User:BD2412/Archive - Law

Archives: Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th

Misc.-1st-2d-3d/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd/Vandalism

I have archived my law-related discussions here

[edit] Flag copyrights?

There is a discussion on the Village Pump about the copyright status of flags. I must admit that I have never considered the matter, but have tended to assume that all governmental flags are public domain. I suppose that organizational flags (such as that of the Presbyterian Church (USA)) are copyright to those organizations. Your interests include IP, so I thought you might be able to comment. 11:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• You could start by looking at the comments on the U.S. flag. There are indeed some restrictions on the use of flag icons, but you'll need to research that yourself if it's a concern. :) Wahkeenah 12:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] America: From Freedom to Fascism

Dear BD2412: I removed some material in the above-referenced article that had been copied and pasted from the web site advertising the film itself. I removed it as a possible copyright violation (and I guess I could have cited non-neutral POV as well, maybe). I think I may have asked you this before, but I can't remember the rule. Question: Because I moved the excerpt from the article to the talk page with an explanation of why I deleted it, do we still have a copyright violation problem? Or, is putting it on the talk page OK under the fair use doctrine? Should I delete the quote from the talk page as well? Yours, Famspear 14:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, moving copyvio material from the article to the talk page probably weakens the fair use rationale as it is arguably no longer being used as part of the "educational" process which the articles serve. So, yes, you should probably delete it altogether if that's the rationale for removing it from the article. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] freedom of movement

Still remember that article? Think we could get it up to Featured, or at least GA/A rank? I added new sections on Africa and Tibet. This could really be a good article to add stuff to, and the research isn't all that hard. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 18:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

That was my goal from the start of it! bd2412 T 05:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, wanna do me a favor then? I'm starting (or rather restarting) Wikiproject Climbing. WP:CLIMB. The articles are very simple to improve, most need to be tagged with the {{Climbing}} template. But I really am a little over my head here. I could use some help. Want to give me a hand? ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 07:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll sure look it over, though I can't say I know the first thing about climbing! bd2412 T 21:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glenshaw Glass, etc.

Thanks for the tip. Things have been fairly quiet with the tax protesters lately. I knew it was too good to last.

It looks like the stuff on South Carolina v. Baker was a wholesale copying of much of the text of the court's opinion, with what looked like some sort of commentary at the end, with no clear delineation. Anyway, at least we have the beginnings of a new article on a tax case now.

By the way, have you by any chance been following Murphy v. IRS? That is really a case to watch for tax geeks like me. In August, a 3 judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled an income tax provision of the IRC unconstitutional (although they did not rule the Federal income tax itself unconstitutional). It was not a tax protester case - it was a case about taxability of personal injury awards. First time in who knows how many years that an income tax provision has been ruled unconstitutional. Legal scholars ripped the opinion apart and, a few days ago, the same 3 judges vacated their own judgment and set the case for rehearing in April. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with next time. Almost any ruling that personal injury awards are not "income" under the Constitution is fairly likely to make its way to the Supreme Court.

Anyway, good to hear from you. Happy holidays! Yours, Famspear 21:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)