17 Burst results for "Duke Law School"

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:27 min | 4 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 | 4 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 | 4 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 | 6 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 | 6 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 WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

03:41 min | 11 months ago

"duke law school" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"In just the last 5 days This morning market participants are seeing more reasons to move away from riskier assets like stocks With the news the U.S. is telling families of its diplomats in Ukraine to leave that country in case of Russian hostilities Right now London's 100 share index is down 1% Germany and France are down one and a half percent and U.S. stock index futures turned down in the last two and a half hours add to this a U.S. Federal Reserve policy meeting on interest rates and inflation later this week Here's marketplaces novos safo David ware money is flowing in and out of tells you a lot right now oil prices are around a 7 year high as Russia is threatening military invasion of Ukraine Russia is of course a major oil and gas supplier the U.S. and Europe have promised a strong response The question is what would it look like if Russia Russia and faith what would that response be and what would it do if anything to global oil supplies we just don't know yet Meanwhile stocks are in a sell off especially tech stocks which reached very high prices during the pandemic so many investors see them as riskier now especially if the fed starts raising interest rates sooner and faster than Wall Street has been expecting The NASDAQ composite index which includes a lot of tech companies is down about 13% for the year That's in just three weeks It's only late January It's been a rough few weeks for tech stocks Yeah and recently when we've seen dips in prices investors look for bargains and there's a jump in buying the next day not so much in recent days Yeah not so much that pattern doesn't appear to be holding this time around at least not on a big scale They've also been some disappointing headlines with regards to recent corporate earnings reports Netflix last week of course reported as we reported surprised by projecting subscription growth will be slow a lot over the next few months That adds to the uncertainty suggesting the effects of pandemic are stimulus or waning What might change the narrative is the fed We'll see what comes out of their policy meetings tomorrow on Wednesday And Wednesday nova thanks Tao and S&P futures are down three 10% now for the NASDAQ down 5 10% Somebody's going into bonds with the ten year interest rate down at 1.73% Now to a story about how pandemic distortions and a terrible storm about two months ago in Western Canada is affecting the building of new houses and home renovations in the U.S. this week will get an update on new home sales covering December in the U.S. and the increased cost of building materials will be a factor Think lumber with prices up by almost a third since September marketplace is Justin Ho has that A lot of what's been going on with lumber prices has to do with the supply of Canadian lumber Mark Fleming is chief economist at first American Canadian pine is highly sought after for home building because of its strength And in November a major storm hit British Columbia Washing out the rail lines that lumber mills rely on Brian Leonard is a lumber analyst with RCM alternatives It stopped shipments by a good 20% And a 100% certain places Leonard says that complicated the supply chain problems the lumber industry had already been dealing with Less truckers less rail employees because the COVID showing up and things like that So the whole system kind of broke down At almost the same time last year a 40 year ongoing trade dispute with Canada came to a head says Rachel Brewster a professor at duke law school The core of the dispute between the United States and Canada is whether or not Canada subsidizing their lumber industry And in November the commerce department doubled its tariff on Canadian softwood lumber imports to almost 18% Doubling the tariff rates I mean that is going to increase the price of lumber This is also happening while the Canadian lumber industry is dealing with another older.

"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 Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

01:58 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"IEX is development and the SEC going along with it It dramatically challenges the business model that's pretty much what Citadel is Do you think that SEC chair Gary gensler is on a collision course with some of Wall Street's biggest names As he absolutely Absolutely I gave him a lot of credit for I'm sure he's aware of that And that's the case but it's not just the biggest Wall Street names Those Wall Street Danes all have a name associated with them And that is they're on the sell side And individuals entities pension funds what have you They're on the buy side and they've been the ones that have been disadvantaged for way too long And through a series of market microstructure anomalies that favors the citadels of the world And doesn't do enough for the people who actually buy the stocks have to earn a return for their beneficiary Thanks for being on the show Jim That's professor James Cox who teaches corporate and securities law at duke law school Citadel also argued in a filing that the SEC violated the administrative procedure act which sets requirements for making changes to agency regulations The firm said the NCC disregard important data showing that D limit would hurt retail investors The SEC said in its own filing that it considers the extensive data in the record and comments from numerous interested parties Coming up next on the Bloomberg law show the state of Oklahoma is looking for redo of a Supreme Court decision hailed by Indian tribes as a long overdue endorsement of their sovereignty in much of the eastern part of the state.

SEC Gary gensler duke law school Citadel James Cox Jim NCC Oklahoma Supreme Court
"duke law school" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

02:16 min | 1 year ago

"duke law school" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"To start things off today. A macro micro thing. 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 know, 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 plan the supply chain disruptions Task force Will the thinking goes increased domestic production of critical inventory, like semiconductors and batteries that was announced today. It is also by the way. An admission that we are not going to be able to make everything we need ourselves. Marketplaces. Justin Ho is on the macro desk today. What the Biden administrations really doing here is trying to reduce the economy's dependence on China. They're talking about trying to reduce dependence on other countries for rare Earth That's mainly China. Katie Rust is an economics professor at U. C. Davis. They're talking about trying to safeguard and encourage domestic sources of key pharmaceutical ingredients. Here. We import a lot of those from China. So the idea instead is to rely more on American allies as trading partners, says Rachel Brewster at Duke Law School. When we're discussing semiconductors are major allies will be South Korea, Japan, Taiwan. When we move on to 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 antagonizing many of these 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 medals 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 U. S. Would be a fool's errand, she says to try to go it alone. I'm Justin. How for marketplace? Micro Part of this supply story today comes.

"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 | 2 years 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 | 2 years 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 | 2 years 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 | 2 years 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 | 2 years 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