The Law Awakens at San Diego Comic Con 2015!

By

-

July 13, 2015

We had an AMAZING time at our first San Diego Comic Con. There were fantastic panels, cosplayers who created costumes with awesome detail, and attendees who represented the joy of being a geek. We were truly honored to celebrate the third anniversary of The Legal Geeks at San Diego Comic Con.

I cannot say enough nice things about US Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal. The Judge might be the first Federal Judge to present at SDCC. Judge Grewal rocked on stage, gave one heck of a presentation, and truly loved Comic Con. I cannot thank him enough for joining Jessica and I on this adventure. Plus he asked to take a selfie with us. Jess and I were truly honored.

Tatooine Law

We were ecstatic that our Star Wars panel filled the room. I estimate that we had between 250 to 300 people in the room. We had a giant line outside the door and filled every seat. My only regret is not everyone was able to get in.

Our audience truly made our presentation experience excellent. We had Star Wars fans of all ages who really love the story, laughed at the humor on the slides, and asked very thoughtful questions on the law.

Our session highlighted to me that discussing legal issues through popular culture is an excellent way for community outreach. Many members of the public do not understand “The Law” and others are afraid of “the Courts.” Going over property rights by studying the ownership history of R2D2 and C-3PO, or Darth Vader modifying the deal with Lando, are great ways to illustrate legal issues for people who would like to know more on how “The Law” works.

I also was very happy that my brother and his fiancé attended our panel. As children we played with Star Wars toys for hours, having dog-fights with X-Wings and Tie Fighters and shootouts with action figures. It was awesome he could join us for our Comic Con debut.

A very dear friend from my volunteer work and her husband also joined us for SDCC. Both are Naval Officers and I was glad we were able to get active duty military personnel to the show as our guests.

Just a Few Panels

I was able to see multiple panels, including one on Marvel’s Secret Wars with Tom Brevoort, Harbro’s Star Wars team, and an interview with Jack Kirby that originally aired on public access TV in the early 1980s that had not been seen in over 30 years. There were tons of just excellent panels.

Marvel_SecretWars_3562 — The Marvel Secret Wars panel with Charles Soule speaking.

I was very impressed with Comics for Impact: Healing Wounds of War. The panelists discussed how comics can be used to help our vets with PTSD using different authoring tools. The two of the three methodologies empowered vets to tell their stories of to others by creating a comic. The third focused on a story of a Sargent tell his troops the story of the Odyssey and returning from war.

The Exhibit Hall

Millennium_Falcon_3476 — Who really needs space for a dining room table?

“Mind-blowing” is a accurate description of the Exhibit Hall. Booths ranged from vintage comics to TV shows, movies, and stunning models. I was especially impressed with Sideshow Collectibles. I have no idea where I would put a 1/6 scale Millennium Falcon cockpit or 5-foot Tie Fighter, but strangely want both.

Tom Hiddleston also walked by me, so that was pretty cool.

Tom_Hiddleston-_3612 — Rare moment of right place at the right time.

It was a Monster Party

I was very happy to catch up with my old friend Matt Weinhold and the team from Monster Party. I first met Matt back in the mid-1990s when my family owned Rooster T. Feathers Comedy Club. It was a joy to met his wife in person and go to dinner with Larry, Shawn, and James from Monster Party. It was very cool to join them for their SDCC podcast and I look forward to hearing it.

MonsterParty_3669 — James Gonis, Shawn Sheridan, Larry Strothe, and Matt Weinhold doing their magic.

2016?

We had an absolutely amazing time at San Diego Comic Con. A huge thank you to Mike Towrey from San Diego Comic Fest for all of his help in getting us a panel at SDCC. I hope we can present again next year, perhaps to honor the legal issues in Star Trek for the 50th Anniversary.

Spider-Kagan?

By

Josh Gilliland

-

July 7, 2015

0

It is nice to see Justice Kagan is also a Legal Geek. The Friendly Neighborhood Justice spun a web of geekdom in following stare decisis over payments for an expired patent for toy Spider-Man web slingers. If the Justice wants to rival the late Chef Justice Rehnquist’s strips on his robe, we have an idea on a new judicial look a la Spider-Gwen (and the talented Jesse Toves).

Here are the basic facts of the case: the patent holder developed a Web Blaster toy and sued Marvel in 1997. The parties settled with Marvel purchasing the patent holder’s patent for a lump sum of about a half-million dollars and a 3% royalty on future sales of the toy. Kimble v. Marvel Entm’t, LLC, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4067, *6 (U.S. June 22, 2015). In the words of the Court, “The parties set no end date for royalties, apparently contemplating that they would continue for as long as kids want to imitate Spider-Man (by doing whatever a spider can).” Id.

Prior cases hold that patent laws prevent patentees from getting royalty sales after the expiration of the patent. Id. Marvel sought and won declaration judgment that they did not need to continue payments after the 20-year period.

The Supreme Court held for Marvel following decades of case law. Justice Kagan concluded the opinion with the following:

What we can decide, we can undecide. But stare decisis teaches that we should exercise that authority sparingly. Cf. S. Lee and S. Ditko, Amazing Fantasy No. 15: “Spider-Man,” p. 13 (1962) (“[I]n this world, with great power there must also come—great responsibility”). Finding many reasons for staying the stare decisis course and no “special justification” for departing from it, we decline Kimble’s invitation to overrule Brulotte.

Kimble, at *31.

My compliments to Justice Kagan in letting her Geek Flag fly in the opinion. Uncle Ben would be proud. The Justice has a standing invitation if she ever wants to write a guest post on The Legal Geeks.

Was it Lawful for Darth Vader to Squeeze Lothal for the Rebels?

By

Josh Gilliland

-

July 6, 2015

0

Darth Vader does not lack imagination when it comes to targeting civilians and killing Imperial Ministers in order to crash a Rebellion. Were his actions in the Star Wars Rebels season two premier legal?

Lord Vader took the following actions to entrap the Rebels:

Used Minster Tua as bait;

Killed Minster Tua in a shuttle rigged with explosives;

Raided and arrested refugees in Tarkin-town; and

Placed a tracking device on a shuttle to follow the Rebels back to their Fleet.

Law enforcement cannot willfully use murder of suspected traitors as a means to entrap criminal suspects. While Minster TUA had planned to defect to the Rebellion given the threat on her life, killing her without a trial would violate the Fourth Amendment, Seventh Amendment, and Eighth Amendment on Earth (warrant for arrest, right to a speedy trial, and prohibition against cruel and usual punishment). Minster Tua was denied the right to defend herself in court, the right to counsel, a trial by her peers, and executed by explosives without any form of due process.

The Empire clearly views civil rights as an impediment to effective law enforcement. The State certainly has the right to set sting operations to capture criminals, however this does not permit the intention killing of individuals to carry out the arrest of others.

Darth Vader ordered the arrest of refugees in Tarkin-town in order to draw out the Rebels. There are precedents for squatters in public lands being arrested, such as the US Army routing the March of the Bonus Army or police in San Jose clearing out the homeless living in Shanty Towns on public areas. However, these actions are normally taken out of concern for public welfare after reports of high crime or safety concerns. Such police actions are often not taken well by the public, can be viewed as cruel, or in the case of President Herbert Hoover, cost him the 1932 Presidential Election after ordering General MacArthur to use the Army on World War 1 Army veterans. No one wins re-election when there is marshal law and fires burning in the Washington, DC.

Governments have a duty to protect its citizens from public and private nuisances that can originate from Shanty Towns such as Tarkin-town. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania found that the mayor of Philadelphia was justified in ordering the destruction of a “Shanty Town” that was (1) composed wholly of highly combustible materials, (2) insufficiently provided with chimneys or protected against fire, (3) occupied as a bar-room, (4) the resort of disorderly persons, and (5) located so close to governmental buildings as to imperil them. Fields v. Stokley (1882) 99 Pa. 306, 309.

Vader made MacArthur look like a sissy in the Imperial attack on Tarkin-town. There was no evidence that the refugees in Tarkin-town were squatting on public lands or a danger to public safety with the construction of the village. They might have violated zoning requirements if they were within a city, but Tarkin-town appeared well removed from Capital City on Lothal. Furthermore, the refugees did not appear to pose the public health hazard that would come from living in a Hooverville.

Even if there were public health and safety violations, enforcing those laws with Imperial Storm Troopers, possible airstrikes by Tie Fights, mass arrests, imprisonment in labor camps, or sending refugees to the Spice Mines of Kessel, would be grossly excessive force. What was their crime, not dying in the first place?

The Empire’s Doctrine of Fear takes “laws with teeth” to a new level. Moreover, Darth Vader claimed at the end of Revenge of the Sith that he had “brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire.” Executions without trials and military attacks on citizens are a very unique view of “peace, freedom, and justice.” Such extreme uses of force would justify in the words of Thomas Jefferson, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” A Rebellion is not just very logical result of such tyranny, but the Doctrine of Fear would cause mass recruiting for the Rebellion.

Let’s just hope Ahsoka Tano does not die horribly fighting Darth Vader this season.

Thank You, Thomas Jefferson

By

Josh Gilliland

-

July 4, 2015

0

Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence has defined the soul of the United States. We stand for the individual; we stand for freedom; and most of all, we stand for Independence.

President Jefferson is owed an eternal debt of gratitude for composing the heart of the Revolution into words that have defined us as a country since 1776. Instead of attempting to further define the significance of our Declaration of Independence, I ask anyone reading our blog to simply read Thomas Jefferson’s words out loud:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

President Jefferson, thank you for your service to country. You set a high bar for America and lawyers.

When Expert Witnesses Do Not Attain Kolinahr

By

Josh Gilliland

-

July 2, 2015

0

It truly is a no win scenario when a Judge excludes the expert witnesses of two adverse parties. How did this happen?

The case involved customs and the importation of mugs that infringed on certain trademarks. Apparently both experts testified that “the mugs and cups clearly have the same design characteristics including bright, bold colors and a round rim shape,” which the Court hammered as applying to countless other items not relevant to the lawsuit. G.G. Marck & Assocs. v. United States, 2015 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 66, *37-38 (Ct. Int’l Trade June 17, 2015).

Judge Richard Eaton stated the following on both experts’ testimony in footnote 18: Remarkably, each expert chose exactly the same words to express his opinion. No doubt, a human example of Vulcan mind meld. G.G. Marck, at *39, citing Star Trek: Dagger of the Mind (NBC television broadcast Nov. 3, 1966) [emphasis added].

The Court stated that a “person of usual discernment does not need the assistance of an expert to make a decision of whether dinnerware items are in the same pattern. Were this not the case, an expert would be needed to accompany each shopper that enters a housewares store.” G.G. Marck, at *39.

Judge Eaton held that the case did not need the testimony of the expert witnesses, due to the testimony being irrelevant and not useful. G.G. Marck, at *37-38.

What did we learn from this case? First, people do not go shopping for mugs with experts. Second, Judge Eaton is a Trekie. Always nice to see another Legal Geek.

Could Velociraptors Be Used in War?

By

Josh Gilliland

-

June 30, 2015

0

InGen’s military weapons branch in Jurassic World had the goal of producing Raptors to be used by the military. Could Raptors be weaponized like a meat-eating drone? Would the use of Raptors in combat be a war crime?

Oddly enough, it looks like the use of the animals would be legal, but that would likely be short-lived until their first military use.

Animals and National Defense

The military has used animals in the past for national defense. The US Navy has done extensive work with dolphins for decades. US Law allows the Secretary of Defense to authorize the taking of not more than 25 marine mammals annually for national defense. 10 USCS § 7524(a). There are specific requirements on the treatment of “Ensign Flipper” and “Skipper Sammy the Seal,” such as humane treatment. 10 USCS § 7524(b). Moreover, endangered species may not be taken for the military program.

There is the infamous article from Parade Magazine in 1978 that recounted a story denied by the Naval officer it was attributed to, stating:

“Some of the most valuable members the U.S. Navy are dolphins trained to defend American naval bases.

During the Vietnam war, squads of killer dolphins pulled guard duty at our billion-dollar Cam Ranh Bay base, now reputedly controlled by the Soviets. According to James Fitzgerald, former chief of the CIA’s Office of Dolphin Research: “With their built-in sonar, the dolphins detected enemy demolition divers on sabotage missions. They impaled them with long hypodermic needles connected to carbon dioxide cartridges. The frogmen just blew up.’

One of these days the Navy is going to release the account of how “some 60 North Vietnamese frogmen were nullified.’ “

Fitzgerald v. Penthouse Int’l (D.Md. 1981) 525 F.Supp. 585, 595, quoting Parade Magazine, Our Unsung Heroes, Sept. 10, 1978, at p. 8.

Regardless of whether or not “killer dolphins” were used in Vietnam in what sounds more like science fiction than fact, the military has a history using marine mammals for national defense.

Would the Army use Raptors? While there is a General who would be tempted to drop 20 Raptors on an ISIS camp, Raptors are not like dolphins or seals. Marine Mammals are not known for EATING people. There is a high risk that the use of Raptors in combat would end with every human fighting not to be a hot lunch for a Rambo Raptor.

Are Raptors Prohibited Weapons?

International treaties prohibit the use of chemical weapons, poison gases, and biological weapons (See, Geneva Protocol, Biological and Toxins Weapons Convention, Chemical Weapons Convention, and Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court).

There is nothing really on point with animals used for hand-to-hand combat, since we generally see service dogs being used to help soldiers for security, rescue, or bomb detention. History lacks stories of Stalin’s Killer Bear Brigades defeating Nazis at Stalingrad. Military planners have moved long past Calvary riding horses and replaced them with helicopters. As such, modern warfare lacks tales of elephants used as tanks.

This does not mean there cannot be cruelty to animals in war. However, the use of Raptors could be allowed because there is a lack of anything prohibiting it. That being said, as soon as the first iPhone video of a Raptor chewing on a terrorist hits social media, expect that to change in the fictional universe of Jurassic World.

Closing Arguments for Season 1 of Daredevil

By

Josh Gilliland

-

June 30, 2015

0

Daredevil is a very unique comic book adaptation for the Marvel Cinematic Universe. First, Wilson Fisk was not a villain out for genocide, but urban renewal through government redevelopment projects after the events of Avengers. Second, the hero is a lawyer with enhanced senses after being blinded with ninja skills. Sets a high bar for all lawyers besides following all our ethical obligations.

Judge Matthew Sciarrino, Novelist and Political Consultant Gerry O’Brien, and I dive into the many issues of Daredevil, from trial advocacy, New York City campaigns, to RICO.