Not necessarily. You can always represent yourself. Lawyers are not always needed and If I remember correctly, are not allowed to represent you in small claims court.
Steve.
Of course, there is always the issue, if you get a copyright, can you afford to enforce it. Lets say someone infringes on your copyright. It will cost your several thousand or tens of thousands of dollars to go after them.
As other posts have already mentioned, you can (as your post suggested) copy an original work, but then you are also liable to be sued for copyright infringement. Being thrown out of a competition may be the least of your worries then.
You cannot be sued for taking an almost identical picture from the same place as someone else. Actual useage of the picture may be another matter if used commercially but for your own use and even for a competition... no.
In the USA, that only is the case if both parties are in the same state. So, for example, I am in Wisconsin and cannot file against some party in neighboring Illinois. Of course, I could go after them in Federal District Court. However, you have to be an attorney, rules of the court, and many years ago, I was told, the minimum out of pocket cost just to file was $5000 and the cost goes up from there.Not necessarily. You can always represent yourself. Lawyers are not always needed and If I remember correctly, are not allowed to represent you in small claims court.
Steve.
However, you have to be an attorney, rules of the court, and many years ago, I was told, the minimum out of pocket cost just to file was $5000 and the cost goes up from there.
Now, imagine the problems, if I needed to take action against someone in your country, provided its laws allow it. Might involve several law firms on my side to do this.
That is fine but you cannot take action against someone in France in your UK court, can you?
In the USA, each state court only adjudicate its state laws.
I just want to know what this photographic idea is! Is it an idea for a picture, or is it an idea for a process?
For serious crimes extradition is used so the person is tried in the country in which the crime was carried out. That's nothing to do with choosing to use a lawyer (or not) though.
I think all cases have to be tried in the country where the alleged crime was committed.
I'm sure you could technically extradite someone and represent yourself but it's not likely (or advisable). If something is serious enough for an extradition order then the Crown Prosecution Service will have taken it on.
To an Englishman that sounds crazy! We have the same law over the whole country (and Wales). I'm not sure how the US keeps control of its laws as they vary from state to state.
For serious crimes extradition is used so the person is tried in the country in which the crime was carried out. That's nothing to do with choosing to use a lawyer (or not) though.
I think all cases have to be tried in the country where the alleged crime was committed.
I'm sure you could technically extradite someone and represent yourself but it's not likely (or advisable). If something is serious enough for an extradition order then the Crown Prosecution Service will have taken it on.
To an Englishman that sounds crazy! We have the same law over the whole country (and Wales). I'm not sure how the US keeps control of its laws as they vary from state to state.
Steve.
can you take someone to court in England that lives in France, and the transaction was done vial mail? :confused: No crime, they just owe you some money!
If you are interested, here is a link to the Canadian Copyright legislation. It is only 123 pages long, and you get two languages for your money.
I was interested but there is no link!
Early English law was written in three languages - English, French and Latin.... so we win!
Steve.
... Of course when it comes down to it, copyright will be what a series of judges and juries says it is.
As to language, what law was written in Latin?
In the USA, each state court only adjudicate its state laws.
To an Englishman that sounds crazy! We have the same law over the whole country (and Wales). I'm not sure how the US keeps control of its laws as they vary from state to state.
I think you may be confusing laws with bye-laws. Bye-laws are local rules with legal force subject to government approval, but these would not cover topics that would be dealt with by civil or criminal law, which is country wide. London may make bye-laws concerning parking and transport and the like, but could not pass laws that would conflict with national laws concerning, say, the Design Patent and Copyright Acts. Cities in the UK are not legally autonomous entities in the way States are. Within Great Britain, only Scotland has its own legal system, which is why Steve was careful to mention England (implicitly) and Wales.You have the same laws everywhere? If London (the city, not the Capitol) passes a law about allowable commercial signage, it applies to the whole country?
Also if a city or town passes a by-law which is in conflict with national law then the by-law would be invalid.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?