Feature

November 14, 2016 0

How the Law Sees Kaepernick’s Protest

By Lee Henderson Colin Kaepernick’s decision to take a knee during the playing of the Star-Spangled Banner has sparked much conversation about the customs and legal rules expected during the National Anthem. While some take offense to the issues the back-up quarterback is kneeling for, most critics are offended by what they perceive as a disregard for the military members who fought and died for the flag (despite Kaepernick’s denial.) Since the Anthem’s first use in the early 1900’s, standing during it’s playing was a contentious issue. Following Hoover’s declaration that the Star-Spangled Banner be the country’s official national anthem in 1931, a poll revealed that public opinion was split as to proper behavior during the Anthem, half of respondents saying mandated standing was overly authoritarian. Congress weighed in on the issue when it passed 36 U.S.C. § 301, also known as the National Anthem Statute, which said that people should “face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over their heart.” Although this still stands as law, no criminal penalties were ever prescribed in case of violation of the provisions. The Supreme Court also took its turn commenting on the status of these customs as they [read more]
November 7, 2016 0

Mass Government Surveillance: The Price of a Secure Nation?

By: Danny Ho Mass government surveillance is a unique issue of concern in our increasingly technological era. Mass surveillance refers to the government’s indiscriminate monitoring of a large group of people through collection of large sets of data such as telephone records, emails, and internet activity. This issue gained public attention in 2013 when Edward Snowden, a former CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) employee and NSA (National Security Agency) contractor, leaked confidential information about the NSA’s global surveillance programs. The Snowden disclosures revealed alarming evidence of government intrusion into the private lives of individuals. Among the revelations was the clandestine government program (code-named PRISM) that allowed the NSA to gain direct access to individual Google and Yahoo accounts with court approval. The 2013 Snowden disclosures forced our government to engage with privacy advocates and the public at large with regards to the implications of its surveillance policies. However, a string of recent global and domestic terrorist attacks – from San Bernardino to Paris – renewed the push for government surveillance programs to respond to fears that terrorists will otherwise avoid government detection. Knowledge of past invasive government surveillance programs and national security fears from recent terrorist attacks have created a complex [read more]
October 31, 2016 0

Don’t Pass Go: How Password Sharing Sent Someone to Jail

By: Francis Cullo Over the summer, the Ninth Circuit handed down an opinion in United States v. Nosal that generated several fear-mongering headlines. At first blush, the Ninth Circuit seemed to outlaw a common digital practice—password sharing. But are you really committing a federal crime if you use someone else’s password when you Netflix and chill? The short answer is no. So what produced this flurry of headlines? The Ninth Circuit wrestles with password sharing. In United States v. Nosal the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion finding that an employee acted “without authorization” when he requested and used a former co-worker’s login despite having that co-worker’s permission. David Nosal was charged under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The CFAA is an anti-hacking statute. It creates a private right to action, allowing both private individuals and businesses to sue and recover damages when someone “intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access.” In 2004, Nosal was a big-wig in Silicon Valley when he left his employer to start a rival executive recruiting company. Two other employees from his former employer joined him a year later at his new firm. After joining Nosal’s new company these employees [read more]
October 24, 2016 0

The Truth About Your Makeup Routine

By Arielle Padover If you’re among the two-thirds of Americans who believe that the government regulates the chemicals that go into your personal care products, think again. According to the Environmental Working Group, American women use an average of twelve personal care products that contain 168 different chemicals every day, while American men use an average of six personal care products that contain 85 different chemicals. These chemicals are currently regulated by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, which has not been substantially updated since it was introduced in 1938, almost 80 years ago. The 1938 legislation gives the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) very limited control over the chemicals that go into personal care products. According to the FDA’s website, the “FDA does not have legal authority to approve cosmetic products and ingredients (other than color additives) before they go on the market” under the existing law. The FDA cannot mandate testing of ingredients or recall products, and cosmetic companies do not have to register with the FDA, submit ingredient lists, or report adverse events. Currently, only 11 toxic ingredients are specifically banned by statute from use in beauty products in the United States, two of which are mercury [read more]
October 23, 2016 0

Court of Arbitration for Sport: Flawed but Essential

By: Karli Cozen The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has played an active role in the international sporting arena since its inception in 1984. CAS is an independent quasi-judicial body with arbitral jurisdiction to resolve both commercial and disciplinary sport-related disputes. It was developed to provide an outlet to resolve disputes in response to the growing number of international sporting disputes. CAS has been implemented by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and many International sporting federations as the chosen method of recourse in dispute resolution. Most recently, in Maria Sharapova v. International Tennis Federation, CAS reduced professional tennis player Maria Sharapova’s two-year ban from professional competition to 15 months of ineligibility on an appeal from a ruling of the International Tennis Federation’s (ITF) appointed independent tribunal. Sharapova is a Russian-born tennis superstar with an impressive resume that includes formerly holding the number one rank in the world and five grand slam championships. In January 2016, at the Australian Open, Sharapova tested positive for taking Melodonium. Melodonium is a drug that was added to the list of banned substances in the World Anti-Doping Code as of January 1, 2016. Sharapova took Melodonium for ten years prior due to a magnesium [read more]
October 23, 2016 0

What to Do with the Minimum Wage: Pro Arguments (Part One)

By Daniel Sperling Is the minimum wage high enough today? Increasing the minimum wage could decrease poverty, benefit company productivity, and boost the economy. But is increasing the minimum wage really that simple? In 1938, the United States Congress passed 29 U.S. Code § 201, otherwise known as the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which effectively shaped the history of United States labor law and regulation. The legislation introduced many characteristics of the work force that still exist today, including the minimum wage requirement. The minimum wage is the base level that an employer can pay its employees as regulated on a federal and state/local government level. In 2007, the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 was passed which gradually increased the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 over two years.  Currently, twenty-nine states have minimum wage legislation that ensures wages hirer than the federal standard, fourteen states have minimum wage legislation equivalent to the federal government, and five states have no minimum wage legislation. Two states, Wyoming in Georgia, have minimum wage laws that actually guarantee an amount less than the federal government, meaning that employees not covered under the FLSA are subject to the lower wage, which [read more]
October 23, 2016 0

Physician-Assisted Suicide: Legislatures Should Take Action

By: Karli Cozen When a terminally-ill person with only a few months to live is experiencing great pain and suffering, shouldn’t the law empower them to end that suffering and die on their own terms? The Supreme Court addressed the issue of physician-assisted suicide in Washington v. Glucksberg. In this 1997 case, the Supreme Court recognized that there is no constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide, but left the door open for state legislatures to enact laws on this matter. Since that time, five states including Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana, and California, have passed “aid-in-dying” laws which permit physicians to help terminally ill patients end their lives under certain conditions. Additionally, countries around the world such as Canada and the Netherlands have legalized physician assisted death. Most recently, the California End of Life Option Act went into effect on June 9, 2016. This law allows California residents over the age of eighteen who have a terminal illness with less than six months to live to request to their attending physician a prescription for an “aid in dying drug.” To be eligible under this act, the patient must be competent to make medical decisions for themselves and must be able to self-administer [read more]
March 21, 2016 1

The Converse Shoe Case: Why We Should “Chuck” the Aesthetic Functionality Doctrine

By Max Scharf Converse is currently in the midst of litigation which seems to completely depend on the status of the aesthetic functionality doctrine. When consumers think of Converse, they often think of their Converse All Star sneakers (as seen below), also known as “Chuck Taylors.” In October 2014, Converse filed suit against Wal-Mart (and dozens of other companies) claiming these companies were selling knock-off Chuck Taylors. For the sake of brevity, this post will mainly focus on Converse’s claims against Wal-Mart. Converse is claiming trade dress infringement on the grounds that Wal-Mart’s “Stinson Oxford” shoes are likely to cause consumer confusion.     Converse claims Wal-Mart is unlawfully reproducing its “midsole trademark” which consists of a particular design, including stripes, a toe cap, and a toe bumper. Indeed, in 2013, Converse registered this design with the Patent and Trademark Office.   Background on Trade Dress Protection In Two Pesos, the Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act protects trade dress, which includes the “shape, color or color combinations, texture, [and] graphics” of a product. Trade dress, in the form of a product design, can only be registered and protected, under the Lanham Act, if it acquires secondary meaning. Secondary [read more]
March 15, 2016 0

Pharma Bro and Drug Prices

On a global scale, the pharmaceutical industry makes about 300 billion dollars a year.  One third of that market is controlled by ten of the largest drug companies.  Six of those companies are based in the United States.  It seems that much of the success of these pharmaceutical companies comes at the expense of providing affordable pharmaceuticals for the consumers. Pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli has been making headlines since last year when he acquired the company that produced Daraprim, a drug that treats toxoplasmosis, an infection that can cause blindness or death in pregnant women and people with HIV or certain types of cancer.  Shkreli decided to raise the price of Daraprim from $13.50 a tablet to $750.00 a tablet, which was a 5000% increase in the price overnight.  He later stated in an interview that he believed he should have raised the price even more. In principle,  Shrekli’s fiduciary duty to to shareholders to maximize profits justifies increasing the price of this drug. After all, shareholders include pension funds and other organizations that are important for the stability of the economy and middle class livelihoods. However, Shrekli has been accused of using money from one enterprise to pay an [read more]
March 15, 2016 0

Follow the Crowdfunding

By Dan Ovadia What is Crowdfunding? Crowdfunding is the process by which a business raises a relatively small amount of capital from a large number of funders. Crowdfunding networks rely on social media to get the word out about their product while attracting a broad base of supporters. The crowdfunding concept has arguably existed as far back as the 1700s, but the modern incarnation started in the late 1990s and began building serious momentum in the mid/late 2000s. The global crowdfunding industry continues to grow exponentially with $2.7 billion raised in 2012 and $5.1 billion raised in 2013; experts project that the global market could exceed $90 billion in 2025.   Reward-Based v. Equity-Based Crowdfunding Within the crowdfunding industry, there are two primary funding models: rewards–based and equity–based. Reward based crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter allow companies to offer funders rewards/products in exchange for their support – essentially serving as a presale website. In contrast, equity-based crowdfunding allows funders to take an equity position in the venture. Historically, equity-based crowdfunding was conducted following Rule 506 of Regulation D. Rule 506 provides an exemption from §5 of the Securities Act of 1933 and thus allows companies to fundraise privately from accredited investors (those [read more]

Copyright © 2024 | MH Purity lite WordPress Theme by MH Themes