scholarly journals Courts React

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-613
Author(s):  
Gretchen L. Casey
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
District Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Youtube Videos ◽  
Summary Judgment ◽  
First Time ◽  
Video Format ◽  
Tube Channel

Over the past few years, the rise in popularity of a genre of You- Tube videos known as “reaction videos” has resulted in controversy for various reasons. The United States District Court in Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, a landmark case for the genre, described the “reaction videos” as “a large genre of YouTube videos . . . [that] vary widely in terms of purpose, structure, and the extent to which they rely on potentially copyrighted material.” According to the Hosseinzadeh opinion, “[s]ome reaction videos. . .intersperse short segments of another’s work with criticism and commentary, while others are more akin to a group viewing session without commentary.” Essentially, reaction videos are exactly what the name suggests: a video showing a person or group of people reacting to the work of another, which by nature requires the incorporation of the work being reacted to for the viewer’s reference. The first time that controversy arose out of the “reaction” genre was in 2015 when the Fine Brothers, the creators of a popular YouTube channel known for its “Kids React” series along with several other “reaction video” series, applied to trademark the term “react.” The brothers did so with the intention to create a program called “React World,” through which they would license out the “reaction video” format to other video creators. This endeavor came not long after the Fine Brothers criticized Ellen DeGeneres for allegedly using their “re- action” format in a segment on her television show, suggesting the brothers’ belief that they were the sole owners of what is, in reality, a widely-used format. As a result, YouTube viewers became distrustful of the Fine Brothers’ intentions in trademarking the format, and viewers criticized them to the point that they issued a public apology in February of 2016 in which they announced their decision to “[r]escind all. . .‘React’ trademarks and applications” and “[d]iscontinue the React World program.” Later in 2016, reaction videos would again become the subject of controversy when Ethan and Hila Klein, the husband-and-wife creators of the popular YouTube comedy channel H3H3 Productions, were sued by Matt Hosseinzadeh of the decidedly less popular You- Tube channel, Matt Hoss Zone, for copyright infringement. Hosseinzadeh alleged copyright infringement for the use of segments of his video, “Bold Guy vs. Parkour Girl,” in a humorous reaction video made by the Kleins.8 What resulted was the aforementioned Hosseinzadeh v. Klein opinion, which set a precedent that will hopefully allow future reaction video creators to produce and share content without their creativity being stifled by the looming risk of copyright infringement lawsuits. Hosseinzadeh alleged that a video, which was part of a series of videos, starring himself as “Bold Guy,” “in which the Bold Guy flirts with a woman and chases her through various sequences” was infringement. Hosseinzadeh alleged that the Kleins’ video entitled “The Big, The BOLD, The Beautiful,” infringed upon “Bold Guy vs. Parkour Girl,” as it featured the couple “comment[ing] on and criticiz[ing] [his] video, playing portions of it in the process.” Accepting the Kleins’ motion for summary judgment, which pleaded the fair use defense, the court held that its “review of the. . .videos makes it clear that [the claim] in which plaintiff alleges that defendants in- fringed plaintiff’s copyrights, must be decided in defendants’ favor.”

Lee v. Dong-A Ilbo

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-94
Author(s):  
Sonya D. Winner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Korean American ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Television ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Official Report ◽  
Foreign Governments ◽  
Summary Judgment

In 1985 two intelligence agencies of the South Korean Government announced that they had successfully disrupted a North Korean spy ring operating in the United States. Their press release, which was widely publicized in the Korean press, named Chang-Sin Lee as a North Korean agent associated with a spy ring at Western Illinois University, where Lee had been a student. The story was picked up and reported in the United States by six Korean-American newspapers and a public television station. When Lee sued for libel, the defendants relied upon the official report privilege, which gives absolute protection to the accurate republication of official government reports. The district court, holding that the privilege applied and that Lee had not overcome it by showing malice, dismissed the case. Plaintiff appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which in a two to one decision reversed (per Ervin, J.) and held: that the official report privilege does not apply to the republication of official reports of foreign governments. Judge Kaufman, sitting by designation, dissented from the majority’s reversal of the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

“The Abominable Crime of Onan”: Catholic Pastoral Practice and Family Limitation in the United States, 1875–1919

2002 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Woodcock Tentler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Birth Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
Protestant Churches ◽  
The People ◽  
Family Limitation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
First Time ◽  
Pastoral Practice

By the 1930s few Catholics in the United States could have been unaware of their church's absolute prohibition on contraception. A widely-publicized papal encyclical had spoken to the issue in 1930, even as various Protestant churches were for the first time giving a public blessing to the practice of birth control in marriage. Growing numbers of American Catholics had been exposed since at least 1920 to frank and vigorous preaching on the subject in the context of parish missions. (Missions are probably best understood as the Catholic analogue of a revival.) And by the early 1930s Catholic periodicals and pamphlets addressed the question of birth control more frequently and directly than ever before. As a Chicago Jesuit acknowledged in 1933, “Practically every priest who is close to the people admits that contraception is the hardest problem of the confessional today.” A major depression accounted in part for the hardness of the problem. But it was more fundamentally caused by the laity's heightened awareness of their church's stance on birth control and their growing consciousness of this position as a defining attribute of Catholic identity.

Propeller and Vane Wheel

1980 ◽  
Vol 24 (04) ◽  
pp. 203-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otto Grim
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
The United States ◽  
German Society ◽  
Memorial Lecture ◽  
Naval Architecture ◽  
Great Pleasure ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
The Subject ◽  
First Time ◽  
To Receive

The vane wheel is a freely rotating device installed on the propeller shaft behind the propeller to provide additional thrust at no increase in power. The wheel, which is larger in diameter than its companion propeller, functions as a turbine by using the otherwise-wasted propeller slipstream to generate the extra thrust. This paper describes a series of tests performed at the Hamburg Ship Model Tank to compare the efficiency of the vane wheel arrangement with other propulsion units, including a conventional propeller, contrarotating propeller, and propeller with fixed guide mechanism. The Appendix provides a mathematical analysis of the performance of the various units investigated. Preface: For many years I had the great pleasure to live near Georg Weinblum, to work with him, and to receive his advice. After he retired I became his successor at Hamburg University. In 1938 I had met Georg Weinblum for the first time; in 1952 — after his return from the United States — for the second time, and after that we met regularly. He encouraged me to write my thesis and to work as a scientist. He always took a great interest in promoting young people and in awakening their enthusiasm for science. Many young people have had this experience and think of him with gratitude. Due to the founders' intentions, the memorial lecture should deal with a subject which belongs to naval architecture and which serves its development. I have chosen the subject, Propeller and Vane Wheel, which I presented for the first time to the German Society of Naval Architecture (Schiffbautechnische Gesellschaft) in 1966. I take this opportunity to discuss the subject again, and to a different extent, because I believe that the purpose of this work is really important and can be achieved without any difficulty in the present situation, where the search for new ideas with regard to the saving of energy has become an urgent necessity.

United States v. Palestine Liberation Organization

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 833-837
Author(s):  
Eric S. Koenig
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
Palestine Liberation Organization ◽  
Southern District ◽  
The Status ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Summary Judgment

Plaintiff, the United States, brought an action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and four individuals seeking an injunction to close the PLO’s Permanent Observer Mission (Mission) to the United Nations as violative of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987 (ATA). The district court (per Palmieri, J.) entered summary judgment for defendants and held: (1) the ATA does not require the closure of the PLO’s Mission to the United Nations; (2) the status of the PLO’s Mission, an invitee of the United Nations, is protected by the Agreement Between the United States and the United Nations Regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations (Headquarters Agreement); and (3) Congress did not intend the ATA to supersede the Headquarters Agreement.

The Practice and Case Law of Israel in Matters Related to International Law

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 803-853 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rotem M. Giladi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Suit ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Government

The case of the Canadian ambassador's residence has been the subject of several court decisions at various instances in Israel. These decisions (as well as others relating to the doctrine of sovereign immunity) have been reviewed in former issues of this section. On June 3, 1997, the Supreme Court, in its appellate jurisdiction, gave its judgment in this case and delineated the application of the international law doctrine of sovereign immunity in Israeli law. In a different case decided on the last day of 1996, the Tel-Aviv District Court was required to rule on the applicability of this doctrine to a civil suit brought against the government of the United States of America. This District Court decision now needs to be examined in light of the recent ruling of the Supreme Court in theEdelsoncase.

Kansas Court Denies Employment Discrimination Claims under ADA, FMLA, and PDA

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-272
Author(s):  
B.P.M
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Americans With Disabilities Act ◽  
Employment Discrimination ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
Medical Leave ◽  
Pregnancy Discrimination ◽  
The Family ◽  
Pregnancy Discrimination Act ◽  
Summary Judgment

The United States District Court of Kansas, in Gudenkauf v. Stauffer, Znc.(922 F. Supp. 465 (D. Kan. 1996), granted the defendants motion for summary judgment for the plaintiff's claims of pregnancy-related discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), but the court denied a similar motion for the plaintiff's claim under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). The court found summary judgment to be appropriate for the ADA claim based on its finding that the plaintiff's pregnancy did not constitute an impairment as required by the statute; as for the FMLA claim, it determined that the defendants failure to grant the plaintiff's leave request did not violate the statute. However, the court determined that summary judgment was inappropriate for the PDA claim because of material questions of fact about whether the defendant had acted with discriminatory intent.In considering the motions for summary judgment, the court accepted the following facts as incontrovertible. Plaintiff Michaela Gudenkauf worked for the defendant Stauffer, Inc.

Jimmo and the Improvement Standard: Implementing Medicare Coverage Through Regulations, Policy Manuals and other Guidance

2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E. Gladieux ◽  
Michael Basile
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Medicare Reimbursement ◽  
Outpatient Therapy ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Medicare Coverage ◽  
Summary Judgment ◽  
Therapy Treatment

In Jimmo v. Sebelius, the plaintiffs alleged that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) regularly and improperly denied Medicare reimbursement for outpatient therapy treatment when the beneficiary did not show a likelihood of improvement. These denials, based on policy manuals and other guidance, appear to contradict the government's own regulations, which specifically prohibit coverage denials based solely on the so-called “Improvement Standard.” In Jimmo, the United States District Court for the District of Vermont found that CMS' use of the Improvement Standard may have violated the rulemaking provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and denied CMS' motion for summary judgment. Subsequently, the parties settled out of court.In the settlement, CMS agreed to revise its policy manuals to clarify that the Improvement Standard was not an acceptable basis on which to deny Medicare coverage. CMS declined to defend its policies even though courts often grant deference to agency interpretations. The settlement implies that the agency feared that it would not have received such deference. It also implies that future Supreme Court decisions may give less deference to agency interpretations.

The Treaty of Paris and Turkey’s Status in International Law

1943 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh McKinnon Wood
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Present Form ◽  
Crimean War ◽  
The Family ◽  
Independent States ◽  
The Subject ◽  
First Time ◽  
European Group

Writers on international law agree that its development in its present form began in the 16th century among the Christian States of Europe, when the feudal organization of the continent gave place to its modern organization in the “sovereign, independent” States of the traditional terminology, and that originally it was considered as not applying, or as not fully applying, to States outside the pale of Christian civilization. At the end of the 18th and until well into the 19th centuries it was common for treatises on the subject to bear titles referring not to “International Law” but to “European International Law,” although such a title had ceased to be appropriate after the attainment of independence by the United States. It is also usually said that Turkey, the first Mohammedan State to join the family of States between which international law is in force, was brought into the family and made for the first time a subject or “person” of international law by Article 7 of the Treaty of Paris of March 30, 1856, which terminated the Crimean War. This view has, however, been disputed by A. H. Smith who argues that “for many centuries Turkey had maintained diplomatic intercourse and concluded treaties with Great Britain and other European Powers and … the general body of international law was considered to apply,” and that the alleged recognition appears to have made no practical difference; and who accordingly suggests the meaning of the article to be that Turkey was formally “admitted to the specifically European group of nations which was deemed to have been established by the Vienna settlement of 1815.” Smith gives no details regarding the evidence on which his view is based, and other writers habitually content themselves with quoting the text of the article. It may be interesting to consider what light contemporary evidence throws upon the matter.

Non-Importation, 1806–1812

1941 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert Heaton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Federal District ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
District Attorney ◽  
Woolen Cloth ◽  
Port Of New York ◽  
To Come ◽  
First Time

Peter A. Schenck, Surveyor of Customs and Inspector of Revenue for the Port of New York, must have felt slightly exhilarated when he left his office on the evening of December 30, 1807. He had that day wielded for the first time the two-edged sword placed in his hands by Congress for the destruction of British maritime arrogance. Nay more, he had struck at least seven times, by seizing that number of shipments of British goods which had arrived in two vessels ten days before. In a few days Nathan Sanford, the District Attorney, would file seven separate libels in the Federal District Court on behalf of the United States vs. twenty-two bales of woolen cloth, two cases of hats, eight boxes linen cloth, sixteen boxes of linens, one case of woolen hosiery, two cases of plated ware, and two boxes of woolen hosiery. The goods would doubtless be condemned, for Sanford was a clever lawyer and the district judge was not, like the fellow up in Massachusetts, unfriendly to Jeffersonian policies. Later the United States marshal, Peter Curtenius, would have them sold by auction outside the Tontine Coffee House; the court and marshal's costs—totaling about $120 in each case—would be paid, and the balance, where there was any, would be shared equally between the customs staff and the Treasury. If this process could be repeated often enough, John Bull might soon be willing to come to terms.

scholarly journals Assessment of the goals of the Russian Federation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization given by French researchers

2021 ◽  
pp. 32-39
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Dmitrievna Trifonova ◽  
Darya Vladimirovna Tavberidze
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Shanghai Cooperation Organization ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
First Time ◽  
Post Soviet Space

The subject of this research is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the goals of the Russian Federation therein. This article aims to fill the gap in French historiography and analyze the goals of the Russian Federation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization through the prism of French researchers. An overview is given to the assessment given by French authors to Russia’s goals in this organization at the stage of its foundation, establishment and development, as well as the overall goals of the Russian foreign policy in post-Soviet space and Central Asia. Special attention is given to the security and energy issues, as well as the growing influence of China and the United States in Central Asia. The relevance of this work is substantiated by the analysis of French research dedicated to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the goals of the Russian Federation therein, which is carried out for the first time. For article leans on the monographs and articles by the French historians, political scientists, and experts in the area of international relations dedicated to foreign policy of the Russian Federation in the early 1990s – late 2000s and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The conclusion is made that according to the majority of French researchers, the Russian Federation uses the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to strengthen its positions in Central Asia, as well as on the international arena.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document