Robbins spoke on the laws that some states have passed banning minors from viewing or purchasing violent video games without an adult and feels such law should not exist (1). A big part of Robbins focus is the unfairness video games face. She feels that the governments involvement in prohibiting sale or
U.S vs Katz Facts: The petitioner, Katz, was convicted of transmitting illegal gambling information over the telephone lines from Los Angeles to Boston and Miami. These illegal transactions were in violation of the federal law. Katz used a public telephone booth to do these illegal gambling procedures. A surveillance was set up at these booths by the FBI which were listening devices and placed at the top of the booths so that the conversations could be recorded. The tapes from the conversations were entered into the trial as evidence.
Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided? No, because there was never a contract. Chou could however say that there was a mistake Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker on his part with the e-mail that he mistaken made the assumption that it
Lithwick:Teens, Nude Photos and the Law In this article, published in Newsweek, the author explains the harsh possible outcomes from teenagers sending at the own free will nude photos of themselves to their mates or lovers. Something that the author defines as “sexting” epidemic and analyses how the law is treating offenders and victims. The author makes an obvious claim that the criminal-justice system is too harsh to solve any issues that deal with teens and technology because this issue is becoming more common and although he doesn’t examine different or alternative ways to solve the problem, personally I agree with him that the law should not interfere with such juvenile cases because being exposed to others instead of the person it was intended for is punishment enough. In the article, the author brings personal stories which highlight three
It seems to be a legal blunder that is very straight forward, but becomes a heated debate. It begins with the argument should we prosecute a gamer for stealing via the virtual world? Alex Weiss is correct in saying that prosecution for virtual theft is wrong in the scheme of things, because each player reacts differently to behaviors. Even though a person is a “raider” in a game, it doesn’t make them a criminal in the real world. Weiss opens up his article with, “As a reformed online gaming thief, this ruling makes no sense to me.
The claim: The 1st Amendment in the US constitution is freedom of speech, and prohibiting a person from burning the American flag is undermining a person’s rights. The grounds: The Us constitution tried to amend the first amendment to prohibit flag burning, and also try to equate flag burning with cross burning. In Vietnamese they don’t questions their citizen rights about protesting about burning the flag. Burning the flag in Vietnamese maybe distasteful, but in some cases it is legitimate expression of free speech. The warrant: Denying Americans their freedom of speech.
Placing a ban on many of the weapons that private citizens own today has stirred an uproar as to what this new ban will do to a nation who takes pride in its amendments. Many people believe that there is no way possible to effectively enforce this new weapons ban and that it does take some of the rights away previously given to American citizens through the Bill of Rights. Determining the effectiveness of the weapons ban of 2013, and exploring the differences between the proposed ban, and the weapons ban of 1994 will prove to be
Andrew Iglesias June 2, 2014 Period 1 ENG 2 Argumentative Paper Gun control has been a very controversial topic and with all of the relevant events it’s become bigger and people want an end to their right to bear arms but what people are failing to recognize is that guns don’t kill people…. People do and that’s just how it is. The right to bear arms should be kept protected because we should be able to feel free and also be able to protect ourselves. By putting an end to the right to bear arms we are basically just taking away a form of protection from the honest person and giving the “criminals” more power and might as well be arming them ourselves. “Criminals” will always find a way to get ahold of something they want, take a look at drugs for example it’s illegal but that hasn’t stopped these people from acquiring it.
So the question rises, why are performance enhancing drugs not legalized? Various forms of performance enhancement drugs have been utilized for centuries and yet it is still illegal for professional athletes to use these pharmaceuticals (Richard I.G. Holt 84). These drugs should remain illegal, it is an unfair advantage against other athletes constituting it as simple as cheating (Dillingham 91) and most importantly these actions have an effect not only on their bodies but also all of the sport fanatics. Dillingham states that steroids are a form of cheating creating an unfair advantage to those who take them breaking the social contract athletes have implicitly agreed to: We are going to have a fair contest (Dillingham 91).
Digital Piracy (Copyright Infringement) according to the copyright.gov (the US government’s copyright enforcement website) is the reproduction, distribution, performance, public display, or modification of a work without the permission of the copyright owner (U.S. Copyright Office). Copyright infringement has become an increasingly prevalent scourge in today’s society as intellectual material such as music, games, movies, shows and novels are reproduced and distributed illegally without the consent of the creator. I am an advocate of the protection of intellectual material both digitally and otherwise after having written a couple of songs and poems I would not want them to pop up somewhere on the internet without royalty being paid to me. Around the world, people that have access to the internet can download digital content free of charge using peer to peer tools as well as file sharing websites.