Legal Authority

It’s funny how difficult it can be hunting down lawyers, in the movies they always seem over eager to take up your case. We’ve all heard of ambulance chasers and how some lawyers are about as eager as door to door salesmen in their endeavors to find a client. Of course in the real world things aren’t as simple. Before falling back on my final option, my cousin, I decided to try out the harder route and go with an unknown. I tried to call up a bunch of offices, but it was amazing just how dodgy lawyers can be especially when it comes to only answering a few questions. I was also amused by the experience how almost all the secretaries seemed sound like they were all the same person. The same indifferent façade, the same broiling questions, and the same “we will get back to you as soon as possible.” In one instance I made the fatal mistake of calling one of the secretaries just that, a “secretary,” and I was rudely introduced indirectly to their feelings towards my condescension. But eventually I decided blood is thicker than water, and went with my cousin, Victor Hairapetian who is a real estate lawyer out of Glendale, California. I’ve known this cousin of mine all my life, he’s about 20 years older than me, plus has been always warm in our meetings. All I had to do was call him up, through his personal cell phone, and never even have to deal with any snarky middle man. Plus, it was pleasant having a chance to speak with him after all these years. The last time I had seen him or talk to him was about 4 years ago, and even though our conversation was short. For the fact I was talking to a lawyer, it was ironically quaint.

Week 10, EOC: Robert Kearns vs. Erin Brockovich

This week I watched all the bits and pieces in the movie “A flash of Genius” which is about the long and hard battle Robert Kearns had to be put through trying to prove the Ford motor company stole his invention. My first impression of the film was just how boring it felt, the film was long and felt like it went on forever. For the first 20 minutes all I wanted was to see the conflict which would take the film into the second act, it’s what you expect from all films.

As the movie started to reach the third act in where Robert Kearns would finally be confronting the Ford Company in court, I was irritated enough by the whole situation that I finally started to feel something for the film. Obviously the Ford Motor Company portrayed the big bad company who’s out to get all the little people in the world that matter. But the reason this film eventually managed to work for is because, this is what it is.

Compared to Erin Brockovich and its feel good, sharp dialogue, and quick victory, this movie felt more realistic. The fact is Erin Brockovich is more of the feel good film with some exceptional dialogue. So there for the whole court case and the conflict in that film felt like a MacGuffin. This movie on the other hand had a more realistic feel to it. It had more weight, and the film was you can even say the opposite of being entertaining. It was frustrating to watch even till the end where of course the good guy wins, and the bad bad billion dollar Ford motor company gets its come-up-ins.

Truth is Robert Kearns just felt more real, down to earth, boring, annoying to watch, and exactly what I would expect dealing with patent issues and major money grubbing corporations feels like. Because the truth of the matter is, most people aren’t even so lucky as Robert Kearns to win the case and have a mediocre film made about him. So Erin Brockovich in some sense is a lie, even though it is based on the true story. Chances are if I ever get caught up in a case similar to what Robert Kearns went through; I won’t have a lovely red head with a Double D figure winning me a 30 million dollar case.

Week 10 BoC: Lawyer Jokes.

-Q: How can you tell the difference between an attorney lying dead in the road and a coyote lying dead in the road? A: With the coyote, you would see skid marks.

http://justjoking.com/jokes/jokes/joke317.html

What's the difference between a hooker and a lawyer?

-A hooker will stop screwing you after you are dead.

http://www.lawlaughs.com/short/thedifference.html

-Q: How many lawyers does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Three. One to climb the ladder. One to shake it. And one to sue the ladder company.

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

Week 7 EoC: 10 Lawyers, 10 Websites

1. Donald L. Prunty
http://www.gtlaw.com/

2. Susan M. Pitz
http://www.nutilepitz.com/

3. Ira W. David
http://www.morishitalawfirm.com/

4. Tiffany Swanis
http://www.jonesvargas.com/

5. Neil J. Beller
http://www.neiljbeller.com/Firm%20Info/Lawyers/1066956.aspx

6. Victor Hairapetian
http://www.facebook.com/people/Victor-Hairapetian/1084736615#!/profile.php?id=1084736615

7. Ikenna K. Odunze
http://www.manta.com/c/mth51lw/ikenna-k-odunze-attorney

8. John Lund Krieger
http://www.lrlaw.com/professionals/xprProfessionalDetailsLR.aspx?xpST=ProfessionalDetail&professional=197

9. Steven Pacitti
http://www.colo-lawyers.com/bio/StevenPacitti.asp

10. Gregory R. Gemignani
http://www.lionelsawyer.com/index.cfm?page_id=5&page=attorney_profile&atid=22

Week 7 EoC: Intellectual Property Questions

1. How do I best protect myself from someone else stealing my artwork/design?
2. What’s the first step to take if someone does steal my design?
3. Do you recommend I personally contact a company that I suspect has stolen my idea?
4. How different (percentage wise) does my design have to be than a similar one?
5. What common issues do designers usually overlook in protecting themselves?
6. Do you recommend a lawyer review my contracts before signatures are put on them by the parties involved?
7. Where do you recommend a designer look for a contract template?
8. Is it better to use a template or have a lawyer draft an original contract for my design?
9. If I die and have a patent pending, does it become public domain?
10. When is it necessary to trademark intellectual property?

Week 6 EoC: Illicit

It’s very difficult for a country like ours, the USA to deal with criminal activities within our borders alone, and this is considering we are a first world nation. When you start thinking about the difficulty that governments have in second or third world nations, you can imagine just how difficult fighting this all really is. Now add the fact taht in our modern times how small the world has become through the internet, you can now imagine how difficult the act of controlling criminal acts like counterfeiting and illicit has become. Controlling your own borders is one thing, but considering how interconnected criminal organizations have become, I really think it’s become just about a losing war.
Truth is, nations will probably never get a hold on every crime ever committed, but what we have here is a free for all where criminals majority of the time are getting away with, and that’s what’s really important. Not only are criminals winning, they’re dominating.
Now when it comes to my personal opinion about all this, well, I have the same issue most governments have to deal with. We won’t exceed the borders of their own country. Honestly, I’m no government or international official whose job it is to deal with this growing issue. So another words, as long as it has no direct effect to my life and the people I know, I really don’t care.
To be honest, I have a bit of contempt for capitalism, and I care less if multimillion dollar organizations and companies around the world are getting ripped off because of this issue. I care about the fake pharmaceuticals because in a cases like those people’s lives are endangered over bogus medications. But either than that and cases similar, I really don’t care to be frank. Now you can hold be contempt for my rash opinions and my favoring to stay ignorant. But the fact is the world is a very ugly place, and it’s only in fat countries like ours where you have people sitting on top wondering why the rest of the world cries for bread when they could be eating cake.

Week 5 EoC: Lawyers looking for Fame

As with every generation, what can be expected by ethics and common practices might as well go out the window. As with then generations in the past 30 years, the so and so called “Me” generation, the questions has been asked if people as a whole are getting greedier, selfish, and more self centered than they use to be. With the generation that is now graduated from the colleges and heading out into the work force, the term “Trophy Kids” has been coined to refer to them.

"They really do seem to want everything, and I can't decide if it's an inability or an unwillingness to make trade-offs," (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455219391652725.html) was said by Derrick Bolton, an assistant dean at Stanford University. As for the case of the fame seeking lawyers, this obviously also applies to them.

As for the case of Fernandez-Vargaz v. Gonzales, the damage that could have been done to nationwide immigration laws because of one of these so called fame seeking lawyers could have been immeasurable.
“Noncitizens with even more compelling cases are still living with the consequences of the Fernandez-Vargas decision,” (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/us/10lawyers.html?pagewanted=3) said Trina Realmuto of the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.

To be honest, I find this to be a major problem, with today’s generation of thrill seekers more and more people are finding themselves stepping out of place of their skills and experience, and obviously taking very little consideration of what they are doing and what the consequences might end up being outside their own lives.

“College kids today are about 40 percent lower in empathy than their counterparts of 20 or 30 years ago, as measured by standard tests of this personality trait.” (http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/the-culture-of-narcissism/) said Sara Konrath, a researcher at the U-M Institute for Social Research. The fact is, with little sympathy, and hardly any empathy, there cannot be an ethical understanding on behalf of today’s lawyers. Without those ingredients, people today can expect to rely more on themselves and less on the aid of others. I mean lawyers have always just about had the stereotype of being blood sucking vampires, now they’re just going to be upgraded to the next level. Whatever that is, really doesn’t seem all that promising to me. Actually, it’s quite the opposite.