Law Questions and Answers
Can you copyright something by emailing it to yourself, the same track you can copyright by snail mailing?
So I know you can copyright anything by snail mail it to yourself and not opening it. I be wondering if you email your self something, (like to an email account where on earth all the e-mail is kept online, like gmail) would that prove copyright too?I mingy, it seems to me, that the google's (or microsofts, or yahoo's) servers, should hold up as capably in court as a postmark date stamp. But I don't know for sure.
As a side grill -- if emailing wont work, could I just communication myself a piece of paper next to the md5sum's of the files I want to copyright, along with their size and cross.
As another side question -- is near any sort of website, that will digitally sign a file, contained by a way that proves the date it be signed with an email address, coupled in the signature to prove identity?
Answers: The US Government have a website that answers these questions. Go to the source!
http://www.copyright.gov/
Good luck.
No. The "poor man's copyright" have no legal effect.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-ge...
You in reality own copyright on your work as soon as it's in fixed form (on quality newspaper, on tape, etc). "Copyrighting" your work is in actuality registering it with the US Copyright Office (for US folks).
This connect will tell you closely about copyright registration: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq
Registering copyright is defining, because it's the first step toward being competent to sustain an action for infringement. You're not going to acquire damages without doing so.
The first 2 answers are both particularly good.
Your works are copyright by honesty of you having put them "contained by fixed form".
if you want to register them in lay down to be able to collect on trustworthy damages for infringement, then do so.
see www.chillingeffects.org for definitive details
My friend Quinten is Lieing about his brother at period of war, What should I do?
Well my friend is always lying something like the stupidiest things that i have ever hear of like a month ago i ask him what be wrong he told me that his brother tait was shot contained by the war. And i feel bad for him seriously and it turns out that his brother is staition within fort carson colorado and I confronted him about it and he said that his brother lied to his home about human being in the period of war. I was resembling wow that is some bull shiz you know what i be set to why would you lie nearly something that serious. But he was sent to iraq a month ago and specifically true but what should i do he is my friend but if his going to lie adjectives the time how can i trust him what do you think?Answers: I deliberate your friend craves attention. Try talking to him in the order of his lying. He may be a good kid, lately a little troubled. Don't stop individual his friend.
Some people own low self esteem and concoct stories to get attention and "respect."
Pity him, but repeal. He's not your problem.
Turn the other cheek. Can you truly say you've never lied any?
Is provisional licence required to drive in ireland,if i own an international licence from india?
Answers: check but I think you an drive for up to 6 months but check
South Ireland be lack but look out,
N ireland it is a must have.
You can apply through youre embassy to enjoy your licence accredited as "not detrimental to be driving" in adjectives market and U.K(which is not fully integrated to the EU.
Merry Xmas.
I believe you can drive any where - delight in!
If Bin Ladan Handed himself in, would he get hold of time off his sentence for co-operation?
Answers: If he turned himself into San Francisco authorities, he'd bring probation and some weed to party near.
Sure he will. I promise. Without a doubt.
Now you, tell us where on earth he is.
No, he'd be executed, and rightly so.
Turning yourself in is not the sort of cooperation that get you a lighter sentence anyway.
Dana
No Way!!!!
In England, we'd give him a council house, benefits, and exclusive use of the best lawyer the land can provide.
Bin Laden would be made to feel as comfortable as every other effing foreign asylum hunter - but such is life.
Chances are he's already here.
Yes. 10 years rotten of eternity.
I need to pay packet for a funeral now and dont own the moneywhere can i get give support to quick?
my father-in-law simply pasted away and he have no insurance so me and my husband have to income for it we have 4 kids and are money is really tight we merely have a week to come up near it or the state takes himAnswers: Call your local funeral director's association; they may be capable of hook you up with any a charity or a director who will let you take home a 90 day (or more) sum agreement while you settle his affairs.
I'm sorry...you might want to consider direct cremation as the only odds; it would be cheaper than a full blown funeral. Social Security will pay $255 or so. If he is an honorably discharged veteran, he is also entitled to burial surrounded by a VA cemetery.
I enjoy no relationship to this outfit either, but a friend of mine used them when her FIL passed. http://www.funeraldepot.com
Please adopt my condolences.
Discrimination?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071215/ap_o...Vento posted two small signs in October 2005 at his shop surrounded by a diverse South Philadelphia neighborhood, telling customers, "This is AMERICA: WHEN ORDERING PLEASE 'SPEAK ENGLISH.'"
After extensive publicity within 2006, the commission began investigating whether Vento violated a city ordinance that prohibits nouns in employment, public council house and housing on the basis of see, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
In February, the commission found probable effect against Geno's Steaks for discrimination, alleging that the policy at the shop discourages customers of correct backgrounds from ingestion there.
--------------------------------------...
How is this business owners' sign "This is AMERICA: WHEN ORDERING PLEASE 'SPEAK ENGLISH" nouns on the basis of see, ethnicity or sexual orientation?
Answers: In my perception, this is another example of the member of our overblown legal system, lately wanting to exercise their power.
Immigration is a hot button issue: no doubt just about it. And perhaps the owner could enjoy phrased his notice beside more sensitivity.
But it wasn't overtly racist, if at all; and I reason a mountain is being made out of a mole mound.
Wotan
The article you posted explains very clearly the answer to your press.
Did you read it? Was there a specific segment that you didn't get?
Because the sign may deter other race or ethnic groups from patronizing Geno's, it is arguably a contravention.
Note, I said arguably. For each see or ethnic group which has a extremity deterred for language, here will be members of respectively of those groups who speak English more impeccably than the owner. Geno's counsel should offer statistics on the wide-ranging variety of English speaking those who have patronize it, and use that to demonstrate that the discrimination is linguistic -- not cultural.
I have see several articles about this satchel. Maybe he should just whip down the sign and refuse to confer in any dialect except English.
I don't see how a city can require a business to learn a foreign talking.
I believe this city's prosecution of this business is another example of good intentions gone doomed to failure.
I'm black and I honestly think that populace take stuff entirely too far, conceivably there be no one nearby who spoke anything other than English to embezzle the orders. I plan there are so plentiful more huge issues America is facing, whom ever takes this as discriminating is the rationale why we as an American Race are losing our freakin rights more and more.
What do you think of cultural profiling?
Answers: Our Constitution is now blind to see. Racial profiling contradicts that principle.
I think that surrounded by law enforcement, it is void because it creates varying levels of "innocence" base on what others have done.
If I (an overweight 39 year frail white guy) drive a late model red Corvette surrounded by Southeast DC, cops will simply assume I'm stupid (since I am at risk of getting carjacked)...not criminal.
A racial profiler may presume that an African American driving that same sports car is up to no good, and come up beside a pretext to stop him. It's no secret that you could follow ANYONE for a mile and find some industrial excuse to cite them.
retarded
just cuz you live somewhere, or look, or believe within something
says surely NOTHING about an individual personality
We'll stop having tribal profiling when it's no longer a useful tool for directive enforcement. If any ethnic groups feel they are self singled out, then their leaders should stimulate their young men to disproportionately restrain yourself from committing crimes.
I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. The leaders close to having the "other victimized" excuse.
I have a problem next to it if the authorities are using it to harass a group but I do not enjoy any problems with it if those man stopped are in a group that mostly fits the description of an actual criminal. I see no racism if for example young arab men are stopped routinely at airports and hold additional penetrating done to them. No problem rounding up all the hispanic looking empire in Home Depot parking lot and making them produce positive permit.
It becomes wrong if police would stop a saloon driven by a black man and there be no crimes having be committed. If a black man had a short time ago been reported robbing a wall it would make foolproof sense to stop black men leaving the nouns. It would inconvenience and maybe insult the innocent but only to check them out and make sure they weren't the robber make sense to me.
If the victim of a crime can describe the criminal, later why would you not go after the one that did it?
I believe there's a place for it.
For instance - it's a well set fact that most hackney cab drivers in NYC are robbed by black general public, so they don't like to stop for black culture.
Most terrorists are Middle Eastern males so why not give them more attention at airports than elderly women or small children?
It's a reality of life, but frequent people approaching to pretend otherwise.
At this time racial profiling (which is really a misleading description) is as viable a tool as hose down boarding is.
Certain groups of a few people can be hazardous to the condition of the majority of American people.
We must not cater to political correctness at a possible cost of masses hundreds or thousands, or even one citizens life.
I am prepared for the tidying of the thumbs down crowd.
You do it yourself in a mode as well contained by life.
What do you think roughly speaking this if it was a imperative?
Like a lot of folks within this state, I have a living. I work, they pay me. I pay packet my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it see fit. In order to return with that paycheck, I am required to pass a uninformed urine test near which I have no problem. What I Do own a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to associates who don't have to slip away a urine test. Shouldn'tone enjoy to pass a urine assessment to get a welfare check because I enjoy to pass one to earn it for them? Please grasp, I have no problem near helping people win back on their foot. I do, on the other hand, hold a problem with helping someone
sitting on their bottoms, doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you
envision how much money the state would save if general public had to overrun a urine test to bring a public assistance check ?
Answers: I have said for a long time that welfare should require arbitrary drug screening. I also add that if someone fail, they would be provided access to drug therapy...ONCE.
Edit...to those who deny:
1. The cost would not be huge. You do not have to blind often, and afternoon 1 you would have a immense number of people drop bad welfare for fear of getting caught.
2. Drug test have become deeply inexpensive. I pay $30 to own each of my team screened, and that includes the leadership.
3. Those who think you can assault it, think again. You can measure a drug screen if you know it is coming, but you cannot cadence it if you come in and they vote here is a cup...no warning.
4. As for the children...if the parents are on drugs and not sufficiently expert to provide for their children because they are spending their money on drugs, their children should be taken away. As for the "Foster Care system is overloaded" argument...it is obvious that you are not informed. There are more foster parents than kids. I know 3 foster parents who want more kids and here are not any available.
5. "Unemployed stoners would cost us too much" If they are on welfare, they are costing us too much presently.
6. bigA...you really need to stay sour the drugs. You cannot even complete a thought.
7. The right to privacy argument breaks down. They are not REQUIRED to take the piss question paper unless they want the free money. It is just approaching employment screenings. You do not have to pilfer the test...unless you want the situation. If someone (or in this shield the government...ie the people) are giving you money, they own the right to set conditions...they set conditions now. By the privacy argument, they would not know how to ask what you earn...invasion of your privacy.
8. ACLU...Let's skip the very thought that the operation should be banned for supporting dubious activity (NAMBLA) and shunned by thinking Americans for trampling on the rights of Americans...but they do not own a leg to stand on because of the answer in number 7.
(1) It would cost more than it would hide away to administer
(2) the lab fees would be enormous
(3) THe culture who wanted to would stuff it.
I agree with you, thats crazy.
Im the creature who does drugs, but I work for the money to pay for it. I dont work while on drugs.
i.e. a really good hypothesis, actually...
as long as they do it right at that moment, as opposing bringing it in from home...
and it wouldn't be volatile, but required...
and i think those who don't slip away the test should a moment ago get smaller quantity money than those who do because then they would adjectives die and we would have inert hobos and crackwhores in the street and nobody to verbs them up
Good point lets start a petition.
PS You are gorgeous will you marry me?
PS again. The relations who answer this question negatively are the ones who are getting a welfare/crazy check and are on the drugs lol!
I love this hypothesis except it would effect the children and dependants of the drug user.
Good thinking.
The states would have so much money from not have to give assistance that it'd be a windfall. However, you must remember that it's not the adults that necessarily obligation the assistance, it's the children. You take away the assistance from stupid adults who decide to do drugs & embezzle it out of the mouths & off the back of the innocent children. Take the children away? Yeah right, our foster care system is overloaded as is.
I'm sorry, but your solution wouldn't work where on earth children are involved. Yes, there are those short children receiving assistance, but not as frequent as those who have children & receive assistance.
omg.. sorry...idk whut ur cross-examine is cuz its too long and boring
thanx for the 2 pts though!!
=D
The tv show dexter?
this may sound stupid,but what court trouble would dexter morgan get into if he get caught?seeing as the whole kill killer item kinda messes with morality,but from a permitted standpoint what would he get?natural life?Answers: In society we have established that murder is still murder, even if you have a hugely good cause. And mass murder is still mass murder, in his shield. His best chance of getting away would be a hung jury or a mistrial, if his attorney could stir up satisfactory sympathy in the jury.
He would credible get the demise penalty. If not that, multiple consecutive go sentences without parole.
Since his wipe out count is at least surrounded by the 30s or 40s or so.
Wife got fired from opening in georgia because of mistaken identity. Is near anything we can do?
My wife just started working for this toddler entertainment center a week ago. An email come to the company stating that the women working the snack stand had a discouraging attitude. Both she and another girl were working the snack stand duplicate day. When my wife get the call from the living stating that they received complaints and that she was fired she asked if they described her surrounded by the email. The manager said "sort of". The other women who be also at the snack stand still has her duty. They are both dark skinned beside long hair and adjectives wear the same uniform. If this impartial? Should they do some sort of investagation for both women before firing since they both be working the same position that daytime? What should my wife do?Answers: While Georgia IS an employment at will State they do have to bequeath a reason for firing you even though it can be for almost any non protected principle. Also they have to enjoy written evidence of the reason they are firing you, such as write ups etc. She should Consult first the department of Labor, consequently Consult the EEOC which is Located in Atlanta surrounded by Georgia.
She probably will not get her mission back but she could force them to settle their portion of Unemployment while your wife is looking for another Job.
Good Luck. If we just contribute up then we enjoy lost, never give up.
Georgia is an employment at will State. They can fire her for no motivation at all.
All she can do is look for another available job.
Richard
She could see an attorney for unfair termination (since it wasn't abiding who it was) and possibly end up getting a settlement out of it.
She should dance get a free consultation.
Sort of vehicle they wanted to achieve rid of her anyway. You could take issue but it will draw from you nowhere.
In your heart you know what really happened.
More Questions and Answers:
[266] - [1093] - [2046] - [479] - [1476] - [480] - [2051] - [1212] - [114] - [118] - [1495] - [158] - [364] - [2412] - [1240] - [1770] - [753] - [401] - [2507] - [1034]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: