Sports attorney David Cornwell is challenging the NFL’s right to discipline players by proposing to appoint an independent arbitrator to review — and have the power to change — rulings made by the commissioner.

Cornwell, one of four finalists in the running to replace the late Gene Upshaw as the NFL Players Association’s executive director, described the league’s current disciplinary policy as being “draconian” and requiring independent oversight.

“The notion that public relations drives or justifies draconian and unfair disciplinary actions is simply misplaced and we will no longer accept it,” Cornwell told The Associated Press. “We have the legal right to negotiate these policies … and we are going to exercise that right to get independent review of the commissioner’s decisions.”

Cornwell is closely tied to the issue of discipline after he successfully argued last season to have a federal judge block the NFL suspension of five players for violating the league’s anti-doping policy. He argued that the suspensions were wrong because the NFL knew about the banned ingredient contained in the dietary supplement StarCaps but failed to share that information with players.

The league has appealed the ruling.

Currently, NFL suspensions are determined by commissioner Roger Goodell. Aside from filing grievances with the NFL, the union’s sole other option is going to court. Cornwell is proposing an appeals process that is similar to that of Major League Baseball and the NBA.

In an e-mail to the AP, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league is not going to comment on proposals made by executive director candidates. Aiello, however, noted that, “The commissioner’s disciplinary authority has always been a bedrock principle of the NFL that has served everyone, including players, very well.”

Entering his third year as commissioner, Goodell has made discipline one of his top priorities.

The other three finalists to replace Upshaw, who died in August, are former union presidents Troy Vincent and Trace Armstrong, and Washington D.C.-based attorney DeMaurice Smith.

The union is scheduled to select its next boss by vote at its annual meetings at Maui on March 15.

If elected, Cornwell said he would include the issue of discipline as part of the next labor talks after the NFL last year opted out of the collective bargaining agreement.

“If the commissioner regulates player conduct, then it is a term and condition of employment,” Cornwell said. “After the StarCaps’ case and other less publicized decisions, we will fix the problem caused by no independent review of commissioner disciplinary decisions.”

Cornwell made clear that the NFL’s reputation would not suffer under his proposal.

“We will make a focused commitment on making sure that the fan understands that the vast majority of NFL players are great community citizens,” he said. “The notion that a person who has a bad event is a reflection on all of us is misplaced.”

Cornwell also proposed creating a new senior union executive position to directly address concerns of retired players in an attempt to stem a series of lawsuits and complaints against the NFLPA, and begin bridging a rift that has grown between the two sides.

The person taking over the new position of special adviser for retired players would report directly to the executive director, Cornwell said.

Cornwell re-entered the executive director election process after gaining the written support of three of 32 player representatives, as allowed under union rules to place a candidate on the ballot. He had been previously eliminated as a finalist by the union’s search committee in January.

On January 1st, 2009, laws mandating stores sell only cigarettes that are slow-burning and comprised of fire-safe paper went into effect in Delaware, Iowa, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Texas. Fifteen other states have laws that will take effect this year or next, according to the Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes.

The paper on these cigarettes is thicker in two separate areas so they will extinguish (if not puffed) when they burn to these spots. This was designed to prevent fires caused by unattended cigarettes. It is estimated that about 800 Americans die each year in fires caused by careless smoking.

“There has been a rash of smoking materials deaths,” Oklahoma Fire Marshal Robert Doke said Monday. “A cigarette will fall into overstuffed furniture or mattresses when people fall asleep, or it rolls off an ashtray and on to the carpet, then the possibility for ignition happens. This cigarette is supposed to snuff out before it can cause enough heat to start a flame.”

States that have already implemented fire-safe cigarette laws are New York, Vermont, California, Oregon, New Hampshire, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Montana, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, Utah, Alaska, Rhode Island and Minnesota, as well as the District of Columbia. Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Colorado, Arizona, Washington, Louisiana, Hawaii and Wisconsin have laws that take effect this year. Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and South Carolina have laws that will take effect in 2010.

A New Year brings new laws across the United States. Some laws will have a small impact; others will be felt by thousands, if not millions of people. Some of these laws include the no-texting while driving law in California, no trans-fat in fast food restaurants law for Oregon, and a referendum that bans non-married, cohabitating couples from fostering or adopting a child in Arkansas. To find out more about the new laws in your state, simply visit your state’s home page (e.g. www.ca.gov for California, etc.)

Are you facing a legal issue?  Have you been sued, or are you wondering about foreclosure?  Did you just have a medical procedure that didn’t turn out as you expected?  Is bankruptcy looming?  What about your family life – are you and your spouse considering divorce?  Do you need to update your will?  Has someone you love been arrested for a DUI? 

These are examples of only some of the most common legal issues.  The fact is we actually deal with the law more than most people think.  More importantly, when we face a legal issue, many of us might not know where to turn for answers.  The legal system can certainly be overwhelming – especially because the consequences are often so grave. 

Since 1994, LawInfo has been providing the public with quality legal resources they can count on.  The idea for the company even came out of the founder’s own legal needs!  How do you find the right attorney?  How do you know the attorneys you contact are in good standing with the state bar association?  What if you want to learn about a legal issue before you talk to a lawyer?  Well, these are the reasons LawInfo was established!  LawInfo has a whole library of information about the most common legal issues including answers to frequently asked questions, articles, legal guides, legal forms, and other information – ALL FREE TO THE PUBLIC!  The really great thing is this – you can also easily find an attorney who will understand your legal needs.  It’s all designed to help the public – help someone find answers they need and find an attorney who can help them. 

Learn more about LawInfo’s Free Legal Resource Center and Find the Right Attorney in your area today!

Fan Fiction is the genre of literary works written by fans that add to a storyline or characters created by someone else.  Though fan fiction has exploded on the Internet it started decades ago and became popular in Star Trek centered science fiction magazines.  One of the more popular genres today is the Harry Potter series of stories.  Not surprisingly since these books are the highest selling novels of all time there are hundreds, if not thousands, of Harry Potter fan fiction sites on the internet.  Some websites themselves state they have thousand of stories written by fans.

Some authors, including Potter author J.K Rowling, encourage fan fiction as long as the stories are free.  Because the Internet allows anyone to post anything at little or no cost fan fiction has exploded without causing most fan fiction writers to worry about being sued because of a commercial use.  Once a fan fiction author attempts to make money on their stories however they may be crossing over into copyright infringement.

Steve Vander Ark started The Harry Potter Lexicon as a Potter fan site and it grew into an encyclopedic collection as more books were written.  The site contains Potter storylines, characters and themes, as well as original commentary from him and other website participants.  Rowling herself even sent the website an award for contributing to the Harry Potter world.  Now that Vander Ark and publisher RDR Books plan to sell the Lexicon as a book they are being sued for copyright infringement.

The Copyright is found in the Constitution and grants the author of a copyrighted work the exclusive right to profit from the work.  There is no question that Vander Ark’s Lexicon copies Rowling’s protected works, it is being promoted as an encyclopedia and if it did not copy the works it would not be worth much.  However, the Copyright was also created to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts” so unauthorized copying is allowed for purposes such as commentary, criticism, review, teaching or news reporting.  Thus Vander Ark must raise a defense that proves the copying falls under one of these purposes.
 
To aid in determining what is a fair copy and what is not Congress created the “Fair Use” doctrine.  The rule lists four factors which the courts may look at to determine whether the copying was fair.  These four factors cover the intended purpose of the secondary work, the nature of the original work, the amount and significance of the copied portion, and whether the secondary work affects the market for the copyrighted work.  In general, a non-commercial use of copied material has a greater chance of being found a fair use than a commercial use does.

Another key concept in copyright infringement which should be highly important to fan fiction writers is “transformative”.  Does the work transform the original work into a separate work or does it merely copy and repackage it?  Time and effort though does not equal transformative, the Supreme Court ruled a while ago that the “Sweat of the Brow” doctrine is irrelevant in copyright law.  In looking to see if it was transformative a court will look at what Vander Ark did to the copied work.  Either the quantity or quality of Vander Ark’s original contribution must be able to outweigh the original material he copied.

Many works of fan fiction are transformative because they take the existing characters and add to them or change them, as well as continuing the story from where the original author left off.  In Harry Potter fan fiction for example, some of the stories involve the characters being gay or Harry teaming up with Malfoy or Lord Voldemort.  Other areas of fan fiction take the original characters and put them in alternate worlds.  These works may be seen as adding to the author’s creation and not merely copying it.  Outside of fan fiction, transformation is an important element for musicians who sample lyrics or music from other artists’ songs.

Whichever way this case is decided it will surely have a ripple effect on the exploding world of fan fiction.  If Rowling wins, fans may be afraid that posting any story may lead to a lawsuit .  While if Vander Ark wins we may see more fans turn their fandom into a business, potentially dissuading authors from creating new works.

Our old friend from high school science class, the electromagnetic spectrum, is behind this conundrum.  The spectrum is property of the people of the United States and administered for us by the federal government.  This means that any person that wants to broadcast signals by use of the electromagnetic spectrum (radio waves) must purchase a license from the FCC and also follow its rules.  One of these rules bans indecent material between 6am and 10 pm to prevent children from hearing or seeing it.

When radio and later television first arrived in homes across America, the only broadcast medium was via the public airwaves.  The number of broadcasters was limited so the industry was easily regulated by the FCC.  Today, cable, satellite, and the internet — all mediums outside the purview of the FCC — play the principal role in delivering these signals.

For instance, while over 100 television channels may be available on your set, you can probably count on one hand the number of channels that are subject to FCC rules.  Only local TV stations and the major broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC and PBS) use the public airwaves, though they are also carried on virtually every cable system as well.  However, this is of no import regarding the scope of FCC regulation; any broadcaster whose signal is received by at least one person over the air must abide by FCC rules.

The law was enacted to protect children.  But due to the sheer number of channels and mediums not subject to the rule, the indecency shield sought is no longer feasible.  Why censor 5 stations when little Johnny can just turn the channel to 100 other stations, or visit a million web pages to see and hear adult language?

Unfortunately the rule still exists and the FCC is under constant political pressure to enforce it.  The FCC stepped up indecency enforcement after the Janet Jackson Super Bowl halftime “wardrobe malfunction.”  The Supreme Court has previously upheld the restrictions as constitutional and it is doubtful that the Court would reverse itself now because of the plethora of additional broadcast media. 

Thus, it is left to Congress to act to repeal an archaic regulation.

An adoption is a legal process where the adoptive parents are given permanent parental rights over a child.  At the same time, the child’s natural parents’ parental rights are terminated.  A parent may voluntarily give up their rights by filing a relinquishment with the court or the court may terminate the parental rights on its own initiative.  Involuntary termination normally requires child abuse, abandonment or some other illegal act.

An adoption is different from the appointment of a non-parental legal guardian.  A legal guardian is a person appointed by the court to temporarily care for a child.  It is a temporary order because the order is vacated on the child’s 18th birthday.  Your parents will always be your parents.  The guardian is also under the supervision of the court.  A judge may overturn a guardian’s decision and may also change a minor’s guardian.  In the eyes of the law an adoptive parent is the child’s parent, permanently.  Once an adoption is finalized the courts have no power over the parents and child.

Brad and Angelina were not given special treatment.  Any parent who is a citizen can bring an adopted child into the United States.  If the adoption is finalized in the child’s home country the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 allows the adopted child to acquire U.S. citizenship automatically on the date they enter the United States as a lawful permanent resident.

It’s official. Downloading music for free is illegal. At least, sometimes it’s illegal. A 12-person jury recently sided with the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) in deciding Jammie Thomas should be liable for copyright infringement. The jury ordered Thomas to pay the record companies $220,000 for sharing copyrighted music online.

The RIAA has been fighting a good fight since online music downloading became popular, but the legality of online music sharing hasn’t always been clear. In 1999 when Napster revolutionized the industry by making it easy for people to upload and download music on the internet, most people had barely even heard of downloading music online let alone understood the legality of it. It was easy, it was free, and it was popular. People started doing it. While the RIAA immediately claimed it was illegal, they went after Napster as the wrongdoer. To make matters worse, the RIAA lost its first lawsuit against Napster. This only furthered the confusion in the average consumer’s mind about the legality of online music sharing. Downloading music on the internet for free just exploded. It was easy, it was free, and it was everywhere. The legal issues were debated as well as the philosophical issues. This was one of those classic situations of law and society trying to catch up with technology.

Since they were losing on the legal side, the music industry launched a major campaign to educate people that free music downloads were illegal. The industry also got on the bandwagon and “legal” music downloading sites like iTunes were developed. Within months of iTunes launch in April 2003, iTunes had sold millions of songs on the internet. “Legal” music downloading had finally “arrived.” On parallel tracks, the music industry changed its legal strategy and started suing the music fans themselves for illegally sharing copyrighted music online.

Fast-forward to 2007 and Jammie Thomas is found liable for having shared music online. Even if the RIAA should have won, is it right for Jammie Thomas to have to pay $220,000 for sharing 25 songs back in February of 2005? What were most of us doing back then? Do you know anyone who was using free file sharing sites like Kazaa and Limewire? Sure, people had been shifting over to paid downloads with sites like iTunes. But, the peer-to-peer music sharing had already had several years lead time. People were familiar with it and they liked it. Moreover, during the years the file-sharing model had been supported by growing forces such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others. The debate about whether music sharing was illegal had grown into whether it should be illegal, and whether there were other technological alternatives available. Jammie Thomas was just the only person willing to stand up for it.

Nevertheless, the RIAA won the battle. There is now legal precedent that a consumer can be held liable for sharing copyrighted music online. The key to the music industry’s success, however, was not the legal issue in my mind. The real reason they won is because they responded to the demand for downloading music online. The majority of people wanted the ease of downloading music online and the ability to select only certain songs more than just simply wanting to get free music. Once the music industry gave the public this solution, they could more easily win the argument in the court of public opinion that free online music sharing was illegal. That gave them a jury pool that they didn’t have previously.

To find more information about copyright law or intellectual property law, feel free to visit LawInfo’s Legal Resource center at: http://www.lawinfo.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/Client.consumer.

Keywords associated with this article: copyright, copyright law, intellectual property attorneys.