The Fair Use Doctrine has been a practice used in the United State Supreme Courts dating back to 1841 in the case of Folsom v. Marsh. In this case “the court’s definition of what constituted a "justifiable use of the original materials" formed the basis of the "fair use" doctrine” (ARL staff‚ 2014). The court must decide if the case meets four factors noted in section 107 of the Copyright Act when considering the Fair Use defense‚ “the purpose and character of your use‚ the nature of the copyrighted
Premium Copyright Fair use Property
Mapp v. Ohio‚ 367 U.S. 1081‚ 81 S. Ct. 1684‚ 6 L. Ed. 2d 1081 (1961) Facts: On May 23rd‚ 1957‚ three Cleveland police officers arrived at the home of Mrs. Mapp with information that ‘a person was hiding out in the home‚ who was wanted for questioning in connection with a recent bombing‚ and that there was a large amount of policy paraphernalia being hidden in the home’. Mrs. Mapp and her daughter lived on the top floor of the two-family dwelling. Upon their arrival at that house‚ the officers
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Exclusionary rule
Alternative Dispute Resolution The case selected is a construction defect case‚ Haynes v. Adair Homes‚ Inc. The case was lastly filed in the Court of Appeals of The State of Oregon. Hynes v. Adair Homes was initially filed in the Clackamas County Circuit Court. The plaintiffs Paul and Renee Haynes contracted with the defendant Adair Homes‚ Inc. for the construction of their home. After completion of the house‚ they discovered extensive water in the underfloor crawlspace. Ponding water in the crawlspace
Premium Appeal United States Law
ruled that Tuskegee city officials redrew the cities boundaries unconstitutionally so that the white candidates in the cities political race could win and the blacks’ votes would not count. This case laid the framework for the passage of the 1965 voters rights act which outlawed discrimination in voting. The case was named after a Tuskegee university professor Charlie A. Gomillion who was the plaintiff and the defendant was the mayor of Tuskegee Phillip M. Lightfoot. Gomillion tried to make it easier
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States American Civil War
The Furman v. Georgia decision of the Supreme Court was the first time in history where a higher court had ruled against capital punishment. However‚ the Supreme Court later suggested new legislation that overturned the ruling that capital punishment was cruel and unusual (Bohm‚ 1997). Opponents for the death penalty were elated. Executions such as drownings‚ crucifixions and burning at the stake were carried out for things such as marrying those of Jewish accent‚ non-confession by criminals and
Premium
Alicia V.‚ based on her symptoms‚ is diagnosed with PCOS. This is based on the findings that she is experiencing weight gain‚ unwanted hair growth‚ acne‚ a normal external genitalia‚ cervix‚ and vagina‚ and amenorrhea. Alicia has secondary amenorrhea because she has high levels of prolactin‚ which suppress GnRH and FSH. This is demonstrated by her low FSH levels. Alicia has hirsutism as insulin producing cells are overactive and create too much insulin. This increase in insulin causes her ovaries
Premium
Roper vs. Simmons was one of the few cases in almost two decades to address whether it’s constitutional under the eighth and fourteenth amendments to execute a juvenile offender who was over the age of fifteen but under the age of eighteen when he/she committed a capital crime. In 1988‚ Thompson vs. Oklahoma banned the execution of minors who were sixteen years of age when they committed a capital crime. Another case‚ Stanford vs. Kentucky (1989)‚ divided the court which eventually rejected that
Premium Capital punishment Crime Supreme Court of the United States
STEPHEN KALONG NINGKAN V. TUN ABANG HAJI OPENG AND TAWI SLI FEDERAL COURT [KUCHING] OCJ HARLEY A-G (BORNEO)‚ CJ [KUCHING CIVIL SUIT NO. K 45 OF 1966] 7 SEPTEMBER 1966 JUDGMENT Harley A-G (Borneo) CJ: The plaintiff was appointed Chief Minister of Sarawak on 22 July 1963. On 14 June 1966 there was a meeting of Council Negri at which‚ apart from the Speaker‚ plaintiff and twenty other members were present. Five members of the Sarawak United Peoples Party and one Machinda member‚ who normally behave
Premium Constitution United States Constitution Prime minister
TRESPASS TO LAND BUKIT LENANG DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD v. TELEKOM MALAYSIA BHD & ORS [2012] 1 CLJ FACTS The plaintiff purchased a land from Oakfield Enterprises Sdn Bhd through a sale and purchase agreement dated 15 May 1996. The plaintiff was aware at that time of the presence of squatters on the land. Following the said purchase‚ the plaintiff commenced eviction proceedings against the squatters and succeeded in obtaining judgment where the court ordered that the squatters surrender vacant possession
Premium Trademark Trademark infringement Tort law
Brandenburg v. Ohio The Supreme Court uses various criteria for the consideration of cases. Not all cases may be chosen by the Supreme Court‚ so they must wisely choose their cases. The Court must be uniform and consistent with the cases they choose according to federal law. "Supreme Court Rule 17‚ Considerations Governing Review on Certiorari ’" (Rossum 28).These rules are obligatory to follow because the Court uses it to grant certiorari. There are four basic rules for Rule 17. First‚ the
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States