Thomas Gibbons, another steamboat operator, competed with Aaron Ogden on this same route but held a federal coasting license issued by an act of Congress. Ogden filed a complaint in New York court to stop Gibbons from operating his boats, claiming that the monopoly granted by New York was legal even though he operated on shared, interstate waters. Gibbons disagreed arguing that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the sole power over interstate commerce. After losing twice in New York courts, Gibbons appealed the case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court determined that the commerce clause of the Constitution grants the federal government the power to determine how interstate commerce is conducted.
The US Supreme Court basically found that copyright law gave the copyright owner the right to restrict others from making their own copies of a work. However, it did not give them any rights to control what happened to books after they sold them. This case described what is now knows as the first sale doctrine, and is codified in 17 U.S.C. §109(a). The first sale doctrine basically says that once someone buys a legitimate copy of a work, they can do whatever they want with it, including sell it to others, or lend it out, or whatever.
The case of Gibbons vs. Ogden began to develop in 1807 when the rights to navigation not just between Albany and New York City, but of all New York waters were sold to Aaron Ogden. The federal government granted a license to another steamboat manager, Thomas Gibbons, entitling him to run ships in the Hudson River, which was supposedly Ogden’s. Ogden obtained a court order from a New York State Court forbidding Gibbons from operating his ferry in New York waters, on the basis that navigation was not a distinct form of commerce and therefore, was to be regulated by the state. Gibbons argued that according to the Constitution, Congress has the power to “regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states”, therefore his federally granted license was still valid despite the ruling of the state court. Ogden claimed that this was true only for goods, not navigation.
Copyright Laws: Argument For and Against Final Paper Outline * Introduction * Rise in popularity of the internet * Copyright infringement * Meaning of piracy * Purpose of copyright laws * Protect creators of artistic works * U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 * Items that are able to be copyright protected * Items that cannot be protected * Changes to copyright laws * Arguments for copyright laws * Implementation of ideas * Copyright clause if the U.S. Constitution * First Amendment * Idea is not protected the implementation is * Arguments against copyright laws * Ownership rights * Undeserved monopoly * Prevents flow of information * Rapid expansion * My Opinion * Creators deserve compensation * Monopoly * Other means of protection * War on piracy * Theft * monitoring * Conclusion * Protects originators of creative works * Arguments for and against copyright laws With the rise in popularity and the proliferation of the internet, copyright infringement has risen to the forefront of many people’s minds. News stories portraying individuals that are being prosecuted for online copyright infringement have increased dramatically in recent years, with individuals that are found to be infringing on copyrights being labeled as pirates. Piracy has taken on a new definition, previously piracy was known as the act of attacking and robbing ships at sea. However, in the digital age piracy has taken on a whole new meaning, it is now known as the act of downloading or obtaining copyrighted material without compensating the creator of the material.
Finding the Optimal Copyright term b. Renewable Copyright Terms c. Concluding Remarks 3. Changing the Scope of Copyright Laws a. Alternative Compensation Model b. Creative Commons or let the artist decide aa. the licence bb.the code cc.
The eleventh amendment to the Constitution says....suits against states (Suits against states) 12. The twelfth amendment to the Constitution says....election of the Pres. (Election of the Pres.) 13. The thirteenth amendment to the Constitution says....slavery is invalid (Slavery is invalid) 14.
Criminal law arrived in the US in the form of common law, brought by the colonists from their native European, African, and Asian homelands (Robinson, 2007). This miasma wrought political havoc, as differing ideologies sought to deal with the matter of crime and punishment. Add to this, the problem of managing a federalist system, with centralized and local authority or sovereignty, requiring two systems of courts: Federal and State (Ryan, 2009). As early as 1776, Thomas Jefferson proposed legislation in the newly declared State of Virginia, hoping to enact reforms based upon the theory of prevention outlined in the works of Cesare Beccaria, developed by Jeremy Bentham, and made usable by John Stuart Mill (Robinson 2007). These efforts were to no avail.
The Monroe Doctrine is a policy of the United States that was introduced on December 2, 1823. It states that European countries colonize land or interfere with states in America would be viewed, by the United States of America, as acts of aggression requiring United States intervention. The Monroe Doctrine asserted that the Western Hemisphere was not to be colonized by European countries and that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries. The Doctrine was issued at a time when many Latin American countries were on the edge of becoming independent from the Spanish Empire and the United States, reflecting concerns echoed by Great Britain, hoped to avoid having any European power take Spain's colonies. The United States was young and did not have powers to back up the Monroe Doctrine.
Tactical Vandalism -the damage done is a conscious tactic used to advance some end other than acquiring money or property. Ideological vandalism is considered to be tactical, with the purpose of drawing attention, and gaining publicity. So also is the act of slogan writing, and property defacement. Vindictive Vandalism-the property is damaged as revenge, especially where one feels that he/she has been unfairly treated. Malicious Vandalism- the act is enjoyed for its own sake, and expresses malice, aggression and anger, which are found by the perpetrator to be amusing.
There is much to be said for the view of Bailhache J. that the circumstances of the contract in Monforts v. Marsden 12 were such as to negative the implied condition that the vendor had a right to sell the machine; but in so far as it decides that the vendor had fulfilled the condition, I think the decision is erroneous and ought to be overruled. ATKIN L.J. This was an action for breach of warranty on the sale of goods. The first question is, What was the contract between the parties? In my opinion it was contained in the two documents dated August 18, 1919.