Canadian Tar Sands Projects Under Fire From Aboriginal Groups

Tar Sands projects have a history of controversy and the Canadian Tar Sands projects are now facing increasing pressure from local Aboriginal groups who say that Alberta is violating Aboriginal rights and treaty obligations in tar sands development regions.

The claim is that a scathing report on how these rights are being violated has been buried by Alberta authorities – a claim that these authorities reject.

The report was put together by a panel that was appointed by government and reportedly contains information on numerous violations in terms of respect of planning for land use and the traditional rights and cultural concerns of the Aboriginal peoples of the area where the tar sands developments are taking place.

A Canadian national news channel obtained a copy of the report which showed that the panel agreed with almost every concern that was raised by representatives of the the First Nations.

According to a senior communications manager for Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations, which is located close to the tar sands sites the developments remain mired in controversy. Some of the concerns raised included a falling oil price, a stagnant economy and now the latest accusations that the Alberta government has failed to live up to their responsibilities when it comes to Aboriginal rights.

Representatives claim that they have only received a preliminary copy of the report after numerous delays. A spokesperson for the Alberta Environment Ministry says that the report was not delayed for any nefarious reason but that the government was merely crafting a considered response to the many recommendations contained in it, and that any response can only be forthcoming after close consultation with the communities that are affected by its findings.

One of the accusations is that the recommendations and any potential action plan if being treated as a ‘hot potato’ by the central government which is actively trying to pass responsibility to government on the federal level.

It was also noted that the problems include the contamination of traditional food sources such as Moose in the tar sands areas. This contamination includes the presence of heavy metals and hydrocarbons. The presence of arsenic, as well as mercury was also found in some species of wild duck in the area.

Many traditional trappers and others who live off the land are concerned that within a very short period of time it will simply not be possible to enjoy their traditional way of life.

The post Canadian Tar Sands Projects Under Fire From Aboriginal Groups appeared first on BHP Law.

Square Settles Morley Litigation For $50 Million

Plenty of start-up companies have interesting origin stories. The credit card processing company, Square, lives true to this claim. On May 5, 2016 the company released their first quarter earnings report. It included an announcement telling shareholders that they amassed $50 million in general and administrative expenses. This is in relation with the Morley litigation. The all-cash settlement put an end to the two-year lawsuit that had beleaguered the company.

Robert Morley is a professor at Washington University. He claimed that he was responsible for creating a dongle which became the signature product of Square. The device reads credit cards by translating information into audio signals, enabling smartphones to process credit card payments. Despite the fact that Morley patented the technology, he found himself outside the ownership of Square.

This shed some light on the rather intriguing story of Square. In 2008, James McKelvey Jr. sought the help of Morley for starting a new business. McKelvey came upon the idea of using smartphones to read credit card transactions. Morley then came up with the necessary technology. He also shared much of his knowledge about the credit card industry, as neither McKelvey nor Jack Dorsey have much experience in this sector.

Dorsey, however, created a new company that would later become Square. It was co-founded by McKelvey, and Professor Morley was left out of the equation. Morley also complained that the additional patents filed by square contained his insights and methods. For this reason, Morley filed a lawsuit against the company and its two cofounders. He wasn’t only seeking for damages but also aiming to be given credit for the Square patents.

Square recently settled the lawsuit, paying Morley a staggering $50 million. Although this all-cash settlement hurt Square’s earnings, the company felt it was a necessary move to move on toward profitability.

In their earnings report for the first quarter of 2016, Square indicated a loss of $97 million. In the same quarter last year, the company only took a loss of $46.3 million. But Square was able to increase revenue by over 50%, totaling $379 million. Despite falling short on analyst expectations, the numbers show that the company is moving closer toward profitability.

Square has remained silent following the details of the settlement with Morley. And now that the lawsuit is settled, it would be interesting to see whether Square sharers would go up after plummeting due to their mixed earnings report.

The post Square Settles Morley Litigation For $50 Million appeared first on BHP Law.

Business Litigation And Social Media

With the prevalence and popularity of social media it comes as no surprise that most businesses use it in some way.  In fact, with more and more traffic to brick and mortar businesses coming from a customer who found out about them online, it’s difficult to compete as a business without using it. Unfortunately, just because a business has a Facebook or Yelp account doesn’t mean that they know how to properly represent themselves online. If the social media manager of a business doesn’t understand the scope of their audience they can fail to act with the proper level of decorum and professionalism ultimately leading to a damaged or even ruined reputation.

Now, in general, the damage that is done can be reversed and the worst it can do is hurt their reputation. Recently however, mega-company Yelp itself made a social media faux-pa that actually led to litigation. Specifically, Yelp made an inappropriate tweet about fired employees and that has raised significant concern about employee privacy.

Boundaries

There are boundaries, and social media is not exempt from this when it comes to a business and its customers. Those boundaries have to be maintained and in Yelp’s case, the limitations also involve their employees. You have to look into this as a business and make sure nothing untoward is said.

Decorum Is Important

This is one of the main things that is not being understood, and that is unfortunate. If a business does not behave well online, they are asking for trouble, and it will come back to bite them. The business has to be the smarter entity in the battle online.

If something negative is being said, it is best to brush it off because businesses are often the targets of severe fines.

All business lawyers talk about this to make sure their clients understand what can happen through social media.

Legally Viable

It’s widely misunderstood that litigation can be pursued over something said online exactly the same way it can be pursued if it were said in person. Somehow the online world still feels like the wild west where anything goes. Not only is this no longer the case, but the official comments a business makes online often need to be more carefully considered because of a much larger audience and because once something is spelled out, there is no longer any way for someone to say, “that’s not actually what I said” or “you mis-heard me” The victim’s case would still be just as strong, and they would have actual proof regarding the posts/tweets made.

It is best to steer clear of these matters and some businesses such as Yelp are learning it the hard way. Business litigation has taken a new turn, and that is what makes it exciting. There are cases coming out of nowhere and it is interesting to see how people react.

The post Business Litigation And Social Media appeared first on BHP Law.

The Legalities of Treasure Hunting

What child hasn’t dreamed of discovering hidden treasure. Oftentimes the story plays out with the discovery of map that leads to a buried chest filled with riches and jewels. X marks the spot. Of course the likelihood of there actually being any chest full of gold medallions centuries buried on some Caribbean island yet to be discovered is very very slim. However, piracy on the open seas was a very real thing for centuries. Naval ships would often be boarded and robbed by gangs of swashbucklers and there is no way of telling where all the shipwrecks of old may be and what might be found on them. In Maritime Law we refer to this as treasure salvage.

Of course it isn’t always as exciting as all that. Ships and boats sink in the open sea in modern times too pulling down with them different assortments of property and valuables. While mariners are expected to save the lives of other people on the high seas without expecting a reward, there are quite a few maritime law codes and standards regarding the rescue of property. The recovery of property lost at sea is generally referred to as salvage.

There are two main types of salvage; contract salvage and pure salvage. Contract salvage is what it says; a matter of contracts. The owner of the property lost at sea enters into a contracted agreement with the salvor to begin salvage operations on a vessel lost at sea. All the property is returned to the property’s original owner, while the salvor is paid an agreed upon fee mentioned in the contract. As with many forms of contracts, these contracts are considered invalid if made under duress or under false pretenses, as well as a number of other circumstances that could invalidate any other land bound contract. Perhaps the most common salvage contract is referred to as Lloyd’s Open Form, a type of standardized legal document published by Lloyd’s of London that serves as a popular form of salvage contract.

Treasure salvage, also known as pure salvage, has no contract between the owner of the property and the person or persons recovering them, with the relationship being implied by admiralty law. The person or group who act as the salvor of pure salvage property must bring their claim to a maritime court, where, depending on the strength of the case of both parties, the court will grant salvage rights and rewards based on the value of the property and the difficulty of the salvage operation.

In a “high order” salvage claim, the salvor put themselves and their crew at risk of injury or risked loss or damage of their equipment in order to salvage the damaged ship. This also applies to raising sunken ships as these endeavors are generally quite difficult. “Low order” salvage claims are generally low or non-existent risk situations for the salvor and tend to carry smaller rewards as a result, usually much smaller rewards.

The rewards for both types of salvage will seldom exceed half the value of the property recovered. The main exception to this rule comes in the case of treasure salvage, sunken treasure that has generally been lost for decades, if not centuries.

The post The Legalities of Treasure Hunting appeared first on BHP Law.

How Human Rights Are Still Being Violated

Over the years, my legal practice has brought me face to face with violations of human rights that we would have expected to be history by now. Unfortunately these are issues that affect people from all walks of life. In our day and age and in this very country people are being discriminated against for because of their sex, race, language, religion, age and even political opinions.

Believe it or not, our society is still not free from racism, and it’s doubtful that it ever will be. Especially when you consider that despite it’s high ideals and supposed founding on the basis of freedom and equality for all, slavery and discrimination were still legal. Not just legal but the social and expected norm. In fact an absence of them would have been considered improprietous. It’s not surprising then when I work with clients who have put up with an unbelievable amount of racism in the workplace. This country was built on the foundation of slavery and discrimination seems to be deeply ingrained in this culture.

Prisons are another place where human rights are often violated. Conditions can be dangerous for inmates. Guards will often cause harm to them or turn a blind eye to abuse. Our prison systems were originally designed to keep criminals off the streets and to protect the innocent from them. Now more and more, prisons have become a dangerous place where the inmates themselves need to be protected from each-other and from the very people who are supposed to supporting a safe environment for the community.

Everyone in this country has rights. You are allowed to be free, and you shouldn’t have to fear that because of something you are that you cannot enjoy your day to day life. It’s a good idea to learn what your rights are, and if you are having a hard time with anyone treating you poorly due to religion, race, sexual preferences, or any other reason you should work with a lawyer. We know how to represent those that have a desire to be treated in a fair manner no matter who they are. The USA is made up of all different kinds of people who deserve equality.

As long as discrimination continues, there will also be good people who come to the defense of people’s basic human rights. It’s too bad that we need to have laws set in place telling people that they cant treat each other like animals. On the other hand, since discrimination is such a problem, we can be grateful that there are laws in place protecting us from violations of our God-given rights to life liberty and justice for all.

The post How Human Rights Are Still Being Violated appeared first on BHP Law.

Georgia Officer Dies From Shooting

Update:  2/11/16 The deceased officer has been identified as Riverdale Police Major Greg Barney.  You can read additional details and view his ODMP Memorial here.   A Riverdale... 

 

 

A Riverdale (GA) police officer is the latest line of duty death that has rocked the profession in the last week.

The officer has not yet been identified but he was shot after responding to an apartment complex in Riverdale on Thursday.  Authorities have stated that a group of officers were serving a “no knock” warrant at the apartment complex.

The officer was transported to Southern Regional Medical Center in critical condition, taken into surgery and later died from his injuries.

Read more here:  http://lawofficer.com/2016/02/11/georgia-officer-dies-from-shooting/