Arguments against civil disobedience

Above and beyond this, the following are authorised to represent parties as attorneys-in-fact: Consumer centres and other publicly subsidised consumer associations, where they are collecting claims of consumers in the context of their scope of responsibilities; 4. Attorneys-in-fact who are not individuals will act through their governing bodies and the representatives charged with representing them in the proceedings. Actions taken in the proceedings by an attorney-in-fact who does not have the power of representation, as well as the service of documents on this attorney-in-fact, or notice given to him, will be valid until the date on which the court refuses to accept him.

Arguments against civil disobedience

Too bad, the court will certainly say; a content-based preliminary injunction of speech would be a blatantly unconstitutional prior restraint. Likewise for preliminary injunctions against obscenity and other kinds of speech, despite the fact that such speech, if ultimately found to be unprotected at trial, could be criminally or civilly punished.

How can this be? Why, then, not to allegedly infringing speech? In Part I, we discuss the history of preliminary injunctions in copyright cases and the current law relating to such injunctions. In Part IV, we discuss the implications of the collision between copyright law principles and free speech principles, and propose some changes that are needed to bring copyright law into line with constitutional commands.

We conclude that permanent injunctions in copyright cases should generally be constitutional, and the same should go for preliminary injunctions in cases that clearly involve literal copying, with no plausible claim of fair use or of copying mere idea rather than expression. Other preliminary injunctions, though, should generally be unconstitutional.

In Part V, we briefly explore these questions with regard to other kinds of intellectual property--trademarks, rights of publicity, trade secrets, and patents. We conclude that the problem is not limited to copyright, and that at least in trademark and right of publicity cases, preliminary injunctions may sometimes run afoul of the First Amendment.

Finally, in Part VI we say a bit about the practical prospects for revising the law along the lines we suggest. Preliminary injunctions have been a feature of English copyright law since its inception.

The first modern English copyright act was the Statute of Anne in While the overlap Arguments against civil disobedience the two produced some disputes, it was well established that injunctive relief could be ordered by the Court of Chancery notwithstanding the existence of a legal remedy in damages.

The issuance of such injunctions in England appears to have been rather common in the early days of copyright, and the standard for their issuance rather lenient. Beckett, Lord De Grey concluded that of the seventeen copyright decisions between andseven appeared to be "injunctions granted ex parte, upon filing the bill, with an affidavit annexed.

But it is notable that English courts regularly issued preliminary injunctions in copyright cases in which "the defendant [was] not so much as heard. Indeed, in one case the Chancellor issued an injunction "till the hearing" at law on the basis of an expired copyright, on the grounds that the plaintiff might in addition be entitled to common law copyright protection.


Some courts characterized this as an effective presumption in favor of injunctive relief. A Court of Equity therefore acts, with a view to make the legal right effectual by preventing the publication altogether. Despite the fact that United States copyright law was based largely on the English model, 24 early U.

Bender, 33 where the court refused to issue a preliminary injunction despite clear evidence of copying because the infringing work was not a "mere copy" and was unlikely to supersede the original. Plaintiffs who had made a clear showing of infringement were sometimes denied injunctive relief if the defendant presented evidence that it could pay adequate damages after the completion of the suit.

Strange, discussed above, 40 where the same factual circumstance was held to support rather than oppose the granting of a preliminary injunction. At some point in the early part of this century, judicial hostility towards preliminary injunctions in copyright cases began to abate.

In his treatise on copyright law, Arthur Weil noted that "the modern tendency is to issue temporary injunctions more freely than in earlier times. The Modern Rule The Copyright Act of 43 authorizes courts to grant "temporary and final injunctions on such terms as [they] may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright.

If that can be demonstrated, a preliminary injunction is the expected remedy.

Teacher’s Note. While most people recognize that in “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau argues against submission to government policies that individuals deem immoral, few note that he also issues a sharp critique of representative democracy. A civil matter involves a lawsuit in which one party sues another to recover money, real property or personal property, to enforce a contract or an obligation, to collect damages for injury (tort), or to protect some civil right. As our climate changes history will look back on Tim DeChristopher as one of the true heroes of our time. The prosecutor, judge, and all those making their livings and fortunes through the extraction and selling of fossil fuels will bring shame to their grandchildren for we shall all see them as descendents of selfish traitors to humanity.

The Second and Ninth Circuits, the most important in copyright cases because together they house the New York publishing industry and acting community, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley, do not even require hardship to the defendant to be balanced at all if the plaintiff can show that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim.

Courts find it "virtually axiomatic that the public interest can only be served by upholding copyright protections," 63 and accordingly grant preliminary injunctions if the plaintiff has shown a likelihood of success on the merits. A prima facie case of copyright infringement requires that the plaintiff prove that it owns a valid copyright and that the defendant has infringed the copyright by violating one of the exclusive rights enumerated in the Act.

Nonetheless, the practice in copyright cases seems to reverse the irreparable injury rule: In appropriate cases, plaintiffs can obtain temporary restraining orders ex parte in accordance with Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Such seizures are also often ex parte, a fact which has caused some writers--and the Federal Rules Advisory Committee--concern. Summary Several things are notable about the law of copyright preliminary injunctions. First, the modern U. Copyright plaintiffs can dispense with most of the normal requirements for obtaining a preliminary injunction, and disputed issues are regularly resolved in their favor.In his essay “Civil Disobedience," Henry David Thoreau opens by saying, “I heartily accept the motto, ‘That government is best which governs least’" (), and then clarifies that his true belief is “‘That government is best which governs not at all’" ().

Voting Rights Background.

Arguments against civil disobedience

is the climactic year in the campaign to win Black voting rights. Sometimes referred to as America's "Second Reconstruction," this fight for the vote stretches far back, deep into history..

Previous voting-related articles in this History & Timeline include. Code of Civil Procedure. Full citation: Code of Civil Procedure as promulgated on 5 December (Bundesgesetzblatt (BGBl., Federal Law Gazette) I page ; I page ; I page ), last amended by Article 1 of the Act dated 10 October (Federal Law Gazette I page ).

The British suffrage movement wasn’t always so violent. The National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies, formed in and led by privileged widow Millicent Garrett Fawsett, campaigned for.

Code of Civil Procedure. Full citation: Code of Civil Procedure as promulgated on 5 December (Bundesgesetzblatt (BGBl., Federal Law Gazette) I page ; I page ; I page ), last amended by Article 1 of the Act dated 10 October (Federal Law Gazette I page ).

This article appears in the Spring issue of The American Prospect lausannecongress2018.comibe here..

What criticisms of representative democracy does Thoreau raise in “Civil Disobedience”?

Celebrate our 25th Anniversary with us by clicking here for a free download of this special issue. R ecollections of the Civil Rights Movement shape the way we comprehend and respond to a protest that remains sharply contested.

The civil .

Navajo Nation Rules of Civil Procedure