Week 5 EOC: Apple-Samsung Ratent Battle

The battle between Apple and Samsung seems like it should be a simple one that should have been over a year ago. However, since it is not over the court will have to decide whether or not Samsung is guilty of producing equipment using patented technology from Apple. Starting with Apple, the creators of the iconic Iphone it is easy to see how Samsung could be in violation while trying to keep up with the iconic Iphone. It’s a simple idea really. If Team A is using a certain bat that is helping them win games Team B will want to use that same bat too. Now if Apple wins the victory than that could potentially cause Samsung to have a very large drop in sales because their products would have to be pulled from the shelves. This would also mean that Samsung would have to pay a large amount to Apple causing their business to hurt. However on the other hand If Samsung was to win a victory than that would allow them to keep selling their products regardless of what technology is within them and that could only lead to more sales. Since the case last year Samsung has stopped selling most of the products that they have been accused of stealing which could make it difficult for Apple to take the victory in appeals court. One of the patents that Samsung has been found guilty of is that they are producing a hand held smart phone with rounded corners. Those rounded hand held devices are still on shelves today so that is certain to be brought up in the court and if they are found guilty of stealing this patent than what could that mean for Samsung in a world where style and comfort in the palm of the hand is everything in the world of smart phones? Would it force them to create non rectangular smartphones with no rounded edges that no one would desire, and would that be a game changer causing them to potentially go out of the smartphone business?

Week 4 EOC: Edward Snowden

In the battle of whether or not Edward Snowden is a whistle blower or an anarchist I personally stand on his side. I firmly believe that if he is telling the truth and that he made the right decision. In my opinion going to the any form of new station would have been pointless. Why go to an American news network when everything that they do is censored by the government? They would not allow that. However, speaking in the stance of him being within breach of a government contract that could equal prison time for him. Since he is within breach of contract, yet morally abiding by the law, the real question is what should happen to him if he is to be returned to the United States? My opinion is that the man should walk free. Whether the people see the government as a god send, a massive pile of manure, or a tyrannical force attempting to turn the entire country into a police state, Edward Snowden was honest and true to the citizens of the Unites States. This quote, said by Abraham Lincoln proves what he was trying to do. "We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution." This quote alone shows to me that he is sticking true to being a rightful master, so to speak. He is telling the country that their constitutional rights to privacy are being violated. These rights which are without a doubt being infringed upon are debatably legal under the Patriot Act. Yet it's strange how the Patriot Act is even legal as it violates the privacy rights of millions. I don't think the true question here is whether or not Mr. Snowden will walk free without being hunted, I think the question here is will the courts, if he is brought to America, take a moral stance and set this man, who is standing up for the constitution, free regardless of whether or not he is within breach of contract.

Week 3: EOC Rolling Stone Magazine

To say that Jahar will be given a fair trial is a ridiculous statement to begin with. After the events of the Boston Marathon bombing it is safe to assume that after he came out and said that he did it, no one is going to look at him as an innocent man. There is a basis of understanding that could come into play but that is still irrelevant because he broke the law. The article by Rolling Stone magazine in my opinion does nothing to cover the legality of what happened and only covers Jahar and his history. History is a great thing to know, it allows us to look at moral stances and turn those moral stances into laws, but since the laws are already in place it seems like a moot point. Looking at Jahars life however I can understand why he was an unstable person. "I can see my face in my dad'spictures as a youngin, he even had a ridiculous amount of hair like me,” was a tweet that he had posted in June of 2012. With this tweet alone you can see that he is longing for something more than what he has and when people do that they tend to be a bit more irrational. Looking toward his family you could also say that the pressure weighed down on him. It is strange to think that a person who once said "I didn't become a lifeguard to just chill and get paid, Ido it for the people, saving lives brings me joy.” could do so much harm. On the other hand though Jahar went on to say "Idk why it's hard for many ofyou to accept that 9/11 was an inside job, I mean I guess fuck the facts y'allare some real #patriots #gethip.” This tells me that he is obviously upset about the bastardizing of his religious orientation and as history will tell us, when religion or politics come into play, anything can happen.

Week 2 EOC: Stand Your Ground

Opinions on the Stand Your Ground Law vary from person to person. My view on it is that it is a sensitive topic. In my opinion being able to defend one’s self outside of their home falls into the same category as John Locke’s Natural Right of life, but the Trayvon Martin case that seems to be inappropriate. The Washington Post defines the Stand Your Ground Law as to “preventdeath or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent thecommission of a forcible felony.” In the case of Trayvon Martin I don’t believe that George Zimmerman was standing his ground so I do not believe this should be implied in any way. An example of standing your ground would be if you are walking to your car at night, alone, in a dark parking lot, and someone is running toward you in what appears to be a threatening manner and you tell them to stop but they continue to run toward you and you fight them with whatever means you have. As I said it is a sensitive law. "The biggest differencein any of the laws are where they have the right to defend themselves. Somerequire that you be in your home or your car. Some have expanded that to sayyou can just be on the street corner,” was said by Ryan Sibley to U.S.News. What he is referring to is the Castle Law, in states like California and so on, which says that a person can only defend themselves in their home, car, place of work and so on whereas Stand Your Ground applies everywhere within the perimeters of such places that have adopted said law. Eric Holder said “By allowing andperhaps encouraging violent situations to escalate in public, such lawsundermine public safety,” in regards to the Stand Your Ground Law. My view is different. I believe that it is circumstantial.

Week 1 EOC: My Voice

In the eyes of anyone who has ever seen a modern movie, visual effects and motion graphics are the things that make them believe that explosions, aliens, orcs, and car chases going one hundred miles an hour are real. Ever since I was a child I've always had an urge to learn how to create those types of things. Growing up I lived in a small town with not much to do so I made the choice to watch movies as my main source of entertainment. Those late nights watching Black Hawk Down, Tears Of The Sun, Lord Of The Rings, Pirates Of The Caribbean, and so many other movies are memories that have always stuck. I moved out of my small town in November 2012 to take a journey to places unknown and wound up at the Art Institute of Las Vegas Nevada to study those exact visual effects and motion graphics that I had remembered awing about as a child. With this degree I would like to one day be able to create them myself for future generations to come. It is with this degree that I hope to one day be able to develop worlds of fantasy that make people believe that anything is possible and make my present and future family, proud to say that one of their relatives worked on a certain popular movie.