legal aid
legal help, finding the right attorney
Is Google a Monopoly?

Has it done Evil?

Has Google betrayed

the very users it once

loved?

Legal help when you need it most

legal insanity

cyber law

ATT and Tmobile?

Legal issues

legal help

American Amp Attorneys books Business Business Forms Congress Constitution Contracts Control Edition Environment Ethics Forms Freedom Guide Insurance International Introduction Issues Job Law Students Lawsuits Lawyer Lawyers legal Legal Advice Legal Books Legal Documents Legal Forms Legal Issues Legal Opinion Legal Opinions Legal Writing Lt Money Opinion People Product Description Remainder Mark Research System Truth White House Writing

Developing legal strategies

Is google about to make a huge mistake?

Over the last few months Google has been quietly and allegedly terminating accounts, suspending ad words accounts, and doing so in a way that might actually be illegal?

Who would do something like that more so if your a company that says do no evil?

One thing may be about to change and it is something that you should be very aware about.

In so many ways, big corporate business is strangling the life out of the internet.

They are forcefully creating a situation where only large companies with more money to spend on advertising can be successful.

 

This is wrong…

When only large corporations are afforded the ability to advertise and the regular public as well as small business (mom and pop) business are excluded this is wrong.

In so many ways, allegedly google has done more evil than anyone even realizes, (allegedly)

legal trouble

Posted by lawsuit - December 23, 2011 at 5:27 pm

Categories: American Bar Association, Class Actions, cyber law   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is the government preparing to take over the Internet?

There have been some uneasy cases recently and some news stories concerning the government and
the internet, these stories which may be little more than rumors at this point however we have seen
an ongoing effort over the last few years by the government going after the internet as a means of
tax revenue.

Indeed there are many states that are now charging tax for online purchases.

This is very disturbing and if steps are not taken to stop this behavior the internet as we know it today
will cease to exist, the internet is still in its infancy and will continue to be in a state of growth as long
as the government stays out of its development.

The moment that we allow the government to begin to stifle growth online by trying to censor and
regulate all the content online, we will have a problem that will deepen the already weakened economy.

Posted by lawsuit - December 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm

Categories: bankruptcy, Class Actions, Constitutional Law, cyber law, family law, Getting a Lawyer, Internet Law, Type of Attorney   Tags: , , , , ,

Internet Market laws

The FTC has some interesting information available if you have not seen this you really need to watch this video.

Posted by lawsuit - August 31, 2011 at 3:21 pm

Categories: AARP, ACLU, American Bar Association, Class Actions, Constitutional Law, cyber law   Tags: , ,

Keep the Internet free?

What this cannot be, where is the ACLU,

are they blind, are they deaf, why are they only allegedly interested in stopping people from praying?

Big Business is swarming Capitol Hill this week as they struggle to get the Internet Blacklist Bill passed.

Here’s Techdirt’s take:

The world’s largest lobbying organization, the US Chamber of Commerce…along with the biggest lobbyists representing the recording and movie industry, have ramped up their efforts to get PROTECT IP

approved as quickly as possible.

Call your local Chamber of commerce to make sure that they understand what this will mean if this law is passed.

Will you support our work by becoming a monthly Demand Progress sustainer? Our small, dedicated, (under-paid) staff is entirely member-supported. (You can cancel your donations at any time.)

Yes! I’ll become a Demand Progress sustainer today.
I can’t, but I’ll click here to chip in $5 or $10 today so you can keep fighting the Internet Blacklist Bill and protecting civil liberties.
But now the good news: Why is the Chamber having to go to such great lengths to ram their bill through Congress? It’s because of Demand Progress members like you. More from Techdirt:

This is the first stage of the endgame to get the law passed. To be honest, I’m surprised they’ve even had to go this far, because from the beginning it looked like they had the easy support. The fact that they felt the need to break out this little stunt shows that the opposition to PROTECT IP has actually drummed up enough noise that some politicians are concerned about the very real unintended consequences of the law.

Will you support our work by becoming a monthly Demand Progress sustainer?

Yes! I’ll become a Demand Progress sustainer today.
I can’t, but I’ll click here to chip in $5 or $10 today so you can keep fighting the Internet Blacklist Bill and protecting civil liberties.
Thanks so much for your continued support.

Posted by lawsuit - July 30, 2011 at 1:51 am

Categories: AARP, ACLU, corrupt, cyber law   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

fox news lies by omission

So is it fair?

Can there be a fair trial when you see websites like this one that are so convinced of what they “think” is the truth, the truth may be very different, the truth may not be known by even fox news, as good as they “think” that they are, they may be wrong, in fact the US justice system has been wrong in the past.

Can this girl get a fair trial at all?

When you have the media convinced of her guilt, most all of the bobble heads at fox news, and likely other news companies also, have said time and time again by action and by inference, that there are some issues that have not been addressed, do we not have a real working system of justice here?

Earlier we were witness, to a fox news commentator, that made a statement, about how they felt that the defense was trying to show a likely result.

There was no real fair and balanced view presented.

In fact there was only one view presented, that was the “we think that she is guilty view point”

When you look at the thought process, involved here you have to think about one thing and one thing alone, is this fair and is this balanced.

When you hear someone make a statement on national TV about how they think that the defense is trying to show reasonable doubt, and that there is no real reasonable doubt, (allegedly) they fail to make that correct impression, by only presented one point of view, it is not a fair thing to do, what if they are wrong, will they come out and apologize that they made allegedly stupid statements?

For example Phil Keating, talks about about what they “think” the defense is trying to do but he only makes one statement, that statement, is filled with invective, that calls for the conclusion of an alleged, verdict of guilty.

Just now on live TV, the bobble head, made the statement, of what the defense “hopes” to prove, this could be made differently you could say the defense may be trying to show that the use of a particular method of disposing of the body of a pet, might be something to consider in this case.

But they did not say that, they seem to be stuck using words that presume the idea of guilt.

You can use words to influence the thinking of anyone, for example while writing this article, I could use many different points or words to make a point, however, I choose to try to show a counter point, that is not happening on Fox news, the (Fair and balanced news company)

Is this fair and balanced coverage or is it just one sided?

 

 

Posted by lawsuit - July 28, 2011 at 8:48 pm

Categories: casey anthony, charlie sheen, Classic Media, criminal law, cyber law, evil doers, family law, florida injustice?, Foundation Press, get an attorney, Getting a Lawyer, gun control, Internet Law, is weiner a liar?, lawsuit, Lawsuit the Cops   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

is intent the same as crime?

There seems to be a new disposition among law enforcement and some rather odd District Attorneys, to apply the theory, valid or otherwise that if you think about it and you think that you are doing to do it then that is the same as doing it.

I know it is sort of difficult to wrap your mind around, but think about it this way what if you “thought” about committing a crime and you “thought” that you were going to do it, but at the last minute you changed your mind…

Remember the movie they made a while back with tom cruise  called minority report, where they have these all powerful psychic that can predict the future so the idea is if you think about it then your guilty.

That could be an alarming thing, considering that a lot of people think about doing things all the time but that does not mean they would act upon those thoughts.

This sort of attacks the innocent until proven guilty thing that has been a part of criminal law for centuries.

But what are we to do now that we have law enforcement that is creating a new way to charge people with crimes that they just think about…

If you are not worried about this then your insane because they could easily say that because you “think bout robbing a bank” then that is the same thing, as robing a bank.

That seems a little crazy, yes and it would be but that is what is happening in many instances, for example they had this girl in florida, (really bad place to visit because you might end up being charged with your own thoughts)

Florida they have this girl whom they setup and they “pretended” to be a “hit man” then they pretended, that they were going to kill someone, “here it comes”  Now they tell this girl, that they “the pretend killers”  who are pretending to be a killer, but are really a cop, that they are going to kill for real the girls husband, ” so they pretend to be a real hit man”  and they pretend to be serious about what they are pretending to do.

Then they get the girl on video and they pretend to say that since we are pretending, we are going to pretend to give you one last chance to get out of this pretend crime, (that is before we charge you with a real crime)  (again florida great place to not visit)

Then they “lie to the girl”  and then they pretend to kill the husband, then they pretend that he is dead, Wow, that is a lot of pretending, now I ask you this, would that girl had actually done what they were pretending to do?

Probably not…

 

Posted by lawsuit - May 31, 2011 at 1:38 am

Categories: criminal law, cyber law   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FTC guides and Taco Bell?

Deception, is a big problem in Advertising these days and more so among Eating establishments and their commercials, you see pictures of Huge three foot Pizzas, 14 inch hamburgers, yet when you get to the restaurant you find that what you get is not the same thing as what you are shown.

Is this not Deception?

We see the keyword used all the time when the FTC goes after someone they think is being deceptive, totally subjective process for the most part, or is it?  With regard to fake merchandise certainly it is easy to see that yes they are being deceptive however one has to wonder, about this entire subject, are restaurants being deceptive in showing the consumer a ten foot high product but when you go to buy that product, you find it is about four inches in diameter, not three feet in diameter, which bring up the question, does the consumer know that they are not going to get what is being show to them?  Logically yes, they know they are not going to get a 12 inch hamburger…

However here is the real question, does the subconscious human mind know this?

Is it possible that some commercials are deceptive by the psychological nature of what they show to consumers.

More importantly should the FTC step in to regulate this aspect of what is most certainly deceptive advertising practices?


Did Taco Bell change its ways, or was the story really ever true?

Well one thing for sure is this, Taco bell had little choice but to either change its practice of calling non beef (beef) or start calling it taco filling.

Not a likely outcome…

Remember the Wendy’s commercials all those year ago, Where’s the Beef, well apparently and allegedly you could say that again…

Well folks you might have to wonder if there is any connection between the new FTC guides and Taco bell, but one thing is clear,

A law firm in Alabama, (of all places) is allegedly happily filing a lawsuit,

allegedly, this is the alleged, ingredients, source, Gizmodo

Water, isolated oat product, salt, chili pepper, onion powder, tomato powder, oats (wheat), soy lecithin, sugar, spices, maltodextrin (a polysaccharide that is absorbed as glucose), soybean oil (anti-dusting agent), garlic powder, autolyzed yeast extract, citric acid, caramel color, cocoa powder, silicon dioxide (anti-caking agent), natural flavors, yeast, modified corn starch, natural smoke flavor, salt, sodium phosphate, less than 2% of beef broth, potassium phosphate, and potassium lactate.

Now, as the story goes, (allegedly) at Gizmodo, Taco bell cannot legally call its beef product, beef, yet, apparently they have been allegedly doing so in some commercials, or something like that, which should come as no surprise considering the results of eating at taco bell more than once per month, (allegedly)

All kidding aside, how are the new FTC guides effecting commercial advertising?

Why is it important?

How do you feel about it?

Is it about time that some action is taken with all of the commercials on TV, there is bound to be a healthy amount of skepticism, I know I sure think that, every day, when I see, a buy one suit at full price get 10 suits FREE, yet, we all know that your paying for those suits, or do we?

Perhaps, some do not, and that may be where this protection is needed, I know for sure that I am sick of seeing a three foot in diameter, pizza, on TV, and then when I go to pick up the pizza it turns out to be barely 14 inches, just for the math to work out right, lets add that up, 3 feet, that would be 36 inches.

Huge, pizza, right, well that my friends is not being honest, in fact the materials that these pizzas are allegedly made from is not food at all but silicone.

So, a disclaimer is in order, something like you of course know that this is not actually pizza at all but a silicone based over sized advertising tool to make you want to buy a pizza, what you may get may not actually even remotely resemble a pizza like the one your being shown.

But wait, would that not be bait and switch?

Perhaps and yes, Bingo, Yahtzee, you win the big prize.

You know it appears that advertising in our culture has long had a very shady element since the times of the carnival, barker who would yell and cajole, laugh and entertain you out of the few dollars and cents you might have in your pocket, advertising false or otherwise has been such a great part of the American culture, that separating it from our TV might be difficult, would it not be a novel idea to produce advertising that is actually accurate?

Only time will tell, it it might not be all that far off before your faced with a hamburger that actually resembles, what you would get if you went down and bought one, a pizza might soon start to look like you might get if you went down and purchased one.

Because to do otherwise, well folks that is just deceptive advertising and it is about time that some law firms start pulling the carpet out from under those jerky advertisers, right? Well, perhaps, I guess it depends on a lot of different things, you would think that in 50 years, that advertisers would have tired of trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes, but allegedly they have not and so the fight may be just warming up…

Posted by lawsuit - May 27, 2011 at 6:09 pm

Categories: AARP, American Bar Association, anti trust, car wrecks, Class Actions, Classic Media, constitution, Constitutional Law, corporate, credit card, criminal law, cyber law, Encore Software, Evergreen, FOX Home Entertainment, francescaskitchen, Getting a Lawyer, good cop bad cop   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why you may need legal help

This year alone more than 50 thousand estimated tickets for more than 300 dollars will be given out of those most people will just pay it out.

However, more and more people are having to go to court to defend themselves, and their wallets.

You never know what may happen next and as predictable as the legal system is you really need to have a good relationship with a legal professional.

In the days where spilled coffee can result in a million dollar settlement, net, you have to be aware that the risk of loss is serious, more so when you consider, that there are literally millions of under insured small business companies out there.

You are likely to need legal help at least once over a period of years, yet most of us do
not actively seek legal help at all.

Data from a survey, conducted by Leo J. Shapiro & Associates, on behalf of the American Bar
Association’s Section of Litigation, which shows that close to three
quarters of American adults experience some event during a twelve-month
period that may require the services of a lawyer.

Over half of those who needed an attorney chose not to hire one, and close to 80% of those yet to
experience legal problems gave strong indications they might go down the
same route.

Why all the doom and gloom? Price is the most sticking point
for most consumers. When it comes to hiring a lawyer, hourly fees of $100
up to $1000 are out of reach of most people’s budget. And then comes the
trepidation of searching for a good attorney and the right service: there
is a lot of uncertainty and confusion as what a lawyer will do, and how to
tell the good from the bad.

A legal plan may solve these problems and change the way you think of legal
services. Thanks to this arrangement, you can now talk to a lawyer whenever
you have a problem, without fear this will leave you out of pocket. In
fact, you don’t even need to be embroiled in a legal problem to get legal
advice: just pick up the phone, call your attorney and get the necessary
legal advice susceptible of resolving any potential problems –with
professional legal advice and follow-up, you can prevent ninety percent of
your legal questions becoming legal problems. Basic services such as the
drafting of your will, review of sample health contracts and writing
letters on your behalf are handled at no cost to you. If you want further
coverage to include family problems, such as a divorce or custody of
children, and any legal representation in court, then you simply pay a
premium and get more inclusive coverage.

Even if your plan doesn’t cover complex legal matters, it can still save
you money on those sky-high attorney fees. Discounts of up to 20% are
offered on hourly and flat rates. Ultimately, it’s not all down to how much
you can save. Having an attorney readily available at all times gives you
peace of mind, in the knowledge that there is someone you can use on
retainer for advice and help on anything of legal nature.

Posted by lawsuit - December 12, 2010 at 10:42 pm

Categories: criminal law, cyber law, family law, get an attorney   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

national day of prayer illegal?

What your kidding right, well apparently one judge thinks they can make law from the bench, which is really funny because that is not constitutional, but hey dont let that stop you from the land of drugs, and free, freedoms, comes, a decision that is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Here is the idea,

because of a national day of prayer, it is not constitutional, what? based on what lame argument?

Well it establishes a religion… err, well maybe it does?

Ok, lets say it does, name one, just one religion that has been established, because of one day  of prayer out of the year…

Im listening….

sorry I can hear your answer….

Well…..

Come on…..

Whats wrong you cant think of even one religion that has been established?

I will even give you all the years since 1952 to come up with one religion that has been established.

Whats wrong cat got your tongue? is something wrong, you dont seem to be saying anything…

You know why it is so silent, that is because the idea that religion is established by one day of national prayer is
not a sound argument, for one thing, they have failed, to mount an effective argument.

So what is up with that,
And that would be the truth, not one single religion has been established by having a national day of prayer…

NOT ONE SINGLE RELIGION….

Since 1952 there has not been one single religion that has been created or established because of a national day of prayer.

So what is next, will they declare that bibles are not constitutional?

And after that, will they start to burn churches, because they are not constitutional either?

Think about it folks, you see where this is headed right, when we have one person that tries, to make policy from the bench they effectively try to become a dictator from the bench, and that is not what the oath they swore to uphold.

When a lawyer, breaks his or her oath, they can be disbarred, which is sort of like a death sentence for the attorney.

So what happens when a judge breaks their oath? I tell you what should happen, is that judge should be removed from office.

I suggest that this needs to happen to this person that has done this, because her actions are illegal and unconstitutional.

This is more than a slippery slop, it is the worst nightmare of every free person in the world, when one person becomes a dictator from the bench, then the freedom of the world hangs in the balance.

It is Time, for these people to go, because they do not know the constitution, they do not know the law, and if they did would they dare, make this kind of decision and then try to back it up with nonsense?

Stupid, that is what it is, and we have better legal minds, in state college…

Posted by lawsuit - April 16, 2010 at 12:09 pm

Categories: Constitutional Law, criminal law, cyber law, prayer   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

life lock alleged lies?

Life lock insanity, you see these alleged commercials where people are crying on TV, Crying and whining, is that right?

What do you think of this?

It is more likely that you would ever receive a benefit from an alleged low benefit insurance policy.

Could it be true? Say it Aint so, allegedly there are several of these companies that prey on americans, they create the fear then they create the product to assuage that fear, now that my friends is ambulance chasing to the next degree. These fly by night companies for the most part, are just a poor excuse for an insurance company, that is why the price for the service is so low.

Identity theft is a big problem and it is becoming even more of a problem, but lets be truthful for a moment, if you are a victim how much protection do you think that 9.95 will buy you, think about that for a moment, at the rates of today, how much money would you have to spend if you had to hire someone to fix an identity theft problem?

Posted by lawsuit - February 27, 2010 at 4:16 pm

Categories: cyber law   Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Next Page »