Although most creative individuals would prefer to focus on their "art" than legal issues, it doesn't hurt to have a smidgen of knowledge when it comes to the Law.
During the summer semester, I took a course in Business Law which focused on a number of intriguing concepts: the key elements of a contract, what constitutes a binding, legal agreement between parties (in California), how to set aside a contract, etc.
And, aspects of Cyber law.
In view of the fact artists are often signing on the dotted line, doesn't it make sense for them to be smart and savvy and mindful of their legal rights and obligations, instead of just blindly signing away their lives?The course zeroed in on torts (injury claims & money-damage award cases) and - in particular - causes of action for slander, libel, and Trademark infringement.
It makes a lot of sense to have some legal knowledge under your belt in view of the litigious society we inhabit today.
To be forewarned is to be forearmed, don't you think?
Libel is a timely subject, and probably more so today for people who cruise the Internet engaging in chat, and thoughtlessly posting on popular blog sites.
Here's a scenario: get into one snit with someone and it is wholly possible that a slew of insults will zip back and forth - as the world watches on!
Some Internet users are not even aware that their actions may be a cause of action for a court case!
Of course, libel concerns false statements made about a person in writing, which may be inflammatory in nature, and engaged in with the specific intent to maliciously harm or smear the reputation of a person.
Not to be confused with slander, of course!
Years ago, a fellow got into a nasty argument on the net about something.
Without thinking, he lashed out at the other party point-blank in a post, spewing a bunch of accusations which clearly had no merit.
In the heat of the moment, the person at the other end of the tirade responded in anger that he would sue for slander.
Well, the other guy just laughed.
Why?
A legal action for slander requires that the words be "uttered", not written on a page.
But, even with slander, problems can arise.
For instance, two business associates were arguing one day, and in the heat of the moment the one accused his partner of slandering him.
In this case there were no grounds for a lawsuit.
Why?
There was no one within earshot; it would not be possible to slander a person to himself!
Yes, it gets tricky, doesn't it?
People assume that because they are on the Internet they can make false statements - even engage in a little character assassination whenever they please - because they are under the mistaken impression that they cannot be traced or held responsible for their misdeeds.
Wrong!
Attorneys hire Private Detectives - experts in the field of Internet Data Analysis - to track the guilty parties down and serve them with a "summons" and a "complaint" to appear in Court.
Internet contracts are interesting, too.
Occasionally, you'll come across them, if you fill in an application for a credit card or a loan on the great world-wide-web.
Or, you may encounter a contract for service if you order a cell phone online.
As you are agreeing to the terms (more-often-than-not) you are required to click on the link - and after doing so - confirm that you agree (and understand) to the terms and conditions.
In fact, in some instances, you can not continue with the application process until you have actually scrolled down and viewed the documentation first.
Contracts signed on the Internet electronically are legally-binding in the courts today.
In my Law class, an interesting case was cited in respect to a Playboy Bunny who was sued by Playboy Enterprises for using "Playmate of Month" in a tag for her web site.Playboy filed suit on the grounds that the sexy siren was allegedly using their Trademark in violation of applicable law, and subsequently petitioned the court for a restraining order for her to "cease and desist".
Surprisingly, the court found that because the "model" had - indeed - been a Playmate of the Month, that she was entitled to legally direct traffic to her website based on that - er - accomplishment.
Probably, the most hilarious case in recent years was the one that dealt with a Plaintiff's request for damages because someone had called them an **hole.
Believe it or not, the case went all the way to the Supreme Court!In the highest court of the land, Justice Scalia was given the task of writing the "Opinion" of the Court.
In his dissertation, he dissected the word with precision, presumably with a straight face.
First, he analyzed the word a** (often used to refer to a donkey).
Then, he explored the second part of the derogatory term, "hole".
After discussing all the intricacies of the root meanings of the words and the in-and-outs of the specifics of the English Language - and God knows what else - Scalia court found that an individual may call someone an ***hole and not be sued for it.
Well, I guess some things are sacred!