel agreed with Mattel that MGA’s counterclaims weren’t “compulsory” in that they weren’t based on the same underlying facts as Mattel’s trade-secret theft claims against MGA. As such, the judge had erred by allowing MGA’s claims to be part of the case, the panel said.” In my personal opinion I believe that MGA shouldn’t be held liable for his own creations. I feel that it’s very unfair to create something and have the business you work for try to take credit for it. Especially if the company didn’t do anything to help the creation, but that’s just my personal belief.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121019/17344420768/its-finally-over-8-years-mattel-vs-bratz-no-ones-getting-paid-lawyers.shtml

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-24/mga-bratz-win-over-mattel-partly-erased-by-appeals-court.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/21/mattel-loses-lawsuit-with-mga-bratz_n_852223.html

Week 8 EOC: Questions

1.       Are there any legal problems with using a specific product in my film?

2.       Can I us a song or other copyrighted work in my film?

3.       Do I need permission to use locations in my city?

4.       Do I need permission to us my actor’s image in my own films?

5.       Do I need to get my film rated before I can show it to an audience?

6.       How do I copyright my company’s name?

7.       How do I get the rights to adapt a book into a screenplay?

8.       If I use fake guns in a public place am I legally obligated to inform the local police?

9.       What type of insurance should a filmmaker consider?

10.   What good legal resources are out there?

 

Week 7 EOC: Lawyers

Name	Number	Address
George T. Bochanis	(702) 659-8222	631 S 9th St, Las Vegas NV 89101
Pezzillo Lloyd	(702)233-4225	6725 Via Austi Parkway, Suite 290 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
Bowler Dixon & Twitchell LLP	(702)425-5671	3137 East Warm Springs Road, Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120
Deluca	(702) 608-1152	7580 W. Sahara Ave. Las Vegas NV 89117
Sterling Kerr	(702)608-0835	2450 Saint Rose Parkway, Suite 250 Henderson, NV 89074
The Bach Law Firm, LLC	(702)925-8787	6053 S. Fort Apache Road, Suite 130 Las Vegas, NV 89148
Wells & Rawling	(702)802-0466	7th Floor of the Bank of America Building 6900 Westcliff Dr. Suite 710 Las Vegas 89145
John C. Lambertsen	(702)796-3476	6900 Westcliff Drive, Suite 104 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Weide & Miller, Ltd	(702)-382-4804	Bank of Nevada Building 5th Floor, Suite 530 7251 West Lake Mead Blvd. Las Vegas, NV 89128
Mr. Donald Curtis Kudler Esq	(702)878-8778	3202 W Charleston Blvd Las Vegas, NV 89102

Week 6 EOC: Supreme Court Prayer

In Wednesday's oral arguments, the justices considered a dispute over the primarily Christian prayers recited before meetings of the Town Board in Greece, N.Y, near Rochester. Two residents, Susan Galloway, who is Jewish, and Linda Stephens, an atheist, said that being required to sit through Christian prayers in order to attend the meetings violated their 1st Amendment rights to religious freedom. Their lawyer asked the court to require the town to use prayers that did not specifically endorse Christian beliefs or include direct references to Jesus Christ. But the justices, perhaps mindful of the storm created by their ban on prayers in public schools in the 1960s, appeared wary of having government regulate what a minister can say, even at a public meeting."I think it's hard because the court lays down these rules and everybody thinks that the court is being hostile to religion and people get unhappy and angry and agitated in various kinds of ways," Justice Elena Kagan said. But she said that "part of what we are trying to do here is to maintain a multi-religious society in a peaceful and harmonious way. And every time the court gets involved in something like this, it seems to make the problem worse rather than better." I completely agree with “Elena Kagan” they should have just kept the prayer to themselves because rather than making things well and harmonious they just caused a total issue. In my personal opinion I feel that everyone has the right to express themselves, but there is always a time and place for it as well. Unfortunately they chose a wrong scenario to do the prayer, unfortunately some people may be offend for their own personal reasons. I am partially for and against what happened I do believe that everyone has the right to express themselves and that the two women are over exaggerating, but I also believe that there is a time and place for everything and that they might have made some people uncomfortable.” Suppose, the justice said, “the members of the court who had stood responded, ‘Amen,’ made the sign of the cross, and the chief justice then called your case. Would that be permissible?” "I don't feel like ... I'm welcome at my town government anymore," Galloway said in an interview with NPR. "My grandmother had to leave Russia because of the Cossacks. My father had to leave Germany because of Hitler." She feels strongly that Americans must "make sure that our government and religion are separate, because we are a diverse country." This is necessary, she says, to recognize diversity and "protect the minorities' rights." I feel that they just cause a huge controversy over some so small and insignificant in my opinion.

http://www.npr.org/2013/11/06/243290108/supreme-court-case-puts-public-prayer-back-in-the-spotlight

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-court-prayer-20131107,0,4489674.story#axzz2jzFwugjP

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/06/21334088-supreme-court-tests-limits-of-prayer-at-official-government-meetings

Week 5 EOC: Midterm

There are many challenges we all face in the internet world now a day some good and some not so good. A couple of issuers or challenge we are currently facing would be identity theft, cyber bulling, and cyber threats. Unfortunately these have been some things that have not been able to fix entirely. One of the issues in cyber threats that I found pretty interesting was when a teen wrestler sued after he was suspended for tweeting that he would “drill” his teammates. His exact words were “I’m boutta drill my ‘teammates’ on Monday.” He says drilling means a hard tackle; his school interpreted the tweet as a terroristic threat. Is this fair, I honestly don’t think so but that’s just my opinion. Cyber bullying has also been a big issue in the internet world around 10 percent of all adolescents in grades 7-9 are victims of internet bullying. 'This type of bullying can be more serious than conventional bullying.” At least with conventional bullying the victim is left alone on evenings and weekends”, says Ann Frisén, Professor of Psychology at the University of Gothenburg. 'Cyber bullying occurs when new technologies such as computers and mobile phones are used to harass or bully somebody. Identity theft has also been a big issue in the world, nobody like having there identity stolen especially when your unknowingly giving it away. Identity theft occurs when someone uses your personal information without your permission like your name, Social Security number, or credit card number to commit fraud or other crimes for personal gain. Identity thieves may rent an apartment, obtain a credit card, or establish a cell phone account in your name, or they may make new charges to existing accounts. There are many places and programs where you can inform yourself of identity theft and how to prevent it from occurring for example “The Identity Theft Resource Center® (ITRC) is a national, non-profit organization established to support victims of identity theft in resolving their cases, and to broaden public education and awareness in the understanding of identity theft. It is the on-going mission of the ITRC to assist victims, educate consumers, research identity theft and increase public and corporate awareness about this problem.”

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/teen_wrestler_sues_after_he_is_suspended_for_tweet_saying_he_will_drill_his/

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100222104939.htm

http://www.stopfraud.gov/protect-identity.html

Week 4 EOC: Copyrights

“Copyrights are a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.” Copy rights are a form of protecting you intellectual property, keeping people from stealing your creations. Unfortunately Copyrights don’t protect against everything for example facts, ideas, systems or methods of operation, but what it does protect is the way they are “expressed.” A good way to protect yourself from Copyrights is, staying away from thing that are copyright especially when you’re planning on using it for your own benefit. This is usually called an infringement which occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner.  Fortunately when it comes to your creations your work is protected at the moment it’s created and fixed in “tangible form.” If you publish or use the creative work of others, their trademarks, or certain confidential business information without the permission of the owner, you may be exposing yourself to legal liability for violations of intellectual property law.” “Fortunately, if you allow your site's user to post this type of content you can protect yourself from copyright infringement claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as long as you establish effective "notice-and-takedown" procedures, promptly remove content when a copyright owner notifies you that it is infringing, and have no knowledge that the material in question is infringing. Best thing you can do for your protection is to just keep all your work Copyrighted, and to keep anything and everything protected your never know when you may come up with something good that may be worth tons last thing you want is to have it stolen!

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/protecting-yourself-against-copyright-claims-based-user-content

 

 

 

Week 3 EOC: PG&E Case

“In 1996 PG&E settled the case for $333 million. This was the largest settlement ever awarded in a direct-action lawsuit in the history of the United States. The lawyers received forty percent, which was a little over $133 million. As in the film, attorney Ed Masry rewarded Erin Brockovich with a $2 million bonus. The more than 600 Hinkley plaintiffs, many of whom had become seriously ill, were in the end left with $196 million to be divided between them. On average, each victim received $300,000.”

Erin brokovich received 2 million dollars after winning the case for PG&E, a well earned 2 million in my opinion!  But when it comes to the victims I personally believe that, that was still a pretty low amount each victim received I mean there were very Sevier damages caused to the victims there lives will never be the same thanks to PG&E. The victims will have to live with their illnesses for the rest of their lives; I feel it’s very unfair! I believe that the reasonable amount for each victim would have been at least $500.000, these are illnesses they have to live with some may be disabled for the rest of there live and may not even be able to work, $300,000 is still a very low amount in my opinon.

“Not all of the victims were happy with the amount of money that they were given. After being billed an extra $10 million for undetailed expenses and having to wait nearly six months after the $333 million had been deposited by PG&E, many of the victims were unhappy with the sum of money that they had been rewarded. The lawyers determined this sum confidentially by various factors, including the severity of their ailments. On average, this came to $300,000 per victim, as stated previously. Some did receive several million. Others received less. For example, Dorothea Montoya received $60,000; Christine Mace got $50,000; Lynn Tindell $50,000; Tiffany Oliver got $60,000.

 Plaintiff Carol Smith argued, "It didn't make sense why my husband, who's had 17 tumors removed from his throat, got only $80,000." After the residents, including Smith, were told that their awards would be based on their medical records, some claimed that their medical records were never looked at, "...no one ever looked at my medical records," said Carol Smith. "I'm sure of that because my doctors told me so after I asked." As a result, some of the plaintiffs appealed their settlements, seeking sums that they felt were more justified.

http://www.chasingthefrog.com/reelfaces/brockovich.php

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-02-06-pge-settlement-brockovich_x.htm

Salon.com