Showing posts with label EOC. Show all posts

Thursday, March 14, 2013

Week 10 EOC: Lawyer Jokes

"As Mr. Smith was on his death bed, he attempted to formulate a plan that would allow him to take at least some of his considerable wealth with him. He called for the three men he trusted most - his lawyer, his doctor, and his clergyman. He told them, "I'm going to give you each $30,000 in cash before I die. At my funeral, I want you to place the money in my coffin so that I can try to take it with me." All three agreed to do this and were given the money. At the funeral, each approached the coffin in turn and placed an envelope inside. While riding in the limousine to the cemetery, the clergyman said "I have to confess something to you fellows. Brother Smith was a good churchman all his life, and I know he would have wanted me to do this. The church needed a new baptistery very badly, and I took $10,000 of the money he gave me and bought one. I only put $20,000 in the coffin." The physician then said, "Well, since we're confiding in one another, I might as well tell you that I didn't put the full $30,000 in the coffin either. Smith had a disease that could have been diagnosed sooner if I had this very new machine, but the machine cost $20,000 and I couldn't afford it then. I used $20,000 of the money to buy the machine so that I might be able to save another patient. I know that Smith would have wanted me to do that." The lawyer then said, "I'm ashamed of both of you. When I put my envelope into that coffin, it held my personal check for the full $30,000."

http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html

Q: What's the difference between an accountant and a lawyer?
A: Accountants know they're boring.

Q: What's the difference between a female lawyer and a pitbull?
A: Lipstick.

http://www.iciclesoftware.com/LawJokes/IcicleLawJokes.html

A lawyer's dog, running around town unleashed, heads for a butcher shop and steals a roast. The butcher goes to the lawyer's office and asks, "if a dog running unleashed steals a piece of meat from my store, do I have a right to demand payment for the meat from the dog's owner?" The lawyer answers, "Absolutely."

"Then you owe me $8.50. Your dog was loose and stole a roast from me today."

The lawyer, without a word, writes the butcher a check for $8.50. The butcher, having a feeling of satisfaction, leaves.

Three days later, the butcher finds a bill from the lawyer: $100 due for a consultation.

http://www.ahajokes.com/law004.html

Q: What's the difference between a lawyer and a vulture?
A: The lawyer gets frequent flyer miles

A lawyer in Charlotte, NC purchased a box of very rare and expensive cigars, then insured them against fire among other things. Within a month, having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars and without yet having made even his first premium payment on the policy, the lawyer filed a claim with the insurance company.
In his claim, the lawyer stated the cigars were lost "in a series of small fires." The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason: that the man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion. The lawyer sued....and won! In delivering the ruling the judge agreed with the insurance company that the claim was frivolous. The judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer held a policy from the company in which it had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also guaranteed that it would insure them against fire, without defining what is considered to be "unacceptable fire," and was obligated to pay the claim. Rather than endure lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000.00 to the lawyer for his loss of the rare cigars lost in the "fires."
But... After the lawyer cashed the check, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of ARSON! With his own insurance claim and testimony from the previous case used against him, the lawyer was convicted of intentionally burning his insured property and was sentenced to 24 months in jail and a $24,000.00 fine.

http://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Lawyer.htm

Thursday, March 7, 2013

Week 9 EOC: Letters of Permission

The four letters of permissions I chose where the talent release forum, general release forum, location release forum and material release forum. Upon my research of these letters of permissions, they are among some of the most applicable when trying to film a movie or any other form of visual media.

I attained these letters of permissions from the from the following site,
http://www.videouniversity.com/articles/releases-for-use-in-film-and-video/. Although these release forums are the same site, I came across a few others which have simular documents. I chose this site because all of the documents where more simple and stright forward as oppsed to some of the other sites.

As a genearl sense of all the permission letters, each states that my film company as granted permission to use all underlined locations, people, products and so on, in whatever film I happen to be making at the time and stated in the release forums.

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Fax702.216.6245

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Week 6 EOC: Illicit Trade

Illicit trade in goods have completely over run the market of goods for trade. As a perspective form a film maker it is becoming incresly hard new movie makers to produce movies that can make any profit what so ever.

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Week 5 EOC: Paten Trolls

“Businesses now face potentially devastating financial penalties for false patent
marking of mass produced products thanks to 2009 U.S. Court of Appeals decision.
Under this decision, businesses that falsely mark an unpatented product can be
liable for up to $500 per item” (Davis Kuelthau attorneys at law, 1). Financial loss
numbers went spinning through several large monopoly company heads, at the
threat that “anyone” could take a falsely marked patent to court and split the profit
with the U. S. Government.

According to Searcey, “one plaintiff, Sarah Tompkins, who has sued more than a
dozen companies, is the wife of Allen, Texas, patent lawyer George Tompkins. –
Tompkins heard about it from his lawyer friends. He and his wife then spent hours
poring our Internet advertising to check for outdated patents on products. —The
couple trekked to retail stores to find falsely marked products on shelves” (Searcey,
5). These patent trolls would argue that it wasn’t fair to the rest of the public, that
the large conglomerate companies are enforcing nervousness into the smaller
companies about getting credit for their patents.

Others would digress even through strong feelings false patents. “That said, it
seems clear that the sudden goldrush mentality of patent attorneys suing all sorts
of companies for false marking is a pure money grab, where there’s little evidence
of any real harm at times. It just seems like a way to tie up the courts in hopes of a
golden lottery ticket (shared with the feds). That doesn’t seem efficient or useful—
and actually has some unfortunate similarities to basic patent trolling” (Masnick,
1). Understanding, the true meaning behind the craze of seeking out patents comes
down to me agreeing that companies do need to check their patents every four years
by law and pay the patent contribution. I see this as a double edge sword, I do agree
with Daniel Ravicher, a founder and executive director of New York nonprofit Public
Patent Foundation when he stated, “It chills competition, it misleads the public and
takes away from the credit patent holders deserve” (Searcey, 4 & 5). I also believe
that the trolling has lost the aspect of Ravicher’s argument simply for cash cow
profit.

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Week 4 EOC: Jeopardy Evaluation

The Jeopardy game, most definitely helped aid in the process of learning the definitions and terms of copyright and paten law. With stakes and reputation in play, it really push the envelope on locating and retaining the terms.

I feel the bigest part of this learning process was trying to create the game. after going over definition after deviation, you couldn't hep but recognize the meaning in everyone else's question. Some of the questions that where provided had much difficulty to them, which really push the mind into over drive. However the return in that will help able the process in looking them up in the book for the test, provided we it is indeed open book.

All in in all, I felt the game was a great success and I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I really believe that interaction is a great tool when it comes to the learning, especially when it comes to something like law, that at times can be a very dry subject, with all of its terminology. I must say now, I really enjoy it.

Week 3 EOC: Jeporady Questions

1. Name the role, who is well funded and are in the business of suing companies but not in the business of making or selling anything through the effort of seeking out licensing fees that are disproportionate to the patents' value?

2. What is the agreement called when many inventions owned by a number of different companies who commonly share their patents by benefiting from the state of the art improvements in the particular field without having to pay royalties to all the relevant patent owners?

3. What is it called if two patents are obtained on a single invention, if this results from a divsional application required by the USPTO and because of the misperception that two inventions were being described int eh original patent application, under a special statute, this rule does not apply and the patents will be considered valid?

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Week 2 EOC: Erin Brockovich

In my personal opinon, I feel the case settelment of $333 million (as stated in http://www.brockovich.com/) was a tremendos win for the firm and their cliants, however after the 40% fee, only $196 million was left to devide amongst all the residents, who on avrege only recived about $300 thousound, theer only a couple that recived “several million”. (as stated on http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0195685/faq ) It brings to me a question of who were the firm actually working for? The cliants or themselves? As reported in imdb, “The lawyers determined this sum confidentially by various factors, including the severity of their ailments. On average, this came to $300,000 per victim, as stated previously. Some did receive several million. Others received less. For example, Dorothea Montoya received $60,000” .

Week 1 EOC: My Voice

As a creative thinker, my passion is beyond filmmaking. I inspire to inspire, to move my audience and compel their emotions while at the same time entertain them. I have three major things in my life and that’s a past, a present and future.

My past, consist of young boy, who while the world beneath him hurtled with chaos, would often times sit high on the roof writing songs or poems, creatively thinking of a way to escape the harshness of life. My present, stands a young, overly driven man, who without that past could never understand, nor put fourth what it take to put together any creative thought, that would even remotely move or compel someone. My future, I envision two things. The first, to gain the respect as a professional and innovator in my craft, the second is to have inspired and compelled other like minds to bring fourth new innovated ideas to the film world.