scholarly journals NON-OBVIOUS SUBTLETIES OF PLAGIARISM IDENTIFICATION AND SCANDALOUS SPEECHES OF FAMOUS AMERICAN POLITICIANS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Андрій Гачкевич ◽  
Петро Пенцак
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political History ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Creative Activity ◽  
Literary Works ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Written Form ◽  
Legal Understanding ◽  
Legal Grounds

This article examines the relation between legal and ethical understanding of plagiarism on the basis of three cases in modern American political history. Ethical understanding deals with any theft of others’ work, whereas legal is observed within the Ukrainian legislation. The authors have made the attempt to cover some theoretical and practical aspects related to the process of plagiarism identification. Nixon/McCarthy, Kinnock/ Biden and Patrick/Obama as cases discussed have received publicity in the United States because of plagiarism accusations aimed at their authors being political figures well-known outside the country. Each of them has different consequences for thereputation of speakers involved. Special attention has been given to the issue of public political speech.The results of the research reveal that as a rule, the speeches of politicians refer to oral literary works, even if they were objectified in written form. The notion of a work according to the general formulas described in the national legislation remains unclear, and there are a lot of doubts whether we can protect any result of creative activity in the spiritual realm. Sometimes a judge should be consulted by an expert, able to distinguish a separate work. Journalists do not tend to look into a situation more deeply and that is the reason for why they blame  politicians lacking legal grounds. There are three questions, which are worth considering in cases like those mentioned in the article. Firstly, where does the creative activity of a politician (or his speechwriter), being granted legal protection, start and end. Secondly, do speakers mean to say that they are the authors of words pronounced by them (as B. Obama did not mean to say that he had come up with «I have a dream»). Thirdly, who has written a text of a speech? Wasn’t it somebody else but a speaker? If a politician says words said earlier by someone else, that doesn’t mean he is plagiarizing. Anyway he might avoid any accusations of the plagiarism in legal understanding by using quotes. The study shows that the issue of oral literary works should be elaborated more thoroughly, for example, regarding the presumption of authorship. 

scholarly journals Legal Protection Schemes for Free-Flowing Rivers in Europe: An Overview

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6423
Author(s):  
Tobias Schäfer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
European Countries ◽  
European Network ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Wild And Scenic Rivers ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Protection Mechanisms ◽  
The Individual

Most of Europe’s rivers are highly fragmented by barriers. This study examines legal protection schemes, that specifically aim at preserving the free-flowing character of rivers. Based on national legislation, such schemes are found in seven European countries: Slovenia, Finland, Sweden, France and Spain as well as Norway and Iceland. The study provides an overview of the individual schemes and their respective scope, compares their protection mechanisms and assesses their effectiveness. As Europe’s the remaining free-flowing rivers are threatened by hydropower and other development, the need for effective legal protection, comparable to the designation of Wild and Scenic Rivers in the United States, is urgent. Similarly, any ambitious strategy for the restoration of free-flowing rivers should be complemented with a mechanism for their permanent protection once dams and other barriers are removed. The investigated legal protection schemes constitute a starting point for envisioning a more cohesive European network of strictly protected free-flowing rivers.

scholarly journals A Confluence of Policy Inequality: Health Disparities in Old Age Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 37-37
Author(s):  
Sadie Giles
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Disparities ◽  
Life Course ◽  
American Indian ◽  
Old Age ◽  
Alaska Native ◽  
Political History ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Life Course

Abstract Racial health disparities in old age are well established, and new conceptualizations and methodologies continue to advance our understanding of health inequality across the life course. One group that is overlooked in many of these analyses, however, is the aging American Indian/Native Alaskan (AI/NA) population. While scholars have attended to the unique health inequities faced by the AI/NA population as a whole due to its discordant political history with the US government, little attention has been paid to unique patterns of disparity that might exist in old age. I propose to draw critical gerontology into the conversation in order to establish a framework through which we can uncover barriers to health, both from the political context of the AI/NA people as well as the political history of old age policy in the United States. Health disparities in old age are often described through a cumulative (dis)advantage framework that offers the benefit of appreciating that different groups enter old age with different resources and health statuses as a result of cumulative inequalities across the life course. Adding a framework of age relations, appreciating age as a system of inequality where people also gain or lose access to resources and status upon entering old age offers a path for understanding the intersection of race and old age. This paper will show how policy history for this group in particular as well as old age policy in the United States all create a unique and unequal circumstance for the aging AI/NA population.

The Estado da India and the Estado do Brasil. Opportunities for Research in Portuguese Overseas History

Itinerario ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-129
Author(s):  
A.J.R. Russell-Wood
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Political History ◽  
The United States ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
American Historical Association ◽  
History Of ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
English Speaking World ◽  
Interest In Research

In this year marking the sexcentenary of the birth of Prince Henry, known erroneously to the English speaking world as ‘the Navigator’, and the 450th anniversary of the Portuguese arrival in Japan, it is fitting to take stock of what has been achieved and what remains concerning research on Portuguese overseas history. In November 1969 a conference was held at the Newberry Library in Chicago to ‘stimulate in the United States scholarly interest in research on Brazil's colonial past’. In November 1978 an International Seminar on Indo-Portuguese History was held in Goa occasioned by ‘an awareness of a relative stagnation in the field of Indo-Portuguese historical studies, especially in India’. This was prompted by the feeling of a dearth of new interpretations, shortage of studies in English, and neglect of political history, biography and social and economic history. Whereas the tone of the Newberry Library meeting was upbeat as to what junior scholars were achieving, and Charles Boxer pointed with pride to scholarly accomplishments since 1950, by 1984 a lecture to mark the occasion of the centennial of the American Historical Association noted grounds for concern regarding studies in the United States on colonial Brazil and this situation has deteriorated further during the decades of the 80s and early 90s. By way of contrast, in 1981 Charles Boxer noted the vitality of the Estado da India in its broadest geographical meaning as a subject for historical research by Portuguese and how ‘after years — I might even say centuries – of neglect by foreigners, the history of the old Estado da India has lately come into its own in the wider world’. This was seconded by M.N. Pearson who noted that ‘Goan historiography seems to be on the verge of a renaissance’.

scholarly journals Perlindungan Konsumen atas Metode Penawaran Negative Option di Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Anastasia ◽  
Dwi Sekar Ningrum ◽  
William Marthianus ◽  
Willis Patrick Onggo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Service Provider ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Telecommunications Services ◽  
Financial Losses

Negative Option Method is a bidding method that requires confirmation from consumers in accepting or rejecting an offer. If the customer doesn’t provide confirmation, the business actor assumes that the consumer agrees and will be charged a fee for the offer given. The Negative Option method originating from the United States has actually developed in Indonesia, especially in the provision of telecommunications services. It is not uncommon for Telecommunications Service Providers in Indonesia to offer a particular feature that requires confirmation of rejection or cancellation from consumers via message, such as "unreg". If the consumer does not provide confirmation, the business actor will unilaterally assume that the Customer has accepted the offer, thus often resulting in the consumer experiencing financial losses due to the imposition of costs for goods and / or services without the consent of the consumer. This encourages the author to conduct legal research on consumer legal protection of the Negative Option bidding method using the normative juridical method. This legal research concludes that the Negative Option bidding method is contrary to the Minister of Communications Regulation Article 2 paragraph (3) and Article 4 paragraph (1) letter a which specifies that each Telecommunications Service Provider must obtain written and/or message approval from the Customer to activate a paid feature. If the Telecommunications Service Provider has not received approval from the Customer, then the paid feature must be stopped.

Lessons Learned from the Canada–China FIPA for the US–China BIT and beyond

2019 ◽  
pp. 116-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Dylan Dickson-Smith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Agreements

Key lessons can be made from analysing a unique and recent BIT, the Canada–China Foreign Investment Protection Agreement (FIPA), in order better to predict and identify the opportunities and challenges for potential BIT counterparties of China (such as the United States, the European Union (EU), India, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and Columbia). The Canada–China FIPA and the anticipated US–China BIT (and EU–China BIT) collectively fall into a unique class of investment agreements, in that they represent a convergence of diverse ideologies of international investment norms/protections with two distinct (East/West) underlying domestic legal and economic systems. The purpose of this chapter is to appreciate and utilize the legal content of the Canada–China FIPA in order to isolate the opportunities and challenges for investment agreements currently under negotiation (focusing on the US–China BIT). This analysis is conducted from the perspective of China’s traditional BIT practice and political–economic goals, relative to that of its counterparty. This chapter briefly addresses the economic and broader diplomatic relationship between China and Canada, comparing that with the United States. It then analyses a broad selection of key substantive and procedural obligations of the Canada–China FIPA, addressing their impact, individually and cumulatively, to extract what lessons can be learned for the United States (US) and other negotiating parties. This analysis identifies the degree of investment liberalization and legal protection that Canada and China have achieved, and whether these standards are reciprocally applied. The analysis is not divorced from the relevant political economy and negotiating position between China and the counterparty and the perceived economic benefits of each party, as well as any diplomatic sensitive obstacles between the parties. While this chapter does not exhaustively analyse each substantive and procedural right, it provides enough of a comprehensive basis to reveal those challenges that remain for future bilateral negotiations with China.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document