17 Burst results for "Duke Law School"

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:27 min | 2 months ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is Bloomberg law. A divided Supreme Court rejects a religious challenge. Charles little about the facts of the case. Peter views with prominent attorneys in Bloomberg legal experts. My guest is former federal prosecutor Jimmy Carole joining me as Bloomberg law reporter Jordan Rubin. And analysis of important legal issues, cases in headlines. The Supreme Court takes on state secrets multiple lawsuits were filed against the emergency rule. Is this lawsuit for real? Bloomberg law with June Grasso. From Bloomberg radio. Welcome to the Bloomberg law show, I'm June grosso, ahead in this hour. Why the Supreme Court's shadow docket is as ominous as it sounds. Trump electors are targeted in the Georgia criminal investigation. Elon Musk loses the first round in his legal battle with Twitter. And JPMorgan's former big hitters of the gold market are being tried for racketeering. Michael Novak was once the most powerful person in the goal market. Now he's on trial with two other former JPMorgan Chase employees for operating a criminal conspiracy inside one of Wall Street's largest banks, facing decades in prison. Prosecutors say a corrupt group of traders and sales staff manipulated gold and silver markets for the benefit of the bank and its prized clients, scamming the market for years with so called spoofing trades. Joining me is securities law expert James Cox, a professor at duke law school. Jim explain what spoofing is. Well, smooth thing is keep this on simple ground. Is submitting an order to buy in order to sell without the intent of really wanting to buy it or sell it at a price the order stated. And it's intended to lure the unsuspecting into thinking that the market is moving one direction or another. So the whole purpose of spoofing isn't to close an order. But rather to create the impression that prices are moving or likely to move in a certain direction because of a buildup of demand demand on the sales side or demand on the buy side. So all of this is the false order that's been sent to the marketplace. And a series of false orders to create an idea that there's like a surge of price, for example, let's assume that you said a whole bunch of false orders to buy. To create the image that there's a lot of demand out there at $10 and maybe the price will go up to ten ten and so therefore you should be wanting to go out and buy in the market at ten or ten O 5 with the expectation that both markets will suddenly go to ten ten. So you grow out in the market and you're willing to pay more than the current market price of ten because you think it's going to go up to ten O 5 and you close the ten O 5 and the market stays at ten. So you've gotten clipped. So the whole idea of spoofing is to dupe another person of believing that there's a shift in the marketplace. So now in this case, unlike past cases of alleged trading fraud, the prosecutors have sort of upped the ante here, they're accusing the defendants of a racketeering conspiracy. That's a law you usually see more with the mafia than banks. This is true. They're using the recall and other legislation that's been passed over the decades as designed to go after a purposeful intentional misconduct. We rarely see that used in most securities or commodities cases, but they're doing it in this case. And I believe the fact that we now find that certainly with this administration, when you look at who the U.S. attorneys are, who's at the SEC, who's at the commodity future trading commission, those are all now democratically controlled prosecutor offices and there has been the belief that the markets have gotten more and more corrupt through a variety of practices, not just spoofing, but spoofing is one of those processes where it's rampant. And what's interesting in the case is being prosecuted now is that part of the defense is the fact that look, I came in, our young broker here and I saw how things were working and people did this practice, which turns out to be spoofing, doing it all the time. And I just thought that was normal and routine processes and I had no corrupt criminal intent behind it. And the fact that that defense in this case has some salience to itself, where I think that that could be actually the key defense to this case is that everybody's doing it indicates that this is a pervasive problem, but it also explains why we're suddenly seeing spoofing cases being brought. And particularly this moving case being brought and the criminal arena, that is that this is not a question of just getting an injunction against somebody making them disgorge the commission so that they may have earned by spoofing or maybe even the gains that they made by spoofing. This is the perhaps put somebody away for some period of time in prison. And the reason for that is that the markets are filled with moving. Some of the prosecution's witnesses are former traders who are cooperating after pleading guilty, so would they be able to testify as to what the intent was. Yes, the important thing is to describe the phenomena. So the trier of fact can really understand why this is manipulative conduct and not legitimate business practices. So they would be explaining that as to explain the consequences of the misconduct. So the witnesses are doing that. And I think that they're also going to be helpful in describing the likely mental state of the defendant in this case. That is that brokers all knew that this conduct was illegal that was pervasively practiced and it was a way to make money and that there were victims not those who were practicing spoofing, but rather the other traders on the other side who are anti and were victimized by false appearances about market movements. So I think that all of that is important and the fact that they'd be able to get some other traders to cooperate while at the same time admitting that they had engaged in this conduct makes it more likely that the defendant in this case could be found guilty. According to the defense, evidence that the trial will show that the vast majority of all market orders are canceled and the typical lifespan of an order is just a couple of seconds. I think that

Supreme Court Jimmy Carole Jordan Rubin JPMorgan Chase June Grasso Bloomberg radio duke law school Michael Novak Elon Musk James Cox commodity future trading commi Bloomberg Trump Charles Peter Georgia Twitter Jim
"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:27 min | 2 months ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is Bloomberg law. A divided Supreme Court rejects a religious challenge. Tell us a little about the facts of the case. Peter views with prominent attorneys in Bloomberg legal experts. My guest is former federal prosecutor Jimmy Carole, joining me as Bloomberg law reporter Jordan Rubin. And analysis of important legal issues, cases in headlines. The Supreme Court takes on state secrets multiple lawsuits were filed against the emergency rule. Is this lawsuit for real? Bloomberg law with June Grasso. From Bloomberg radio. Welcome to the Bloomberg law show. I'm June grosso, ahead in this hour. Why the Supreme Court's shadow docket is as ominous as it sounds. Trump electors are targeted in the Georgia criminal investigation. Elon Musk loses the first round in his legal battle with Twitter. And JPMorgan's former big hitters of the gold market are being tried for racketeering. Michael Novak was once the most powerful person in the goal market. Now he's on trial with two other former JPMorgan Chase employees for operating a criminal conspiracy inside one of Wall Street's largest banks, facing decades in prison. Prosecutors say a corrupt group of traders and sales staff manipulated gold and silver markets for the benefit of the bank and its prized clients, scamming the market for years with so called spoofing trades. Joining me is securities law expert James Cox, a professor at duke law school. Jim explain what spoofing is. A smooth thing is keep this on simple ground. Is submitting an order to buy it in order to sell without the intent of really wanting to buy it or sell it at a price the order stated. And it's intended to allure the unsuspecting and to thinking that the market is moving one direction or another. So the whole purpose of spoofing isn't to close an order. But rather to create the impression that prices are moving or likely to move in a certain direction because of a buildup of demand demand on the sales side or demand on the buy side. So all it is is the false order that's being sent to the marketplace. And a series of false orders to create an idea that there's like a surge of price, for example, let's assume that you said a whole bunch of false orders to buy. To create the image that there's a lot of demand out there at $10 and maybe the price will go up to ten ten and so therefore you should be wanting to go out and buy in the market at ten or ten O 5 with the expectation that build markets will suddenly go to ten ten. So you grow out in the market and you're willing to pay more than the current market price of ten because you think it's going to go up to ten O 5 and you close the 10.5 million in the market stays at ten. So you've gotten clipped. So the whole idea of spoofing is to dupe another person of believing that there's a shift in the marketplace. So now in this case, unlike past cases of alleged trading fraud, the prosecutors have sort of upped the ante here, they're accusing the defendants of a racketeering conspiracy. That's a law you usually see more with the mafia than banks. This is true. They're using the recall and other legislation that's been passed over the decades as designed to go after a purposeful intentional misconduct. We rarely see that used in most securities or commodities cases, but they're doing it in this case. And I believe the fact that we now find that certainly with this administration, when you look at who the U.S. attorneys are, who's at the SEC, who's at the future trading commission, those are all now democratically controlled prosecutor offices and there has been the belief that the markets have gotten more and more corrupt through a variety of practices, not just spoofing, but spoofing is one of those practices where it's rampant. And what's interesting in the case that's being prosecuted now is that part of the defense is the fact that look, I came in, our young broker here and I saw how things were working and people did this practice, which turns out to be spoofing, doing it all the time. And I just thought that was normal and routine processes and I had no corrupt criminal intent behind it. And the fact that that defense in this case has some salience to itself, where I think that that could be actually the key defense to this case is that everybody's doing it indicates that this is a pervasive problem, but it also explains why we're suddenly seeing spoofing cases being brought. And particularly this moving case being brought and the criminal arena, that is that this is not a question of just getting an injunction against somebody making them disgorge the commission so that they may have earned by spoofing or maybe even the gains that they made by spoofing. This is the perhaps put somebody away for some period of time in prison. And the reason for that is that the markets are filled with moving. Some of the prosecution's witnesses are former traders who are cooperating after pleading guilty, so would they be able to testify as to what the intent was. Yes, the important thing is to describe the phenomena so the trier of fact can really understand why this is manipulative conduct and not legitimate business practices. So they would be explaining that as to explain the consequences of the misconduct. So the witnesses are doing that. And I think that they're also going to be helpful in describing the likely mental state of the defendant in this case. That is that brokers all knew that this conduct was illegal that it was pervasively practiced and it was a way to make money and that there were victims, not those who were practicing spoofing, but rather the other traders on the other side were victimized by false appearances about market movements. So I think that all of that is important and the fact that they'd be able to get some other traders to cooperate while at the same time admitting that they had engaged in this conduct makes it more likely that the defendant in this case could be found guilty. According to the defense, evidence of the trial will show that the vast majority of all market orders are canceled and the typical lifespan of an order is just a couple of seconds. I think that that was

Supreme Court Jimmy Carole Jordan Rubin JPMorgan Chase June Grasso Bloomberg radio duke law school Michael Novak Elon Musk James Cox future trading commission Bloomberg Trump Peter Georgia Twitter Jim SEC
"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:27 min | 2 months ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is Bloomberg law. A divided Supreme Court rejects a religious challenge. Tell us a little about the facts of the case. Peter views with prominent attorneys in Bloomberg legal experts. My guest is former federal prosecutor Jimmy Carole joining me as Bloomberg law reporter Jordan Rubin. And analysis of important legal issues, cases in headlines. The Supreme Court takes on state secrets multiple lawsuits were filed against the emergency rule. Is this lawsuit for real? Bloomberg law with June Grasso. From Bloomberg radio. Welcome to the Bloomberg law show. I'm June grosso, ahead in this hour. Why the Supreme Court's shadow docket is as ominous as it sounds. Trump electors are targeted in the Georgia criminal investigation. Elon Musk loses the first round in his legal battle with Twitter. And JPMorgan's former big hitters of the gold market are being tried for racketeering. Michael Novak was once the most powerful person in the goal market. Now he's on trial with two other former JPMorgan Chase employees for operating a criminal conspiracy inside one of Wall Street's largest banks, facing decades in prison. Prosecutors say a corrupt group of traders and sales staff manipulated gold and silver markets for the benefit of the bank and its prized clients, scamming the market for years with so called spoofing trades. Joining me is securities law expert James Cox, a professor at duke law school. Jim explain what spoofing is. A small thing is keep this on simple ground. Is submitting an order to buy it or to sell without the intent of really wanting to buy it or sell it at a price the order stated. And it's intended to lure the unsuspecting into thinking that the market is moving one direction or another. So the whole purpose of spoofing isn't to close an order. But rather to create the impressions that prices are moving or likely to move in a certain direction because of a buildup of demand demand on the sales side or demand on the buy side. So all it is is the false order that's being sent to the marketplace. And a series of false orders to create an idea that there's like a surge of price, for example, let's assume that you said a whole bunch of false orders to buy. To create the image that there's a lot of demand out there at $10 and maybe the price will go up to ten ten and so therefore you should be wanting to go out and buy in the market at ten or ten O 5 with the expectation that build markets will suddenly go to ten ten. So you grow out in the market and you're willing to pay more than the current market price of ten because you think it's going to go up to ten O 5 and you close the 10.5 million in the market stays at ten. So you've gotten clipped. So the whole idea of spoofing is to dupe another person of believing that there's a shift in the marketplace. So now in this case, unlike past cases of alleged trading fraud, the prosecutors have sort of upped the ante here, they're accusing the defendants of a racketeering conspiracy. That's a law usually see more with the mafia than banks. This is true. They're using the recall and other legislation that's been passed over the decades as designed to go after a purposeful intentional misconduct. We rarely see that used in most securities or commodities cases, but they're doing it in this case. And I believe it's the fact that we now find that certainly with this administration, when you look at who the U.S. attorneys are, who's at the SEC, who's at the future trading commission, those are all now going to control prosecutor offices and there has been the belief that the markets have gotten more and more corrupt through a variety of practices, not just spoofing, but spoofing is one of those processes where it's rampant. And what's interesting in the case is being prosecuted now is that part of the defense is the fact that, look, I came in, our young broker here, and I saw how things were working and people did this practice, which turns out to be spoofing, doing it all the time. And I just thought that was normal and routine processes and I had no corrupt criminal intent behind it. And the fact that that defense in this case has some salience to itself, where I think that that could be actually the key defense to this case is that everybody's doing it indicates that this is a pervasive problem, but it also explains why we're suddenly seeing spoofing cases being brought. And particularly this moving case being brought and the criminal arena, that is that this is not a question of just getting an injunction against somebody making them disgorge the commission so that they may have earned by spoofing or maybe even the gains that they made by spoofing. This is the perhaps put somebody away for some period of time in prison. And the reason for that is that the markets are filled with moving. Some of the prosecution's witnesses are former traders who are cooperating after pleading guilty, so would they be able to testify as to what the intent was. Yes, the important thing is to describe the phenomena so the trier of fact can really understand why this is manipulative conduct and not legitimate business practices. So they would be explaining that as to explain the consequences of the misconduct. So the witnesses are doing that. And I think that they're also going to be helpful in describing the likely mental state of the defendant in this case. That is that brokers all knew that this conduct was illegal that it was pervasively practiced and it was a way to make money and that there were victims, not those who were practicing spoofing, but rather the other traders on the other side who are victimized by false appearances about market movements. So I think that all of that is important and the fact that they'd be able to get some other traders to cooperate while at the same time admitting that they had engaged in this conduct makes it more likely that the defendant in this case could be found guilty. According to the defense, evidence of the trial will show that the vast majority of all market orders are canceled and the typical lifespan of an order is just a couple of seconds. I think that that was

Supreme Court Jimmy Carole Jordan Rubin JPMorgan Chase June Grasso Bloomberg radio duke law school Michael Novak Elon Musk James Cox future trading commission Bloomberg Trump Peter Georgia Twitter Jim SEC
"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

07:50 min | 4 months ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is Bloomberg law with June Grasso from Bloomberg radio After the tragic school shooting in Texas by a teenager who bought his AR-15 style rifle legally president Joe Biden called for action on gun control legislation that has stalled on Capitol Hill As a nation we have to ask when in God's name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby When in God's name we do we all know in our gut needs to be done But the governor of Texas Greg Abbott brushed aside calls for strict gun legislation saying gun laws don't curb violence in major cities that have them I hate to say this but there are more people who were shot every weekend in Chicago than there are in schools and Texas Joining me is an expert in Second Amendment law Joseph blocher a professor at duke law school In America we have more guns than people And there's been an upward trend in the purchase of guns since 2020 Why are Americans buying more guns Yeah there's a few things to say about it And I think one is the sheer number of guns But another is why are people buying guns As far as the sheer number I think the thing that always stands out to me is that although the number of guns in circulation seems to continue going up the percentage of Americans who own them continues to go down There was a bit of a spike during the pandemic I get the background of George Floyd the way the protests and so on But if you look over the last ten or 15 years actually the percentage of Americans who live in a household with a gun continues to decline So what that means is that the people who own guns are buying more and more but the number of people who have them continues to go down But the other thing that's changed really dramatically is the tipping point within the last ten or 15 years is that the primary reason for Don ownership has shifted It has historically been recreation and hunting And it is today self defense And so the motivation and then I think that sort of changes the mindset for gun ownership has dramatically changed too And self defense is a justification we hear a lot Even just as Brett Kavanaugh asked during the oral arguments in the case over New York's gun law why isn't it good enough to say I live in a violent area and I want to be able to defend myself This is a tricky one because so much of this is a debate about sort of hypothetical from counterfactuals And what would have happened if this person had had a gun or something I had a gun And that's tricky I think do that well requires a rigorous look at big sets of data rather than sort of trading the hypotheticals and anecdotes And there has been scholarship on this and Fowler's disagree unsurprisingly about the degree to which permissive public carry laws either do or don't reduce rates of particular kinds of violent crime I've never seen anything convincing that guns in schools would reduce the math school shootings that we've seen I mean there was an armed guard at the school in Texas And that wasn't enough President Biden has called on Congress to end gun violence by passing common sense gun laws Is federal legislation the answer I think it's going to require a variety of responses federal state and local I think there are some kinds of laws that are best known as the federal level expanded background checks would be a good example That's easiest to administer using a national influence background check system which relies on data that comes from the state But at the state level there's plenty of reforms as well Some of which have some bipartisan support and has become more popular even in the last 5 years So the passage of extreme risk protection order laws often called red flag laws That's a good example There's more than 20 states have those now almost all of them have been adopted in the last 5 years So there's a room there At the local level things are a little trickier because most states might more than 40 states now have what are called preemption laws which make it hard for local governments to regulate But in the states where local governments still have some regulatory space they could for example designate certain places like Mars or busy public areas stadiums et cetera as sensitive places where guns should be taken They might impose licensing requirements on people carrying guns into particular places So it's going to require a broad response at the federal state and local level So I want to go back because it wasn't until 2008 that the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the gun rights of individuals That was the Heller case and it was a 5 to four decision In European is that a true reading of the Second Amendment Yeah I should say in the interest of full disclosure here I was one of the attorneys who represented the District of Columbia In that case so I was on the loose side of that case You know my review on it now is that the question is much closer than the Supreme Court made it sound So the question for the court was whether the Second Amendment extends to private purposes like the individual use of parameters self defense against criminals or whether it is limited to the organized militia that is like state militias come into people and arms and activities having some connections to those militia I actually think that's a hard question I think that justice Scalia's majority opinion could have been much better reasoned if he were not so committed to relying on some of the historical sources that he did I think that justice Stevens in dissent had the plausibly the better of the historical argument But I think Heller itself is settled law and at least until now it has not been the problem You know the main obstacle to gun regulation is still political It's not the courts are striking down gun laws until recently anyway courts haven't been striking down many gun laws It's more that the laws are just never being first but justice Scalia's opinion is very explicit that the government retains regulatory authority over things like dangerous and unusual weapons and certain classes of persons and carrying certain places and for that matter can feel caring And so it's really kind of up to us what are we going to do in that space that Heller leaves open That space may be closed somewhat because we're waiting for this opinion from the court and most people who listen to those oral arguments are anticipating that the court is going to strike down New York's law imposing special requirements to get a handgun license Yeah I think the challenges in that case have reason to feel confident I think that the New York law at least in its current form is probably going to be struck down And what we're really waiting to hear is on what basis How broad is the Supreme Court's ruling going to be The challenge is to New York's current system for issuing permits to publicly carry a concealed handgun And the court could just say well New York standard is too strict or New York standard has too much discretion built into it And that would be a relatively limited holding It could be a big one The court could go further and say you know permit requirements for public hearing are unconstitutional or they all have to be protocols shall issue meaning based on purely objective criterion And those would be broader The other thing the court could do and I think this is the one that most in the weeds but maybe the most significant is that they could adopt a whole new test The whole new methodology for evaluating whether gun laws New York or others are constitutional And that would be what's called the test of text history and tradition which was advocated by land judge Bret Kavanaugh when he was on the D.C. circuit before he was elevated at the Supreme Court And under that test the idea would be gun laws should be evaluated based solely by reference to text history and tradition And I felt a brief in the New York case arguing that that would be a bad idea I think that's true I think that's an extreme form of originalism It's just not going to give judges guidance in most cases It would make it hard to evaluate the federal rules prohibiting guns on airplanes right What are the framers think about that Nothing I had no idea or the current federal law for having any gun possession by people who committed crimes with domestic violence not even prosecuted as a crime in the late 1700s So I think those who are really in the ceiling are keeping eye on that methodological question as well as the specimen's outcome with regard to New York's law Thanks Joseph fast professor.

Texas June Grasso Bloomberg radio Joseph blocher duke law school George Floyd Don ownership Brett Kavanaugh President Biden Greg Abbott New York Joe Biden Capitol Hill Supreme Court Bloomberg Scalia justice Stevens Fowler Heller Chicago
"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

08:22 min | 4 months ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is Bloomberg law with June grosso from Bloomberg radio After the tragic school shooting in Texas by a teenager who bought his AR-15 style rifle legally president Joe Biden called for action on gun control legislation that has stalled on Capitol Hill As a nation we have to ask when in God's name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby When in God's name we do what we all know in our gut needs to be done But the governor of Texas Greg Abbott brushed aside calls for strict gun legislation saying gun laws don't curb violence in major cities that have them I hate to say this but there are more people who were shot every weekend in Chicago than there are in schools and Texas Joining me is an expert in Second Amendment law Joseph blocher a professor at duke law school In America we have more guns than people And there's been an upward trend in the purchase of guns since 2020 Why are Americans buying more guns Yeah there's a few things to say about it And I think one is the sheer number of guns But another is why are people buying guns As far as the sheer number I think the thing that always comes out to me is that although the number of guns in circulation seems to continue going up the percentage of Americans who own them continues to go down There was a bit of a spike during the pandemic I get to the background of George Floyd related protests and so on But if you look over the last ten or 15 years actually the percentage of Americans who live in a household with a gun continues to decline So what that means is that the people who own guns are buying more and more but the number of people who have them continue to go down but the other thing that's changed really dramatically I think the tipping point was in the last ten or 15 years is that the primary reason for gun ownership has shifted It has historically been recreation and hunting And it is today self defense And so the motivation and then I think that sort of changes the mindset for gun ownership has dramatically changed too And self defense is a justification we hear a lot even just as Brett Kavanaugh asked during the oral arguments in the case over New York's gun law why isn't it good enough to say I live in a violent area and I want to be able to defend myself So this is a tricky one because so much of this is a debate about sort of hypothetical from counterfactuals And what would have happened if this person had had a gun or a personal account And that's tricky I think to do that well requires a rigorous look at big sets of data rather than sort of trading the hypotheticals and anecdotes And there has been scholarship on this and scholars disagree on surprisingly about the degree to which permissive public carry laws either do or don't reduce rates of particular kinds of violent crime I've never seen anything convincing that guns in schools would reduce the math school shootings that we've seen I mean there was an armed guard at the school in Texas And that wasn't enough President Biden has called on Congress to end gun violence by passing common sense gun laws Is federal legislation the answer I think it's going to require a variety of responses federal state and I think there's some kinds of laws that are best known at the federal level expanded background checks would be a good example That's the easiest to administer using a national influence background check system which relies on data that comes from the state But at the state level there's plenty of reforms as well Some of which have some bipartisan support and has become more popular even in the last 5 years So the passage of extreme risk protection order laws often called red flag law That's a good example There's more than 20 states have those now almost all of them have been adopted in the last 5 years So there's a room there At the local level things are a little trickier because most states might more than 40 states now have what are called preemption laws which make it hard for local governments to regulate But in the states where local governments still have some regulatory space they could for example designate certain places like Mars or busy public areas stadiums et cetera as sensitive places where guns should be taken They might impose licensing requirements on people carrying guns into particular places So it's going to require a broad response with the federal state and local level So I want to go back because it wasn't until 2008 that the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the gun rights of individuals That was the Heller case and it was a 5 to four decision In your opinion is that a true reading of the Second Amendment Yeah I should say in the interest of full disclosure here I was one of the attorneys who represented the District of Columbia In that case so I was on the loose side of that case You know my view on it now is that the question is much closer than the Supreme Court made it sound So the question for the court was whether the Second Amendment extends to private purposes like the individual use of banks or self defense against criminals or whether it is limited to the organized militia that is like state militias come into people and arms and activities having some connections to those militia I actually think that's a hard question I think that justice Louise majority opinion could have been much better reasoned if you were not so committed to relying on some of the historical sources that he did I think that just the students in dissent had a plausibly the better of the historical argument But I think Heller is self is settled law and at least until now it has not been the problem You know the main obstacle to gun regulation is still political It's not the courts are striking down gun laws until recently anyway Of course haven't been striking down many gun laws It's more that the laws are just never being passed in the first place And justice Scalia's opinion is very explicit that the government retains regulatory authority over things like dangerous and unusual weapons and certain classes of persons and carrying certain places and for that matter can feel caring And so it's really kind of up to us What are we going to do in that space that Heller leaves open That space may be closed somewhat because we're waiting for this opinion from the court and most people who listen to those oral arguments are anticipating that the court is going to strike down New York's law imposing special requirements to get a handgun license Yeah I think the challenges in that case have reason to feel confident I think this is the New York law at least in its current form is probably going to be struck down And what we're really waiting to hear is on what basis How broad is the Supreme Court's ruling going to be The challenge is to New York's current system for issuing permits to publicly carry a concealed handgun And the court could just say well New York standard is too strict or New York standard that has too much discretion built into it And that would be a relatively limited holding and it still be a big one The court could go further and say you know permit requirements for public hearing are unconstitutional or they all have to be or called shall issue meaning based on just purely objective criterion And those things would be broader The other thing the court could do and I think this is the one that most in the weeds but maybe the most significant is that they could adopt a whole new test a whole new methodology for evaluating whether gun laws New York or others are constitutional And that would be what's called the test of text history and tradition which is advocated by the judge Brett Kavanaugh when he was on the D.C. circuit before he was elevated at the Supreme Court And under that test the idea would be gun laws should be evaluated based solely by reference to text history and tradition And I felt a brief in the New York case arguing that that would be a bad idea I think that's true I think that's an extreme form of originalism It's just not going to give judges guidance in most cases It would make it hard to evaluate the federal rules prohibiting guns on airplanes What are the framers think about that Nothing I had no idea or the current federal law for him gun possession by people who committed crimes of domestic violence not even prosecuted as a crime in the late 1700s So I think those who are really in a field are keeping an eye on that methodological question as well as the subsequent outcome with regard to New York's law Thanks Joseph That's professor Joseph blocher of duke law school coming up next the defense begins in the second theranos trial This is Bloomberg One 40 Every day big decisions are made without full information Overloaded by data Compounded by complexity Better decisions are made without the noise With clarity and confidence.

Texas Bloomberg radio Joseph blocher duke law school Brett Kavanaugh George Floyd President Biden New York Greg Abbott Joe Biden Supreme Court Capitol Hill Bloomberg Heller Chicago America Congress District of Columbia Scalia Louise
"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:09 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Is Bloomberg law with June grosso from Bloomberg radio It's a battle over 350 microseconds You know is there a point where speed is actually detrimental Should we think about slowing things down And we introduced an amount of time that's absolutely so infinitesimally small It's irrelevant to the majority of traditional participants But it's absolutely critical to certain people that have bought advantages in the market It may be infinitesimally small as Brad katsuyama CEO of IEX group says but the stock exchange operator made famous by flash boys is in court defending those microseconds The electronic trading firm Citadel securities is suing the Securities and Exchange Commission to thwart the new order type known as D limit which was approved by the federal regulator last year In arguments before the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals a lawyer for IEX Catherine stetson said the D limit helps blunt the edge of high frequency traders What we are talking about is evidence of a huge amount of trading going on in the couple few microseconds before a price changes I just happen to blink my eyes That blink is about 200 times longer than the couple microseconds that we're talking about But the lawyer for Citadel Jeffrey wall criticized the D limit order But this is just a sloppy order It takes data It misreads the stats It assumes away all the costs If you look at both the order and their brief to this court it reads like it's all roses and no thorns It doesn't have any consideration of the call on retail or routing My guest is an expert in securities law James Cox a professor at duke law school Jim explained the D limit or discretionary limit that was introduced by IX This is part of their branding which when they came on the stage initially and Michael Lewis wrote about them big time It was putting in a speed bump The individuals that are in the high 5 of the market have been yelling for some time they have they are being disadvantaged and not just the price discovery process but disadvantage in getting a good price by all kinds of mechanisms like colocation et cetera and what the exchange is initially which is install a speed bump to take away the edge that the algorithmic electronic colocated traders have been making a lot of money on The great thing right now is that we have a chairman of the SEC joins a list of a lot of former very experienced knowledgeable individuals with chairman of the SEC But this chairman knows market he came out of the market He didn't come out of the securities markets but as a derivatives market which are actually better insights about how markets operate are ought to operate And these committed to the idea of bringing change to the markets So the complaint is being made against these exchange about this feedback It's going to fall on deaf ears at the SEC and should in the courts as well What's IX's argument before the circuit court This is a legitimate practice of saying look we have a market Here's our protocols Nobody's going to get an advantage because their computers are located closer to the exchange Everybody's going to be the same level playing field And to the extent of that the roads and advantage that some of these market participants have had Well so be it It's better to have individuals in the buy side finally hearing their voices raised and having an exchange where they can go What I find interesting here is whether this changes things enough so that other exchanges will develop and find that could be competitive that they're going to have to have a speed bump as well Citadel securities is suing the SEC What's the cause of action What are they alleging Alleging that the SEC has approving a practice that is according to them inherently anti competitive is an artificial device that is going to slow down trading and price recovery and therefore the argument would be that you're disadvantaging the public interest because you're slowing down price movements and what we should be doing is trying to facilitate competing up price movements That's the argument The attorney for Citadel says that the order type interferes with the natural course of the market the display price isn't real it's phantom How would you address that I think it's hard to say that as anthem because the orders are all coming in and what is actually happening is Citadel is wanting to start off three feet ahead in the race to the 5th line to determine what the price is going to be So essentially what the exchange is doing here is saying the starting line is the same for everybody So let's put everybody on the same plane whereas as I read the argument so that says no now we're ahead of the starting line and we want to preserve that position And by doing that we can get to the price first It's not clear to me that the price is going to be any different If everybody starts off at the same point then it is presently with Citadel starting off earlier And so we're still going to have the same sort of pricing that goes on It's just a question about who gets that price first And so the current arrangements where you have colocations and other devices that suited element and a few other market traders Give themselves a competitive advantage over others and they want to preserve that competitive advantage The exchange is proposal the one that's being challenged is the exchange of saying no we want to get everybody a chance to get the price And by doing that if you make the market pure fairer it'll be more individuals wanting to get that price and will have a deeper market and better price discovery.

Citadel securities Bloomberg radio SEC Brad katsuyama IEX group D.C. circuit Court of Appeals Catherine stetson Citadel Jeffrey wall duke law school James Cox Bloomberg Securities and Exchange Commis Michael Lewis Citadel Jim circuit court
"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:12 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is Bloomberg law with June brazo from Bloomberg radio It's a battle over 350 microseconds You know is there a point where speed is actually detrimental Should we think about slowing things down And we introduced an amount of time that's absolutely so infinitesimally small It's irrelevant to the majority of traditional participants but it's absolutely critical to certain people that have bought advantages in the market It may be infinitesimally small As Brad katsuyama CEO of IX group says but the stock exchange operator made famous by flash boys is in court defending those microseconds The electronic trading firm Citadel securities is suing the Securities and Exchange Commission to thwart the new order type known as D limit which was approved by the federal regulator last year In arguments before the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals a lawyer for IEX Katherine stetson said the D limit helps blunt the edge of high frequency traders What we are talking about is evidence of a huge amount of trading going on in the couple few microseconds before a price changes I just happened to blink my eyes That blink is about 200 times longer than the couple microseconds that we're talking about But the lawyer for Citadel Geoffrey wall criticized the D limit order But this is just a sloppy order It takes data It misreads the stats It assumes away all the costs If you look at both the order and their brief to this court it reads like it's all roses and no thorns It doesn't have any consideration of the calls on retail or routing My guest is an expert in securities law James Cox a professor at duke law school Jim explained the D limit or discretionary limit that was introduced by IX This is part of their branding which when they came on the stage initially and Michael Lewis wrote about them big time It was putting in a speed bump The individuals that are in the high 5 of the market have been yelling for some time that they are being disadvantaged in not just the price discovery process but disadvantaged in getting a good price All kinds of mechanisms like colocation et cetera and what the exchange is initially was install a speed bump to take away the edge that the algorithmic electronic colocated traders have been making a lot of money on The great thing right now is that we have a chairman of the SEC joins a list of a lot of former very experienced knowledgeable individuals who are chairman of the SEC But this chairman knows market she came out of the market From out of the securities markets but as a derivatives market which are actually better insight about how markets operate or ought to operate And these committed to the idea of bringing change to the market So the complaint is being made against the exchange about this feed bump It's going to fall on deaf ears at the SEC and should in the courts as well What's IX's argument before the circuit court This is a legitimate practice of saying well we have a market Here's our protocols Nobody's going to get an advantage because their computers are located closer to the exchange Everybody's going to be the same level playing field And to the extent of that the roads and advantage that some of these market participants have had well so be it It's better to have individuals in the buy side finally hearing their voices raised and having an exchange where they can go What I find interesting here is whether this changes things enough So that other exchanges will develop and find that could be competitive that they're going to have to have a speed bump as well Citadel securities is suing the SEC What's the cause of action What are they alleging They alleging that the SEC has approving a practice that is according to them inherently anti competitive is an artificial device that is going to slow down trading and price discovery and therefore the argument would be that you're disadvantaging the public interest because you're slowing down price movements and what we should be doing is trying to facilitate competing up price movements That's the argument The attorney for Citadel says that the order type interferes with the natural course of the market the display price isn't real it's phantom How would you address that I think it's hard to say that as anthem because the orders are all coming in and what is actually happening is Citadel is wanting to start off three feet ahead in the race through the Finch line to determine what the price is going to be So essentially what the exchange is doing here is the starting line is the same for everybody So let's put everybody on the same plane Whereas as I read the argument student else says no now we're ahead of the starting line and we want to preserve that position And by doing that we can get to the price first It's not clear to me that the price is going to be any different If everybody starts off at the same point then it is presently with Citadel starting off earlier And so we're still going to have the same sort of pricing that goes on It's just a question about who gets that price first And so the current arrangements where you have colocations and other devices that's included in a few other market traders Give themselves a competitive advantage over others and they want to preserve the competitive advantage The exchange is proposal the one that's being challenged is the exchange of saying no we want to get everybody a chance to get the price And by doing that if you make the market pure fairer it'll be more individuals wanting to get that price and will have a deeper market and better price discovery.

Citadel securities Bloomberg radio SEC Brad katsuyama IX group D.C. circuit Court of Appeals Katherine stetson Citadel Geoffrey wall duke law school James Cox Bloomberg Securities and Exchange Commis Michael Lewis Jim circuit court Citadel
"duke law school" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal

Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal

04:33 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal

"In los angeles. I'm kai ryssdal. It is tuesday today. The eighth of june. Good as always to have you along everybody. We are going to do a one to to start things off today. A macro micro thing a big picture and then granular look inside the gears of this economy. The case study at hand is the supply chain on which we have spent as. You're no no small amount of time. The past couple of months shortages and price spikes logistical. Bottlenecks well to that end. The biden administration says it has planned the supply chain disruptions task will thinking goes increase domestic production of critical inventory like semiconductors in batteries. That was announced. Today it is also by the way admission that we are not going to be able to make everything we need ourselves. Marketplace's justin hose on the macro desk. Today what the biden administration's really doing here is trying to reduce the economy's dependence on china talking about trying to reduce dependence on other countries for rare earth. That's mainly china. Td russ is an economics. Professor at uc davis. They're talking about trying to safeguard and encourage domestic sources of key pharmaceutical ingredients here. We import those from china. So the idea instead is to rely more on american. Allies is trading partners. Says rachel brewster at duke law school when we're discussing semiconductors. Our major allies will be out three. Ed japan i wan when we move onto pharmaceuticals. It's going to be maced much more in europe. But there's a problem with that says emily blanchard at dartmouth. We have been entangled in many of the same trading partners for a number of years the trump administration slap tariffs on trade with a lot of these countries and even now tariffs on european metals. Remain in place. I think here we are sensing a very deliberate and intentional policy shift by the biden administration to say let's deal with some of these national security concerns with our neighbors not despite our neighbors blanchard says we don't have the capacity to manufacture everything we need in the us. It'd be a fool's errand. She says to try to go it alone. I'm justin how for marketplace. The mark part of this supplies story today comes to us from the national federation of independent business which released its small business optimism index this morning. The group's monthly survey of business owners in retailing construction manufacturing also services among the highlights forty percent of small business owners plan on raising prices the most since nineteen eighty-one marketplace's kristen schwab made some calls bobbi williams in columbia south carolina is facing some tough competition not for who can make the best catfish or country fried steak. But who can lauren workers like. Say if you could bog mirror we will hire well. We just need some bodies right now. Williams raised starting wages at his restaurant. Lizard's thicket to ten dollars an hour up from eight. Meanwhile prices of everything from pork to plastic goods are soaring. Bacon has doubled food. Prep gloves quadrupled because manufacturing processing trucking. Everything is backed up every week. There's five or six items that are out of stock williams's had to pass the cost onto customers because he simply can't sell more to make more money labor and supply shortages are holding business owners down. The big issue is that they aren't able to take advantage of that increasing demand for their good or service. Hollywood is with the national federation of independent business which found half of small business owners had unfilled job. Openings in may and of those more than ninety percent say there were few or no qualified applicants. that's jeweler becky. Both problem in oak michigan her goldsmith moved to hawaii during the pandemic. she needs sales associates. Too i can train people to sound. But i can't train people to have a personality binding people with that you know. Hey how are you in the. It's more high. She too has had to raise wages. And that's not her only problem. Her suppliers are raising prices because minds and manufacturers overseas are still dealing with pandemic disruptions. I'm kristen schwab for marketplace on wall street today. Not a whole lot of enthusiasm. Either way really..

five hawaii Today rachel brewster forty percent europe emily blanchard los angeles uc davis today Williams bobbi williams williams kai ryssdal six items tuesday today duke law school more than ninety percent eighth of june columbia south carolina
"duke law school" Discussed on KTLK 1130 AM

KTLK 1130 AM

04:57 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on KTLK 1130 AM

"So when I when I did the final my question is they promised me, uh, floor mats and the privacy screen for the back of the SUV. Yeah, and all he did was right on the card. Um, but my friend was there when he offered these things, and it's been a while. How long when you say when you say a while? How long is a while? A couple of weeks. Oh, that's not a while. That's fine. Uh, now here a couple of problems. You have number one is it's not in the contract. Okay? That's a problem Number two. The fact that your friend it was there. That doesn't mean much because a friend, of course your friend lie for you. At least that's what a judge is small claims Judge would would look at and go. Yeah, I mean, come on, I can get a friend alive for me to any time in court. Now was it on the back of the card that said, you are going to get these additional items. Yes, I had him right on his business card. That's not bad, Then I then it's if you buy the car, so I mean, he's going to say that. Well, you got it at a lower price and just all this other crap, But you're going to say, Hey, here it is. He wrote it. I think that's enough to get a small claims Judge to buy it. I really do. How much money we're talking about. About 600 bucks. Oh, yeah, That's where small claims and the argument is a straight straight out breach of contract straight breach. You promised he promised he didn't deliver. I don't know. So I would also argue fraud. You could actually argue fraud and he did it intentionally fraud in the inducement, which means I He induced you to buy a car with a false Promise that he never intended to keep, uh and then you have breach of contract. So here's our written contract just because it's not on one piece of paper doesn't matter. The two are well, the other thing. Yeah, The other thing he did was when I went back and purchased it. I didn't bring my friend because everything was finalized. He gave me one file. But he had told me to. All right then what you do. No, no, no. All right. I don't I got that because I've Yeah, and by the way, even if that's not written in, you can argue. I want the fob. Why is that? Because that's what happens with every new car on the planet. Is you Get two keys. Right? No one ever. No dealer ever would sell you one key. So Sue for the $600. I think you have it. Thank you. Unfortunately. Drives me crazy. How scooter doing better? All right again, Holiday season. I'm going to let this one go. All right, Scooter, Let's hear it. Bill. You know, I've been a fan of yours for 10 years you were the persons made me want to become a lawyer, and now I need you to decide. Between USC law School and Duke Law School. The decision is yours. Where should I go? Wow, First of all, Of course, you've been a fan for 10 years. The That's a given. You don't have to tell me that. Uh and You know, that actually is a very interesting judge. Just a little bit of history. You know? Richard Nixon went to Duke. Yes, OK. Yeah. A lot of other people don't know. Uh, I think SC if you live in Southern California, and I'll tell you why, because of the networking that goes on When you meet people at SC, you see how many judges you'll see How many prosecutors how many partners Uh, in various law firms all come from SC, and it could be that there are more SC people in the legal field. In southern California, and then there any other school and assuming and they're both decent schools, etc. Is considered a very good school. The only reason I say that is I went to one of the worst law schools in the history of law schools. You know that, don't you? My dear law school. Yeah. Whittier, its now defunct. It's gone. It's out of business. They shut down. It's like the gap. Okay, it's over. Uh, where'd you go undergrad by the way. A school in New York. You've never heard of before, but but you got in there. See yet Anesi lost. Yeah, I did. Yeah, well, good for you. Um how'd you do on the others? ET by the way, Just curious. I've got a 1 69 l c I don't know the L s a t when I was doing 6 90. What is that? 96%? That's very good. Yeah, when I went, uh I did. It was a $1600 Mark. And what did I get? 304? 100. You got 500 for writing your name? And that's where it started. Scooter. Good luck to you Enjoy. I would go there, see, and you'll probably knocks. You're probably not succeed at all anyway,.

Richard Nixon New York $1600 $600 Southern California Duke Law School 96% USC law School 10 years 500 two keys southern California one key Bill 100 two Whittier SC Mark Anesi
"duke law school" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

03:08 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on KQED Radio

"San Carlos 43 in San Francisco. Right now, it's 46 degrees. This is KQED public radio. The time is 8 46. This is morning edition from NPR News. I'm Layla fold in and I'm Steve Inskeep. Happy New Year. Among other things. January 1st is public Domain Day. That means copyrights expire on works from 95 years ago, so everybody is free to rewrite or remix or just play around with classic books and songs and more. NPR's Petra Mayer reports on what people have been doing with it all. So here's the thing with public Domain Day for 20 years. It didn't happen in 1998. Congress passed a law extending current copyrights from 75 to 95 years. And that meant that until two years ago, nothing new was coming into the public domain. That all changed on January 1st 2019. Since then, A flood of popular culture from the 19 twenties has become available early, silent movies, pop songs, books like the Prophet Mrs Dalloway in The Great Gatsby. So what are people doing with all this good stuff? You know, Like Gatsby, I was captivated by Nick That's author Michael Ferris Smith. His new novel, Nick comes out this month, and it imagines a life and a backstory for Gatsby's and it, Carraway. Smith says he was snagged by that moment at the end of the book, where Nick suddenly realizes it's his 30th birthday. And then right after that, he describes it as anticipating a decade of loneliness. And that is what really stuck me like When I read the decade of loneliness line I remember actually stopped there, and I said the book aside, Smith says he saw so many parallels between Nick's life and his own at that age that he decided to write next story, although he says he just assumed Gatsby was in the public domain. When he started writing five years ago. He was a little taken aback when his publishers told him the book couldn't come out until 2021. But Nick is one of the few really high profile works to surface from that flood of new public domain material. Jennifer Jenkins is the director of the Center for the Study of the Public domain at Duke Law School. She says. A lot of what's happening is on a smaller scale. I've had e mails from parents who say Hey, my high school kids, an amazing musician. And guess what, In another Rhapsody in Blue is free. He's going to play it. He's going to re imagine it and maybe we'll put it on YouTube. Some publishers have put out new editions of books like Khalil Gibran's The Prophet, Jenkins says the works become more available and in more editions, and that is self feeds creativity, So we do absolutely no, that happens. So why aren't there more Nick's out there? Glenn Fleishman is a journalist who's covered copyright issues. There's some very popular weird copyright cases that involved lots of lawsuits. And I think it makes people worry. Flashman has experienced some of that worry himself. He loves the classic song. Yes, we have no bananas, which entered the public domain on January 1st 2019. So he organized some friends at a New year's party to sing it, And they put the song up on YouTube. Moments after midnight on January 1st wait..

Nick That Michael Ferris Smith Jennifer Jenkins Gatsby YouTube NPR News Steve Inskeep KQED NPR San Carlos Flashman Glenn Fleishman Petra Mayer Mrs Dalloway San Francisco Duke Law School Congress Khalil Gibran Carraway
"duke law school" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

02:54 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on KCRW

"Inskeep. Happy New Year. Among other things. January 1st is public Domain Day. That means copyrights expire on works from 95 years ago, so everybody is free to rewrite or remix or just play around with classic books and songs and more. NPR's Petra Mayer reports on what people have been doing with it all. So here's the thing with public domain Day for 20 years. It didn't happen in 1998. Congress passed a law extending current copyrights from 75 to 95 years. And that meant that until two years ago, nothing new was coming into the public domain. That all changed on January 1st 2019. Since then, A flood of popular culture from the 19 twenties has become available early, silent movies, pop songs, books like the Prophet Mrs Dalloway in The Great Gatsby. So what are people doing with all this good stuff? You know, Like Gatsby, I was captivated by Nick That's author Michael Ferris Smith. His new novel, Nick comes out this month, and it imagines a life and a backstory for Gatsby's and Nick Carraway. Smith says he was snagged by that moment at the end of the book, where Nick suddenly realizes it's his 30th birthday. And then right after that, he describes it as anticipating a decade of loneliness. And that is what really stuck me like When I read the decade of loneliness line I remember actually stopped there, and I said the book aside, Smith says he saw so many parallels between Nick's life and his own at that age that he decided to write next story, although he says he just assumed Gatsby was in the public domain. When he started writing five years ago. He was a little taken aback when his publishers told him the book couldn't come out until 2021. But Nick is one of the few really high profile works to surface from that flood of new public domain material. Jennifer Jenkins is the director of the Center for the Study of the Public domain at Duke Law School, she says a lot of what's happening is on a smaller scale. I've had e mails from parents who say Hey, why high school kids, an amazing musician, and guess what, you know now that Rhapsody in Blue is free. He's going to play it. He's going to re imagine it and maybe we'll put it on YouTube. Some publishers have put out new editions of books like Khalil Gibran's The Pro. Off it, Jenkins says. The works become more available and in more editions, and that is self feeds creativity, So we do absolutely no, that happens. So why aren't there more? Nick's out there? Glenn Fleishman is a journalist who's covered copyright issues. There's some very popular weird copyright cases that involve lots of lawsuits, and I think it makes people worry Flashman has experienced some of that worry himself. He loves the classic song. Yes, we have no bananas, which entered the public domain on January 1st 2019. So he organized some friends at a New year's party to sing it, And they put the song up on YouTube. Moments after midnight on January 1st wait. Months.

Nick Michael Ferris Smith Gatsby Jennifer Jenkins YouTube Nick That Nick Carraway Glenn Fleishman Inskeep. Khalil Gibran Petra Mayer Mrs Dalloway NPR Congress Duke Law School Flashman director
"duke law school" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

03:00 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on KQED Radio

"And the listeners of KQED. This is morning edition from NPR News. I'm Layla fold in and I'm Steve Inskeep. Happy New Year. Among other things. January 1st is public Domain Day. That means copyrights expire on works from 95 years ago, so everybody is free to rewrite or remix or just play around with classic books and songs and more. NPR's Petra Mayer reports on what people have been doing with it all. So here's the thing with public Domain Day for 20 years. It didn't happen in 1998. Congress passed a law extending current copyrights from 75 to 95 years. And that meant that until two years ago, nothing new was coming into the public domain. That all changed on January 1st 2019. Since then, A flood of popular culture from the 19 twenties has become available early, silent movies, pop songs, books like the Prophet Mrs Dalloway in The Great Gatsby. So what are people doing with all this good stuff? You know, Like Gatsby, I was captivated by Nick That's author Michael Ferris Smith. His new novel, Nick comes out this month, and it imagines a life and a backstory for Gatsby's Nick Carraway. Smith says he was snagged by that moment at the end of the book, where Nick suddenly realizes it's his 30th birthday. And then right after that, he describes it as anticipating a decade of loneliness. And that is what really stuck me like When I read the decade of loneliness line I remember actually stopped there, and I said the book aside, Smith says he saw so many parallels between Nick's life and his own at that age that he decided to write next story, although he says he just assumed Gatsby was in the public domain. When he started writing five years ago. He was a little taken aback when his publishers told him the book couldn't come out until 2021. But Nick is one of the few really high profile works to surface from that flood of new public domain material. Jennifer Jenkins is the director of the Center for the Study of the Public domain at Duke Law School. She says. A lot of what's happening is on a smaller scale. I've had e mails from parents who say, Hey, my high school kids, an amazing musician. And guess what, you know now that Rhapsody in blue is free. He's going to play it. He's going to re imagine it and maybe we'll put it on YouTube. Some publishers have put out new editions of books like Khalil Gibran's The Prophet, Jenkins says the works become more available and in more editions, and that is self feeds creativity, So we do absolutely no, that happens. So why aren't there more Nick's out there? Glenn Fleishman is a journalist who's covered copyright issues. There's some very popular weird copyright cases that involved lots of lawsuits. And I think it makes people worry. Flashman has experienced some of that worry himself. He loves the classic song. Yes, we have no bananas, which entered the public domain on January 1st 2019. So he organized some friends at a New year's party to sing it, And they put the song up on YouTube. Moments after midnight on January 1st wait..

Nick Michael Ferris Smith Gatsby Jennifer Jenkins Nick That NPR News Steve Inskeep Nick Carraway KQED NPR YouTube Flashman Glenn Fleishman Petra Mayer Mrs Dalloway Duke Law School Congress Khalil Gibran director
"duke law school" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

02:54 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on KCRW

"And I'm Steve Inskeep. Happy New Year. Among other things. January 1st is public domain Day. That means copyrights expire on works from 95 years ago, so everybody is free to rewrite. Remix or just play around with classic books and songs and more. NPR's Petra Mayer reports on what people have been doing with it all. So here's the thing with public Domain Day for 20 years, it didn't happen. 1998 Congress passed a law extending current copyrights from 75 to 95 years. And that meant that until two years ago, nothing new was coming into the public domain. That all changed on January 1st 2019. Since then, A flood of popular culture from the 19 twenties has become available early, silent movies, pop songs, books like the Prophet Mrs Dalloway and The Great Gatsby. So what are people doing with all this good stuff? You know, Like Gatsby, I was captivated by Nick That's author Michael Farris Smith. His new novel, Nick comes out this month, and it imagines a life and a backstory for Gatsby's Nick Carraway. Smith says he was snagged by that moment at the end of the book, where Nick suddenly realizes it's his 30th birthday. And then right after that, he describes it as anticipating a decade of loneliness. And that is what really stuck me like When I read the decade of loneliness line I remember actually stopped there, and I said the book aside, Smith says he saw so many parallels between Nick's life and his own at that age that he decided to write next story, although he says he just assumed Gatsby was in the public domain. When he started writing five years ago. He was a little taken aback when his publishers told him the book couldn't come out until 2021. But Nick is one of the few really high profile works to surface from that flood of new public domain material. Jennifer Jenkins is the director of the Center for the Study of the Public domain at Duke Law School. She says. A lot of what's happening is on a smaller scale. I've had e mails from parents who say, Hey, my high school kids, an amazing musician. And guess what, you know now that Rhapsody in blue is free. He's going to play it. He's going to re imagine it and maybe we'll put it on YouTube. Some publishers have put out new editions of books like Khalil Gibran's The Prophet, Jenkins says the works become more available and in more editions, and that is self feeds creativity, So we do absolutely no, that happens. So why aren't there more Nick's out there? Glenn Fleishman is a journalist who's covered copyright issues. There's some very popular weird copyright cases that involve lots of lawsuits. And I think it makes people worry. Flashman has experienced some of that worry himself. He loves the classic song. Yes, we have no bananas, which entered the public domain on January 1st 2019. So he organized some friends at a New year's party to sing it, And they put the song up on YouTube. Moments after midnight on January 1st wait. Months.

Nick Michael Farris Smith Gatsby Jennifer Jenkins Nick That Steve Inskeep Nick Carraway YouTube Flashman NPR Glenn Fleishman Petra Mayer Mrs Dalloway Duke Law School Congress Khalil Gibran director
"duke law school" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

02:56 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"Possible. Rita Chatterjee. NPR news, among other things. January 1st is public domain Day. That means copyrights expire on works from 95 years ago. So everybody is free to rewrite or remix or just play around with classic books and songs and more. NPR's Petra Mayer reports on what people have been doing with it all. So here's the thing with public Domain Day for 20 years. It didn't happen in 1998. Congress passed a law extending current copyrights from 75 to 95 years. And that meant that until two years ago, nothing new was coming into the public domain. That all changed on January 1st 2019. Since then, A flood of popular culture from the 19 twenties has become available early, silent movies, pop songs, books like the Prophet Mrs Dalloway and The Great Gatsby. So what are people doing with all this good stuff? You know, Like Gatsby, I was captivated by Nick That's author Michael Ferris Smith. His new novel, Nick comes out this month, and it imagines a life and a backstory for Gatsby's Nick Carraway. Smith says he was snagged by that moment at the end of the book, where Nick suddenly realizes it's his 30th birthday. And then right after that, he describes it as anticipating a decade of loneliness. And that is what really stuck me like When I read the decade of loneliness line I remember actually stopped there, and I said the book aside, Smith says he saw so many parallels between Nick's life and his own at that age that he decided to write next story, although he says he just assumed Gatsby was in the public domain. When he started writing five years ago. He was a little taken aback when his publishers told him the book couldn't come out until 2021. But Nick is one of the few really high profile works to surface from that flood of new public domain material. Jennifer Jenkins is the director of the Center for the Study of the Public domain at Duke Law School. She says. A lot of what's happening is on a smaller scale. I've had e mails from parents who say Hey, why high school kids, an amazing musician, and guess what. Another Rhapsody in blue is free. He's going to play it. He's going to re imagine it and maybe we'll put it on YouTube. Some publishers have put out new editions of books like Khalil Gibran's The Prophet, Jenkins says the works become more available and in more editions, and that is self feeds creativity, So we do absolutely no, that happens. So why aren't there more Nick's out there? Glenn Fleishman is a journalist who's covered copyright issues. There's some very popular weird copyright cases that involve lots of lawsuits and I think it makes people worry. Flashman has experienced some of that worry himself. He loves the classic song. Yes, we have no bananas, which entered the public domain on January 1st 2019. So he organized some friends at a New year's party to sing it, And they put the song up on YouTube. Moments after midnight on January 1st wait..

Nick Michael Ferris Smith Gatsby Jennifer Jenkins Nick That NPR Nick Carraway Rita Chatterjee YouTube Flashman Petra Mayer Glenn Fleishman Mrs Dalloway Duke Law School Congress Khalil Gibran director
"duke law school" Discussed on Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network

Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network

10:05 min | 3 years ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network

"A member of the NFL and college football halls of fame and of course he played thirteen seasons in the NFL. All with the giants science winning Super Bowl in nineteen eighty six as a member of the giants and he was selected to nine pro bowls and was named to the all. NFL team seven times and he wants wants made an amazing twenty five tackles at a Monday night. Football game against the Green Bay packers but what caught. My attention is the fact that he was on a recent panel. Discussion Russian on football concussions at Duke Law School and he said he would not let his eight year old grandson. Play football saying with the brain. You've got only one. I am not willing to risk the future of my grandson plain and simple. The sport brought him fame and he called. Winning Super Bowls are Super Bowl. One of the greatest moments in his life but he he also said if I had to do it all over again. No I wouldn't do it all over again. What brought you to that conclusion Harry a lot of reflection I'm a little older now I sort of look back on my life. I look back on the things that I've got and So you know I I I can honestly say even though I played football I never really considered myself of football player. I always considered myself guys. Who just happened to play football and found some built differently than most of the other guys who played with and again You know all of those guys really loved playing the game. I and one of one of my Things was I just love the guy who I played with and they were the ones who inspire me. You know game after game practice after practice and so I I would like to think that even though I may have some regrets about playing the game I think that you know knowing what I know. Now I probably would have been something differently by known the risk of traumatic brain injury way back when I played You know I knew I could hurt. I I tackle and on I might get my have to get my knee replaced and all of that stuff but when it comes to traumatic brain injury as a result concussions and nobody's sort of drilled me on that when I was Starting to play a game so I didn't know oftentimes you you see players do things and and They kill themselves or you know they. They they fall into some kind of situation and often on the fans really can't understand nor do they have any sympathy for four players. Who have played and we're dealing with issues that they might not even be overly Aware of so. You Know I. I've been around this concussion issue long before it became Hot Button topic and I. I've seen a lot so When I talk about Doing other things. I'm just sort of built differently than most other guys. In all north I will down the same thing. Yeah you're the perfect person to ask this because you now have the perspective at the age that you are now but take me back when you're twenty twenty two twenty three twenty four a player that young playing the game a game that they've been brought up with what is their perspective at that time about the possibilities Leeza injuries and debilitating injury. You know big step on the football coach. I realized that I was I. I could possibly get hurt. You Know L. Physically Yeah I saw God getting carried off the field and you know whether at the knee ankle or whatever. I knew that could happen. I even knew about you. Know possibly being paralyzed. You know having played the game but I assume that and I like in terms of the issue of traumatic brain injury. I didn't know that and so laid back. Then there was absolutely no information out there here to concussions than in the effect of concussions and so yeah most players who play we all say knowing that you know we could You know get can cost them really well part of the game. I mean Amtrak. Dot Ammonia capsules were a regular people on the phone line. So that you're wrong or if you stop star or whatever Yeah that's a concussion. And we sort of learn how to play through it and like I said earlier the reason why I played a lot of so gung ho about saying as take the team concept and and that was really about playing guys who are on a mission and and sort of gravitated to me as their later and and I enjoy playing that role of cap them you know whether it be in highschool whether it be college whether it be In mm professional football I I enjoyed on you know being there. You mentioned that I am not willing to risk the future. My grandson plain and simple and I think you know as well in our society especially when kids start participating in something like football a very young age. I think that the parents get trapped by society and expectations dictation that go along well. Let's have my grandson my son you know. Play this game that I loved so they must love as well. What advice would you give to parents and grandparents the parents having to deal with that challenge in explaining to a kid who may be getting social pressure from other kids? But I think that there's so much wrong there's if some much more information out there now in regards to traumatic brain injury and concussion the sports related I think every parent it should be fully informed as to what they're signing up for because you can't comeback with all the information out there now you can't come back you know ten. I'm twenty nine. Th I didn't know because if nation is there yeah there's a lot of pressure that Parents are going to feel because everybody wants their their local team to play. Well I mean but the young people who are playing now they see what's happening in the the NFL and college and so forth and many young people who are playing you know they want the same thing they wanNA scholarship. They wanted to go to college. They the war eventually transferred. Turn this into the NFL. But frankly for for me. And I just sort of say just for me. I know what it's all about. I've been there. I got my college degree we could have done so many other things have been college degree but instead I played in the national football and I'm not saying that parents should not ah allow their kids to play. I just think that they should be fully informed as to what they're signing your kids because You know you. You don't know what might happen down the road months day sustain. The damage is done around guys could play and never even played. NFL and they're having neurological issues. They never even made it to college. They played high school ball. You know now when they're in their twenties they're dealing with neurological disorders and You know I I just think that the issue traumatic brain injury and concussions. One that we're always scratching the surface of the problems that many young people who and I'm not just talking football I'm talking. Yeah all the contact sports even talking. You know cheerleaders who sustained some kind of traumatic brain injury. Because I I thought it run run into so many different people on dealing with issues. Let me ask you also. We only have ninety seconds left. But do you think there's anything that can be done to make a collision. It's more like football safer. I think anything that can be done is to not play the game. Because if you're GONNA play the risk is always going to be there. I don't care what kind of helmet you wear. If you're out there then had been running around even unintentional hits more. Aw Can timbering on some kind of trauma and so if that's the case months you sustain some kind go to your brain. You don't know how that's like that you down line so you know you can try to make the game of safety as you want. But you'll never gotta get away from the kids. Come playing contact sports in about forty five seconds. Do you see the day that possibly we will not be playing football. No I think football will always be there. I think you'll always have on an individual willing to pay the price in and risk his neurological. Ah Health so I think the game will always be there It's just a baby. A lot of other individuals who are rolling out there and and perhaps played a game to make things better for their families and so forth area. I want to thank you very much for your time. Your insights and how articulate you are about Out The game and about how you feel about the game and of course. That story did catch my attention when you said. I'm not willing to risk the future of my grandson plain and simple..

football brain injury NFL giants Duke Law School Green Bay packers Harry
"duke law school" Discussed on The Bacon Podcast | Brian Basilico - Marketing Strategy Expert Interviews to CURE Your Marketing

The Bacon Podcast | Brian Basilico - Marketing Strategy Expert Interviews to CURE Your Marketing

10:05 min | 3 years ago

"duke law school" Discussed on The Bacon Podcast | Brian Basilico - Marketing Strategy Expert Interviews to CURE Your Marketing

"Hey leaps I have two incredible guests today. Their names are Stanley. PAGET and Pam Jordan. Now let me ask you guys something confront so lawyer and an accountant walk into a bar. What's the punchline? I'm a pastor's wife and he's a Mormon so I'm going to get drunk. He's GonNa Walk Me Home you wou- self like a party I want to so How are you guys doing today? Doing Great Brian so Stan Dan you are a lawyer in Pam. You are an accountant and me being of business. ILL FOR OVER FORTY YEARS I've dealt with with both of you guys but not everybody may have all of their is dotted T.'s. Crossed the day may have their shoebox filled with receipts and maybe could use a little business advice. So that's what we're here to do. Today is kind of introduce them but before are we get to that. Can you give me each your your story in Manhattan you get into law had to get into accounting. I mean did you. Did you have a calculator as a little kid Did you like wearing robes and gals. And how did that Ulster them you first so I thought I was either going to be in Hutton Africa as a missionary or in a corner office And I tried the nonprofit route and decided it was not how I wanted to go so I jumped in corporate. Had had lots of fun saw the ups and downs Got Over fifteen years of working the small businesses and I now have a fractional. CFO firm. That right I run that we help. Do all the executive financial stuff that you need regardless of what size you are profit loss cash flow budgets. All those things business owners don't care about that. I love well. Somebody's gotTa love it. so how `bout you stand. I always wanted to be a lawyer but primarily primarily because when I was a kid I thought it looked all all the prisons were lawyers and that was the best way to be president. I now don't want to be president. Okay I went to grow. I still wanted to be lawyer because it just was always interesting to me. I went graduated from Duke Law School. Nineteen ninety-two practicing as a business. Trial lawyer in Tampa. Uh for the last thirty seven years I have represented business owners in virtually every kind of a case that you can imagine. So I've seen every kind of screw they make and I realized that they're very common patterns of things that they do wrong and if I could teach them how to avoid those problems it would be far more valuable able to them and far less expensive than me having to hire me to get out of trouble later. So that's why Pam teamed up so we can keep business owners out the trouble see that's awesome and having run businesses for over forty years. I've seen a lot but I haven't seen everything so You know there are certain things that have happened to me over the years that I've made you know dumb mistakes and You know gotten sued. I've you know one thing I've learned a longtime ago was get a good accountant. Because they're going to help you save more money than you're going to spend in the long run so but you guys have a kind of a the system put together and we're GonNa talk about five quick things today and It's five kind of start up problems or secrets that people need to know about so the five things that you guys told me about number one. Where bad advice? Handshake deals something about a piggy bank. Something about control in then some hiring mistakes so I'll let you guys take to it. So why don't we start with the bad advice because nobody in business ever gotten bad advice from their brother and all right or they've I've never gotten bad advice from Google the anywhere on the internet or sadly enough a lot of people in this WanNa start a business actually go to CPA's and what they get is a lot of bad legal advice so the the number one proposition is start. Your Business out sound bill on a firm foundation on Dacian and then when you make money you can grow it as big as you want We see a lot of people build bro builds build businesses completely wrong because they get bad advice. And you can't get answers off the Internet you can find twenty different answers to the same question and probably nineteen and a half of the wrong. Those are pretty bad on so pam. How `bout you got anything to add to that? So yeah to the stands point me away people start out when they make a start a company like oh well I'll just gonNA CPA or asked my uncle kind of cooper structure tax structure. I should choose news and then five ten years down the road. Someone like standard. I walk in and were there to broker a deal and we start digging and realized they have the complete wrong legal structure. They're paying the taxes for the last ten years and it's takes US longer to get them set up correctly so we we can take them to the next level so when you set up your company you need to get advice from someone who can ask you what your goal is because very often. SCPA will say. Oh you want to be an ankle escort to save on taxes but there's lots of other options that in many cases can be better. especially if you're looking scale an exit Gotcha so going online and getting legalzoom because they advertise on. TV is not what I should be doing. No they must have simple answer all right. So handshake deals I like shaking hands. You know and I'm not a politician session and I don't want to be a politician. What's wrong with handshake deals? I I grew up in the south to and you like to be able to do business with people based on their word. I I will just tell you that it doesn't work and especially doesn't work when you're setting up a business you know you and a friend or saying. Hey we've got this great idea. Let's go into business together. Will on fifty fifty and will work well to. It really doesn't matter whether the business goes really well or really poorly or simply in your own The the objectives of the two people change over time. When you don't write down what the deal is memories raise in the law? We call it convenient memory. It just think people things tend to remember things that favor them and they can't remember anything that doesn't so so you're deals need to be in writing your greements at the beginning need to be a writing because a business just like a marriage the day start. Everybody's really happy. But the only thing than regular divorces business divorce it with their documents. It's not only ugly. It's really expense right. Who and one of the other things? I think that people have to be aware of is You know getting contracts and things like that. I've ran into a problem. This just something. I came him cross a while ago as I had a company. Come in and they this when I owned my recording studio and they came in they did five hundred dollars worth of work and they they paid me immediately then. They came in start doing more work than they ran. A bill about five thousand. Didn't pay a penny and I went through the process of okay I will. I'm going to sue them so I went and sued him and we want We one half twenty five hundred dollars and my lawyer cost me me twenty six hundred dollars or cost me a hundred dollars one hundred hours to basically get nothing as you know. What can you do to avoid something like that as you know? They're the smart way to get paid. Is there any other way that we should be looking at stuff. Sure as an accountant I have customers in the construction world. And what happens is I see a lot of handshake deals. Where a contractor hires a sub to go plant trees on her job site? I and everything's fine on day one but on day thirty the trees are dying and the landscape wants to get paid but the contractor says. Look your trees are dying and the whole thing comes down to nothing was in writing so both of them are just stuck. Someone's going to replace the trees and the other one's not getting get paid So the easy thing is write it down. Obviously it's best if you can work with an attorney to put all the league over rich together but but at least have something in writing in regards to what the terms are. What services are going to be provided and what the money exchange is GonNa look like and the time line because to stand point everything looks great upfront but wants money gets involved people turn into monsters and what they they said they were going to do is not what happens? So the next point is something that's near and dear to my heart Bagan the the piggy bank so what what does bacon have to do with running a business perfect so we all want lots of vacant. We all want lots of money money. We want a of the jingles full of money. The problem is a lot of businesses. Do not do a good job of separating their business expenses and money from their personal expenses and money so a lot of times standing I come into companies where it's a cable company and they have a number of Camaros and they're trying to expense Louis Vuitton purses in Gucci clothing clothing and multiple trips to the Carribbean okay. You need to have a clear line between your company's money and your money it you you want to go on those trips and make those purchases bright yourself a check out of the business.

Pam Jordan Stanley Duke Law School PAGET Louis Vuitton US Brian Google Manhattan Ulster CPA Tampa Dacian Hutton Africa
"duke law school" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

WBZ NewsRadio 1030

02:07 min | 3 years ago

"duke law school" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

"Whatever war will be highlighted and recognized on our website this great you know I was introduced to you the organization by a a great friend of mine Jack Merrin who played in the NBA for many years it was an all American at Duke and following his career Jack went back to Duke law school and is a practicing attorney in in North Carolina he and his wife robin into two great friends he introduced me to hope for the warriors and I hope that tonight I've introduced this charity to some of our listeners out there and if anyone wants to find a great veterans charity it is hoped for the warriors dot org robin Keller thank you so much a we will talk soon okay all right thank you Dan at night you too thank you very much thank you for the work you do when we get back we are going to talk about an extraordinary extraordinary essay that was sent to me today particularly in the context of what is going on sadly among students at Harvard we talked about this a little while ago there was a a rally to abolish ice at Harvard University among students which of course can happen and the Harvard crimson made the horrific mistake in the minds of some at Harvard University of actually seeking a comment from ice the organization which was being rallied against waiting to hear this story and and what the Harvard now they're a student government administration has done look Harvard you have to be pretty smart to go to Harvard but I think there's a lot of kids over there who just don't understand what this country is all about in terms of the first amendment and I will compare what the student government association at Harvard is doing with a very interesting essay entitled thoughts from hipster coffee shop coming back on the other side stay tuned I think you will be delighted by what you're about to.

Jack Merrin NBA Duke Duke law school attorney North Carolina robin Keller Dan Harvard University