ballp.it

Projects => Other Projects => Song Crimes => Topic started by: Cheapskate on September 05, 2017, 06:25:07 pm

Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 05, 2017, 06:25:07 pm
As long as we’re going to have our own subforum, I might as well start a thread where you can ask me about law stuff unrelated to song lyrics, and I’ll provide you with words that are not legal advice and that you should not rely upon. So this is that thread.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: SATAN MILKSHAKE on September 05, 2017, 07:25:50 pm
Cheapskate is not a law firm
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on September 05, 2017, 07:52:01 pm
Knowing that this will vary from state to state, or maybe even city to city, can you explain implied easements to me?  Like, this path from this public street onto this public property has been open for 50 years and now there's a locked gate there, and "we never meant for that to be used as an entrance."  Is there some degree to which 50 years of unfettered access sets a precedent - is that a common law entrance now?
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 05, 2017, 09:47:55 pm
Knowing that this will vary from state to state, or maybe even city to city, can you explain implied easements to me?  Like, this path from this public street onto this public property has been open for 50 years and now there's a locked gate there, and "we never meant for that to be used as an entrance."  Is there some degree to which 50 years of unfettered access sets a precedent - is that a common law entrance now?
Victor Laszlo, September 05, 2017, 07:52:01 pm

That depends on what people were doing on that path for fifty years. My state (Idaho) has a pretty common rule for prescriptive easements. (That’s what we call an easement that you get by open use of a property—an implied easement is one you get when you subdivide a single parcel and don’t leave a public right-of-way running onto one of the new parcels.) You get a prescriptive easement if your use of the pathway is:

• open and notorious (you’re crossing the path in a way that people can see you do it, not skulking furtively about)
• continuous and uninterrupted (there wasn’t another closed gate there)
• adverse and under a claim of right (you had reason to believe that you were allowed to cross the path, and the owner didn’t expressly permit you to use the path)
• with the actual or imputed knowledge of the owner of the servient tenement (the guy who owns the path knew, or had reason to know, you were using it)
• for the statutory period of five years (self-explanatory).

Note that third one: if I’m just putting up a sign that says anyone can use the path, it’s not a prescriptive easement. It’s only a prescriptive easement if you don’t have the right to use it, but I’m not stopping you. In this case, a guy loses his prescriptive easement, in part, because the other guys put a lock on the gate, but gave him a key to open the gate. (https://isc.idaho.gov/opinions/41277.pdf)

Because they’re hard to prove, prescriptive easements usually don’t actually happen except in cases where there’s an old surveyor’s error and a road spills onto somebody else’s property.

Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Baldr on September 05, 2017, 11:39:43 pm
Let's say I work on a personal project that ends up making money.  Is my employer legally entitled to that money if I have not signed a contract that states anything produced outside of work belongs to them?  You can assume that I wouldn't be dumb enough to use employer resources on the project, work on it while at the place of employment, or take paid leave (like a sabbatical) to work on the project.

I'm asking because I've spent an hour or two trying to Google this and I've seen every possible answer pop up.  This is the most useful resource (https://www.aaup.org/issues/copyright-distance-education-intellectual-property/resources-copyright-distance-education-and/intellectual-property-issues-faculty) I've come across for my situation, but it seems to indicate that the matter hasn't been settled in case law.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 06, 2017, 07:13:56 am
Let's say I work on a personal project that ends up making money.  Is my employer legally entitled to that money if I have not signed a contract that states anything produced outside of work belongs to them?  You can assume that I wouldn't be dumb enough to use employer resources on the project, work on it while at the place of employment, or take paid leave (like a sabbatical) to work on the project.

I'm asking because I've spent an hour or two trying to Google this and I've seen every possible answer pop up.  This is the most useful resource (https://www.aaup.org/issues/copyright-distance-education-intellectual-property/resources-copyright-distance-education-and/intellectual-property-issues-faculty) I've come across for my situation, but it seems to indicate that the matter hasn't been settled in case law.
Healslime, September 05, 2017, 11:39:43 pm

If an actual IP lawyer is telling you “we don’t know,” then a guy who isn‘t an IP lawyer will also tell you “we don’t know.”
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on September 06, 2017, 11:55:23 am
Knowing that this will vary from state to state, or maybe even city to city, can you explain implied easements to me?  Like, this path from this public street onto this public property has been open for 50 years and now there's a locked gate there, and "we never meant for that to be used as an entrance."  Is there some degree to which 50 years of unfettered access sets a precedent - is that a common law entrance now?
Victor Laszlo, September 05, 2017, 07:52:01 pm

That depends on what people were doing on that path for fifty years. My state (Idaho) has a pretty common rule for prescriptive easements. (That’s what we call an easement that you get by open use of a property—an implied easement is one you get when you subdivide a single parcel and don’t leave a public right-of-way running onto one of the new parcels.) You get a prescriptive easement if your use of the pathway is:

• open and notorious (you’re crossing the path in a way that people can see you do it, not skulking furtively about)
• continuous and uninterrupted (there wasn’t another closed gate there)
• adverse and under a claim of right (you had reason to believe that you were allowed to cross the path, and the owner didn’t expressly permit you to use the path)
• with the actual or imputed knowledge of the owner of the servient tenement (the guy who owns the path knew, or had reason to know, you were using it)
• for the statutory period of five years (self-explanatory).

Note that third one: if I’m just putting up a sign that says anyone can use the path, it’s not a prescriptive easement. It’s only a prescriptive easement if you don’t have the right to use it, but I’m not stopping you. In this case, a guy loses his prescriptive easement, in part, because the other guys put a lock on the gate, but gave him a key to open the gate. (https://isc.idaho.gov/opinions/41277.pdf)

Because they’re hard to prove, prescriptive easements usually don’t actually happen except in cases where there’s an old surveyor’s error and a road spills onto somebody else’s property.
Cheapskate, September 05, 2017, 09:47:55 pm

Interesting, thanks.  We are having a neighborhood tiff - the school had an open sidewalk up from one side of the building.  10 years ago they put a gate up without telling anyone.  The community erupted and they agreed to unlock the gate on evenings and weekends.  This evolved into the gate being unlocked all the time because the guy whose job it was to lock it wasn't interested in locking it.  They renovated the school a couple of years ago, which required tearing out the fence and gate and sidewalk.  Open access during renovation.  Then they replaced the pedestrian gate with a vehicle-sized gate, which stood unlocked for over a year, and was used freely by the community.  Last month when school started they locked the gate again and when the community complained they agreed to unlock it evenings and weekends again as before, except this time the gate is always locked because the guy whose job it is isn't interested in unlocking it before he leaves.  The community is petitioning the school to unlock the gate for pickup and dropoff times and the nighborhood armchair lawyers were hoping that the history of access there might be an argument for a prescriptive easement - you have to let us use the gate because in over 50 years there's never been more than half-assed effort to restrict gate use.  It doesn't sound like we are correct, from what you're telling me.



Baldr, just tell the school that you made the project while you were working as an Uber driver and they'll have to sue Uber if they want part of it.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Baldr on September 06, 2017, 01:33:57 pm
If an actual IP lawyer is telling you “we don’t know,” then a guy who isn‘t an IP lawyer will also tell you “we don’t know.”
Cheapskate, September 06, 2017, 07:13:56 am

I figured that would be the answer, but I was holding out hope that it might be easier.  Thanks for letting me know I was right to be confused.

Just tell the school that you made the project while you were working as an Uber driver and they'll have to sue Uber if they want part of it.Victor Laszlo, September 06, 2017, 11:55:23 am

That's a possibility.  I am bad enough at driving that I could plausibly be employed by Uber.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 06, 2017, 10:26:47 pm
Interesting, thanks.  We are having a neighborhood tiff - the school had an open sidewalk up from one side of the building.  10 years ago they put a gate up without telling anyone.  The community erupted and they agreed to unlock the gate on evenings and weekends.  This evolved into the gate being unlocked all the time because the guy whose job it was to lock it wasn't interested in locking it.  They renovated the school a couple of years ago, which required tearing out the fence and gate and sidewalk.  Open access during renovation.  Then they replaced the pedestrian gate with a vehicle-sized gate, which stood unlocked for over a year, and was used freely by the community.  Last month when school started they locked the gate again and when the community complained they agreed to unlock it evenings and weekends again as before, except this time the gate is always locked because the guy whose job it is isn't interested in unlocking it before he leaves.  The community is petitioning the school to unlock the gate for pickup and dropoff times and the nighborhood armchair lawyers were hoping that the history of access there might be an argument for a prescriptive easement - you have to let us use the gate because in over 50 years there's never been more than half-assed effort to restrict gate use.  It doesn't sound like we are correct, from what you're telling me.
Victor Laszlo, September 06, 2017, 11:55:23 am

It’ll depend on what happened before the gate went up, and what the statutory use period is in your state.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Liatai on April 25, 2018, 07:09:23 am
I'm kind of surprised no one brought this up already, but here goes.

The ball-kicking contract from F Plus episode 64. What WOULD happen if two guys went into a lawyer's office and wanted to have a contract made whereby the kicked hereby absolves the kicker of any wrongdoing or grievance related to the kicker kicking the kicked in the nuts? :B

We know from previous Song Crimes episodes that you can't consent to getting beaten up. What... what would even happen in that case? x3;
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on April 25, 2018, 07:51:09 am
I'm kind of surprised no one brought this up already, but here goes.

The ball-kicking contract from F Plus episode 64. What WOULD happen if two guys went into a lawyer's office and wanted to have a contract made whereby the kicked hereby absolves the kicker of any wrongdoing or grievance related to the kicker kicking the kicked in the nuts? :B

We know from previous Song Crimes episodes that you can't consent to getting beaten up. What... what would even happen in that case? x3;
Liatai, April 25, 2018, 07:09:23 am

If this happens after the guy gets kicked, and the kicker gives the kickee something in exchange, this is a pretty standard settlement agreement for a personal injury claim. Wouldn’t prevent the cops from arresting the kicker or the state from prosecuting him, though.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Liatai on April 25, 2018, 08:46:38 am
A mystery solved! :D What if it happened before the act, though? Premeditated, agreed-upon groin-kicking?
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Ambious on April 25, 2018, 04:59:20 pm
Is it legal for a podcast to be fucking awesome and at the same time to not have released a new episode since February 13th?
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on April 25, 2018, 05:34:59 pm
A mystery solved! :D What if it happened before the act, though? Premeditated, agreed-upon groin-kicking?
Liatai, April 25, 2018, 08:46:38 am

You can’t waive liability for an intentional tort before it happens. Accidental torts, yes (that’s what all the waivers you sign before dangerous activities do): intentional, no.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Liatai on April 26, 2018, 02:05:07 am
(Scene; two dudes are in a lawyer's office, having drafted up a ball-kicking contract, as though in the first case.)

Lawyer: So, when did this incident occur?

Dude A: What's today's date?

Lawyer: Let me check. (XX/YY/20ZZ) according to my computer.

Dude A: Awesome!

(Dude A turns to Dude B and nods. Dude B nods as well and they both stand up. Dude B kicks Dude A in the groin.)

Lawyer: What the --

Dude B: It's cool, man. We just wanted to get the paperwork ready before it happened.

Dude A: (whimpering) Y-yeah.... 'cause it's hard to... write stuff after being... kicked in the nads.... y'know? Ow...

Dude B: I gotcha, bro. Just sign and date. Here's the agreed-upon ice pack and ten bucks.

Dude A: Cool... Just slide the contract over, man...

Lawyer: ..... I wish I could say this was the strangest thing I'd seen in practice.

(End scene)
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on May 10, 2018, 03:28:54 pm
(a) As used in this section "animal" includes every living creature, domestic or wild, except a human being.

(b) It shall be unlawful within any area of the county for any person to offer or give away any live animal as a prize or reward in connection with any raffle, protest, demonstration, promotion, or as a part of any gratuity or pecuniary exchange to induce entry into any game, contest or other competition, except livestock offered or given away as a part of a farm youth education program.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the auction or sale of animals.

(d) Any person who shall violate this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or imprisonment for a term not to exceed twelve (12) months, or both for each offense. Each offering or giving away of an animal in violation of this section shall be deemed a separate offense.

Am I correct in interpreting this section of my local legal code as saying that it is legal to raffle off a live a human being?
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on May 10, 2018, 05:47:25 pm
Raffling off a person wouldn’t be covered by your county code, but if it involves unlawfully restraining someone and then releasing them to the holder of a winning ticket, it would be kidnapping. (http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19751) And, of course, you can’t own a person in the U.S.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: SATAN MILKSHAKE on May 11, 2018, 06:10:50 am
According to this legal code, while you can't offer a raffle for a live cow, you can offer a raffle for a dead cow, and I have to assume that temporarily stopping a cow's heart and then immediately resuscitating it would be frowned on by the courts.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on May 11, 2018, 07:21:25 am
If the cow can be resuscitated, it isn’t dead, pursuant to the Uniform Determination of Death Act. (http://www.uniformlaws.org/shared/docs/determination%20of%20death/udda80.pdf) The act only applies to people, but I’d take it as advisory when applied to animals.

(Political candidates in Saipan raffle off goats as fundraisers all the time.)
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: LaserSeusan on May 11, 2018, 11:01:33 am
So, speaking from a purely legal point of view, how often should I have butt sex with my girlfriend?
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on May 11, 2018, 08:22:49 pm
What on earth could have led you to think that lawyers would know anything about enjoyable varieties of sex?
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on May 13, 2018, 12:08:58 pm
Raffling off a person wouldn’t be covered by your county code, but if it involves unlawfully restraining someone and then releasing them to the holder of a winning ticket, it would be kidnapping. (http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19751) And, of course, you can’t own a person in the U.S.
Cheapskate, May 10, 2018, 05:47:25 pm

Can I raffle off a child? It’s not really ownership per se.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on May 13, 2018, 05:53:51 pm
Maybe, if you’re raffling them off to one of your relatives. Your state‘s adoption code doesn’t require state agency investigation or approval for relative adoptions.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Ambious on May 24, 2018, 08:32:59 am
Is there a phone spam law in the US?
I keep getting calls from this US based company trying to sell me investment packages.
Not sure where they got my number or how they know I'm a US citizen.
In Israel I can sue them if they don't stop calling me after I specifically asked them to remove me from their lists.
Is there such a thing in the US?
They seem to be California based if that matters.

Edited: To be clear, I'm not actually interesting in suing anyone because that's stupid.
I just wanna get them to stop calling me.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on May 24, 2018, 11:46:37 pm
Is there a phone spam law in the US?
I keep getting calls from this US based company trying to sell me investment packages.
Not sure where they got my number or how they know I'm a US citizen.
In Israel I can sue them if they don't stop calling me after I specifically asked them to remove me from their lists.
Is there such a thing in the US?
They seem to be California based if that matters.

Edited: To be clear, I'm not actually interesting in suing anyone because that's stupid.
I just wanna get them to stop calling me.
Ambious, May 24, 2018, 08:32:59 am

In theory, you can sign up for the Do Not Call (https://www.donotcall.gov) registry. In practice, phone numbers are easily spoofed so they will never be caught if they violate the law.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on May 25, 2018, 09:11:22 am
Is there a phone spam law in the US?
I keep getting calls from this US based company trying to sell me investment packages.
Not sure where they got my number or how they know I'm a US citizen.
In Israel I can sue them if they don't stop calling me after I specifically asked them to remove me from their lists.
Is there such a thing in the US?
They seem to be California based if that matters.

Edited: To be clear, I'm not actually interesting in suing anyone because that's stupid.
I just wanna get them to stop calling me.
Ambious, May 24, 2018, 08:32:59 am

In theory, you can sign up for the Do Not Call (https://www.donotcall.gov) registry. In practice, phone numbers are easily spoofed so they will never be caught if they violate the law.
Cheapskate, May 24, 2018, 11:46:37 pm

Yeah. one time I said to one of these phone spammers "you know I'm on the do not call list, right?" and his response was "oh yeah? how's that working out for you?"
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Ambious on May 25, 2018, 02:09:59 pm
Is there a phone spam law in the US?
I keep getting calls from this US based company trying to sell me investment packages.
Not sure where they got my number or how they know I'm a US citizen.
In Israel I can sue them if they don't stop calling me after I specifically asked them to remove me from their lists.
Is there such a thing in the US?
They seem to be California based if that matters.

Edited: To be clear, I'm not actually interesting in suing anyone because that's stupid.
I just wanna get them to stop calling me.
Ambious, May 24, 2018, 08:32:59 am

In theory, you can sign up for the Do Not Call (https://www.donotcall.gov) registry. In practice, phone numbers are easily spoofed so they will never be caught if they violate the law.
Cheapskate, May 24, 2018, 11:46:37 pm

Yeah. one time I said to one of these phone spammers "you know I'm on the do not call list, right?" and his response was "oh yeah? how's that working out for you?"
Victor Laszlo, May 25, 2018, 09:11:22 am

Also it only lets you put in a US based number, so it won't even let me input mine.
Guess I'll just have to rely on TrueCaller.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on September 16, 2018, 07:46:58 pm
Hypothetical situation:

An old man and his wife die.  It is not clear who inherits their home but they are survived by two sons, who we'll call Hank and Dean.  Dean is a CPA and assumed to be a fairly regular joe based on holding down a career.  This is in contrast to Hank, who continues to live in the basement of the parents' home (maybe he moved upstairs, I guess). 

While the parents were alive, Hank was a Boo Radley, rumored to be a severe alcoholic.  No longer living like a basement troll has given evidence that Hank has a drug problem - numerous police visits to the house for things like "terroristic threatening", "fraud" and "larceny"; cars showing up at 2a with super loud music blasting, Hank walks out to talk to someone in the driver's seat for a minute, then car leaves; the house and vehicles falling into disrepair.  The police are there again tonight, for the fourth time in about three months.

The house is still listed as being owned by the estate of the parents with Dean as the executor of the estate.  Generally speaking, does Dean have any exposure or liability for Hank's actions at the house?  If Hank and Dean inherited the house 50/50 but Hank lives there and Dean has his own residence, does that affect the answer? 

The house is within 1000 feet of a school, so if Hank is selling drugs including pills it's a class D felony in our fair commonwealth.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 16, 2018, 07:59:38 pm
Criminally? Not on the facts you’ve described to me.

Civilly? If Hank was required to pay restitution as a result of a crime, or if any of his other creditors came after him, the creditors would only be able to collect against Hank’s portion of the estate. If Dean pulled some shenanigans to prevent Hank from getting the estate, he could be liable for a fraudulent transfer.

But in general, legally, you are not your brother’s keeper.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Victor Laszlo on September 16, 2018, 08:20:48 pm
Interesting.  These websites
https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/drug-activity-and-real-estate.html (https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/drug-activity-and-real-estate.html)
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/criminal-acts-activities-landlord-liability-faq.html (https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/criminal-acts-activities-landlord-liability-faq.html)
which I admit are Not A Lawyer (I'm sure you hate people consulting Google, Esq almost as much as I hate people consulting Dr Google) suggests that at least in some states it is a crime to "control or manage" a property or to be a landlord and "knowingly allow" drug activity to take place.

Obviously Dean is not a landlord in this situation, but it seems like the law of nuisance would apply liability to the owner/executor if he is aware of illegal activity on his property and does not curtail it.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 17, 2018, 07:08:08 am
There’s not enough information here to determine if Dean is a property manager.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Liatai on September 17, 2018, 07:03:04 pm
Is there anything legally someone can do if an abusive relative keeps trying to get in contact with them, even if the person does not want contact with the abusive relative? The abuse is not physical or sexual, the abuser is very careful not to lay a hand on the victim(s).

If the person tells the relative no, or just doesn't reply, the abuser has a history of showing up uninvited (from six hours away, no less) just to chew the person out and try to force them into contact. Usually by offering expensive gifts and then getting offended and angry, saying things like "look at how much money and gas I spent to get here and on this thing, this is all your fault! I'M A NICE GUY!"
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 17, 2018, 10:28:13 pm
In some states, that makes you eligible for a restraining order: in others, it doesn’t.

In any state, you can send anyone a letter telling them that you don’t want any more contact with them, and that if they arrive at your property, you’ll call the police to report them for trespassing. Some states may also allow telephone harassment charges if you get too many calls or messages.

If you live near a family justice center, (https://www.familyjusticecenter.org/affiliated-centers/) visit them for help with safety planning.
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Liatai on September 17, 2018, 11:04:33 pm
Two questions, then -- one, if someone's renting their place of residence, do they still have the right legally to tell someone to get off "their" property? Where does that right extend to? If someone were, say, lurking outside the apartment door or sitting in the parking lot waiting for the inhabitant(s) to leave. The landlord does not live on the premises.

And two, if the victim did need to call the police due to the abuser testing boundaries and showing up uninvited in spite of a letter (which the victim has retained dated copies of, of course), what would be best to say to the police to inform them of the situation? Ideally to reduce the risk of someone getting shot as much as possible, because these people do live in the USA. ^^;
Title: Unrelated Law Things
Post by: Cheapskate on September 18, 2018, 05:09:00 pm
The tenant’s right to exclude someone extends to all the areas in the lease, not to any common areas in an apartment complex. The landlord can exclude people from any common areas.

If you trespass someone and they come back, tell the police you’ve trespassed someone and they came back. If the police shoot the trespasser, it’s not your fault.