Recent SCOTUS copyright decisions

In 2021 and 2022, the United States Supreme Court made several important decisions related to copyright law. These decisions have significant implications for creators, publishers, and users of copyrighted works.

One of the most closely watched cases was Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., which concerned the copyrightability of application programming interfaces (APIs). In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that Google's use of certain Java APIs in its Android operating system was a fair use and therefore not infringing [1]. The Court's decision is likely to have a significant impact on the software industry and the way APIs are developed and used.

Another important case was Van Buren v. United States, which concerned the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The Court held that an individual who accesses a computer system for an improper purpose does not violate the CFAA if they have permission to access the system in question [2]. The decision is likely to have significant implications for the way that companies and individuals protect their computer systems and data.

In addition to these cases, the Court also issued decisions related to copyright registration requirements [3], the availability of attorney's fees in copyright cases [4], and the scope of the fair use doctrine [5]. Each of these decisions has important implications for the way that copyright law is interpreted and applied in the United States.

Overall, the recent decisions from the United States Supreme Court demonstrate the importance of staying up to date on developments in copyright law. Whether you are a creator, publisher, or user of copyrighted works, it is important to understand the legal landscape and how it may impact your rights and obligations.

Considerations in selecting a business entity

When starting a business, one of the key decisions that entrepreneurs face is selecting the appropriate business entity. The type of entity selected can have a significant impact on the legal and financial operations of the company. Hence, it is essential to consider several legal factors before making a final decision.

1. Liability Protection: The first and foremost consideration is the level of liability protection offered by each type of entity. Different entities offer varying degrees of protection to their owners from personal liability for the company's debts and obligations. For example, a limited liability company (LLC) or a corporation offers greater protection than a sole proprietorship or a general partnership.

2. Taxation: The type of entity chosen can also have a significant impact on the company's tax obligations. For example, C corporations are taxed at the corporate level, and their owners are taxed again on any dividends received. In contrast, an LLC can elect to be taxed as a partnership, and its owners are only taxed once on their share of the company's income.

3. Management Structure: The management structure of a business is another important factor to consider when choosing an entity. Some entities, such as corporations, have a more formal structure with defined roles and responsibilities for officers and directors. Others, like an LLC, offer more flexibility in terms of management and decision-making.

4. Compliance Requirements: Each type of entity has specific compliance requirements, including the filing of annual reports and the maintenance of corporate records. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in significant legal and financial consequences. Hence, it is important to choose an entity that fits the company's needs and resources.

5. Transferability of Ownership: The transferability of ownership is also an important factor to consider when selecting a business entity. Some entities, such as corporations, allow for the transfer of ownership through the sale of stock. Others, like an LLC, may have restrictions on the transfer of ownership interests.

6. Continuity of the Business: The continuity of the business is also a crucial factor to consider when selecting an entity. Some entities, such as corporations, can exist indefinitely, regardless of changes in ownership. In contrast, a sole proprietorship or a general partnership may dissolve upon the departure or death of one of its owners.

7. Cost of Formation and Maintenance: Finally, the cost of formation and maintenance should also be considered when selecting a business entity. Some entities, such as corporations, may have higher formation and maintenance costs, while others, like an LLC, may be less expensive.

In conclusion, selecting the appropriate business entity involves weighing several legal considerations, including liability protection, taxation, management structure, compliance requirements, transferability of ownership, continuity of the business, and cost of formation and maintenance. Entrepreneurs should carefully evaluate these factors and consult with legal and financial professionals to ensure that they make an informed decision

Ownership of a corporation with no issued stock

Ownership in a corporation is typically determined by the number of shares of stock that an individual or entity holds. However, if a corporation never properly issued stock, the determination of ownership can be more complex.

One way to determine ownership in this situation is through a "de facto" analysis. This means that the court will look at the actions and conduct of the individuals involved in the corporation to determine who should be considered the owners. Factors that a court may consider in a de facto analysis include:

1. Who contributed money or property to the corporation?
2. Who has been managing and running the corporation?
3. Who has been receiving profits and benefits from the corporation?
4. Who has been holding themselves out as the owners of the corporation?

Another way to determine ownership is through a "quantum meruit" analysis. This means that the court will look at the value of the services or contributions that each individual has made to the corporation, and will award ownership based on the proportion of value contributed.

It's worth noting that, if a corporation never properly issued stock, it may also have other legal problems such as not having held proper shareholder meeting, not having a proper corporate records, etc. This can make it more difficult for the court to determine ownership, and may also make it more difficult for the corporation to conduct business or enforce agreements. In such cases, it's best to consult an attorney to advise on how to properly structure the corporation going forward.

Liability of FTX endorsers

The chances of FTX endorsers like Tom Brady being held liable for any alleged wrongdoing related to their endorsement of the FTX exchange will depend on a number of factors, including the specific laws and regulations that apply to their endorsement and the actions taken by the endorser.

One key factor that may impact the chances of liability is the level of disclosure and transparency provided by the endorser. If an endorser makes clear and accurate disclosures about their relationship with the exchange, their potential financial gain from the endorsement, and any potential conflicts of interest, they may be less likely to be held liable for any alleged wrongdoing.

Another important factor is the level of control that the endorser has over the exchange and its activities. If the endorser has no control or influence over the exchange's operations, it may be more difficult to hold them liable for any alleged wrongdoing.

Additionally, the legal framework for advertising and endorsements might be different in various countries and regions, so this will also play a role in determining the chances of liability.

It's worth noting that in general, it's difficult to predict the outcome of legal matters and the chances of liability for any particular individual or entity. Ultimately, the specific facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the applicable laws and regulations, will play a significant role in determining the chances of an endorser being held liable for any alleged wrongdoing.

However, it's important to note that regardless of the chances of liability, endorsers should be aware of the possible risks involved in endorsing a financial product or service and take care to disclose any potential conflicts of interest or other relevant information.

Subchapter S Corporations

Subchapter S corporations, also known as S corporations, are a type of business entity that offers certain tax advantages over traditional corporations (C corporations). Some of the key tax advantages of S corporations include:

1. Pass-through taxation: S corporations are considered "pass-through" entities, which means that the income and losses of the corporation are passed through to the shareholders and reported on their individual tax returns. This means that the corporation itself is not subject to corporate income tax, which can result in significant tax savings.

2. Flexibility in allocating income and losses: S corporation shareholders have more flexibility in allocating income and losses among themselves. This allows them to optimize their tax situation by allocating losses to shareholders who are in a higher tax bracket and income to shareholders who are in a lower tax bracket.

3. Avoidance of double taxation: With traditional C corporations, income is taxed at the corporate level and then again at the individual level when it is distributed as dividends. S corporations, on the other hand, are not subject to double taxation, as the income is only taxed at the individual level.

4. Lower self-employment taxes: Shareholders of S corporations who also work for the company may be able to pay lower self-employment taxes on their share of the company's income.

5. Eligibility for certain tax credits and deductions: S corporation shareholders may be eligible for certain tax credits and deductions that are not available to shareholders of C corporations.

However, it's also worth noting that S corporations are subject to certain restrictions, such as a limit on the number of shareholders and certain restrictions on the types of shareholders that the corporation can have. Additionally, S corporations may be subject to more scrutiny from the IRS, which can lead to additional compliance costs.

Pros and Cons of Business Litigation Courts

Dedicated business litigation courts, also known as specialized commercial courts, are courts that are designed to handle complex business disputes, including those related to contracts, intellectual property, and antitrust laws. These courts are intended to provide a more efficient and effective way to resolve disputes involving businesses and commercial transactions. Some of the pros and cons of dedicated business litigation courts include:

Pros:

• Expertise: Judges in dedicated business litigation courts are often selected specifically for their expertise in commercial law and business disputes. This can lead to more informed and accurate decisions.
• Efficiency: Specialized commercial courts are designed to handle complex business disputes quickly and efficiently. This can help to reduce the time and cost of litigation for businesses.
• Predictability: Because dedicated business litigation courts are focused on specific areas of commercial law, businesses can have more predictability in the outcome of their disputes.

Cons:

• Access: Some critics argue that dedicated business litigation courts may not be accessible to small businesses or individuals who cannot afford to litigate in specialized commercial courts.
• Bias: Some argue that the specialized nature of these courts may lead to bias in favor of businesses and against consumers or other parties.
• Limited Jurisdiction: These specialized courts may not have jurisdiction over all types of disputes that a business may face, leading to the need to file in multiple courts.

In conclusion, dedicated business litigation courts can provide a more efficient and effective way to resolve complex business disputes, but they also have some drawbacks, such as potential lack of access and bias in favor of businesses. It is important to consider the pros and cons of dedicated business litigation courts when deciding whether to pursue litigation in one of these specialized courts.

The infamous Rule Against Perpetuities

write an essay from the perspective of a law professor on the rule against perpetuities

The rule against perpetuities is a fundamental principle of property law that limits the duration of future interests in property. The basic idea behind the rule is that no interest in property should be able to last indefinitely, as this would create uncertainty and instability in the property market.

The rule against perpetuities is based on the common law principle that no interest in property should be able to last longer than the lifetime of a person who is alive at the time the interest is created, plus 21 years. This is known as the "lives in being" rule, and it is designed to prevent the creation of interests that could last for hundreds of years or more.

There are several reasons why the rule against perpetuities is important. First, it helps to ensure that property is used efficiently and productively, as it prevents the creation of long-term interests that could tie up land and other assets for generations. Second, it helps to protect the rights of future generations by ensuring that they are not bound by the interests of their ancestors. Third, it helps to provide certainty and stability in the property market, as it ensures that people can rely on the interests they hold in property not to be challenged or defeated by the interests of others.

Despite the importance of the rule against perpetuities, it has been the subject of much debate and controversy over the years. Some have argued that the rule is too restrictive and inflexible, and that it can lead to unintended consequences, such as the loss of valuable property rights. Others have argued that the rule is too lenient and that it allows for the creation of long-term interests that are detrimental to the public interest.

Despite these criticisms, the rule against perpetuities remains a vital principle of property law that plays a crucial role in ensuring that property is used efficiently, fairly, and in the public interest. As a law professor, I believe that it is important for students to understand the rule and its implications, so that they can effectively advise clients and make informed decisions about property transactions.

In conclusion, the rule against perpetuities is a fundamental principle of property law that limits the duration of future interests in property. It is based on the common law principle that no interest in property should be able to last longer than the lifetime of a person who is alive at the time the interest is created, plus 21 years. The rule is essential to ensure that property is used efficiently and productively, protect the rights of future generations, and provide certainty and stability in the property market. Despite ongoing debate and controversy surrounding the rule, it remains a vital principle of property law.