Categories
Copyright Law

Copyright Law

June 9, 2014 Update:

In May 2014, the United States Supreme Court ruled the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 100 et seq., allows plaintiff to bring an action for copyright infringement 18 years after the initial act of infringement for continuing infringements. Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (May 19, 2014, 2014 DJDAR 6168). The look back period is controlled by the Act statute of limitations, which is three years. The defendant does not have the equitable defense of laches, which is unreasonable and prejudicial delay of the plaintiff in bringing the action. The Petrella case involved the alleged infringing work of the movie Raging Bull, based on the life of boxing champion Jake LaMotta. The plaintiff, Paula Petrella, is the daughter of the original copyright owner, Frank Petrella, who with Jake LaMotta created the 1963 screenplay.

Categories
Consumer Law

Consumer Law

California consumer protection laws consist of the California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and unfair competition law (UCL). CLRA is contained in California Civil Code §§ 1750-1784. UCL is codified in Business & Professions Code § 1720 et seq.

Consumers are protected from unfair, unlawful, fraudulent and deceptive business practices. Proper written notice of the alleged violation and a demand that the problem be corrected is the first step to protecting your consumer rights.

Categories
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)

Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Overview

Justice Kennedy covers the history and purpose of DOMA legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 1996 in United States v. Windsor 570 U.S ___ (2013).

Congress sought to prevent what it perceived as pending recognition of same-sex marriages being considered by a few states, particularly Hawaii, from having any federal recognition. The Windsor case involved $363,053 estate taxes paid by Edith Windsor, which would not have been assessed but for her same-sex marriage recognized by the State of New York, but not recognized by the federal government (IRS) because of DOMA.  The Windsor case only decided Section 3 of DOMA.