>- So there, Mr. Idealist - have some local business in Paoli agree to work with you to develop a project that you, in the end, will own the marketing rights to. Do it real cheap in exchange for these rights. In 8 or 10 months, when the project is done (and you've lost 30 percent of your body mass), and some VP says: If we marketed this, instead of John, we could get rich!!! If you're ever unfortunate enough to have some good-ole-boy local business type pull you in front of some good-ole-boy local judge and say he didn't really mean what he agreed to - if you don't have the bucks to fight it (we're talking at least 20K for cheap starters), just let em have it - because every nickle and dime you have left, will be blown - just to pay a good-ole-boy lawyer to let the good-ole-boy judge give it to the good-ole-boy other side.
>

That is presuming I would get into that situation. FWIW, I would not...

>The point of this exercise should be this. If you develop a program and want to own it: Write it down to the affect:
>You agree that I (the developer) will own all rights to the program. And you, the user and/or customer will have a license to use it, but will not own it! YIf you challenge my right to ownership, you the licensee, will pay any court costs and penalities resulting from that challenge.
>

That is true wisdom...wisdom that has been echoed here before...


>In short: Its always cheaper to get the legal stuff covered up front. If you do it at the back - it will be expensive, you probably will loose, and your heart will be broken. AN once of prevention is indeed worth a pound of cure.
>

A point a master of the obvious will make....


>
Lower courts simply feed the good-ole-boy judical industry. If there are issues, one should ask their lawyer how to move the case to a higher court right away. But to get good representation - you got to have money. You got to have good representation.
>

I think you need a lesson in how American Jurisprudence works. You don't get to go to a higher court right away. Rather, you need to start at the bottom. Sometimes, a lower court will just pass it on up the latter. It is a matter of local rules and procedures. The FL election cases illustrate that. Still, you need to start at the bottom. Further, passing cases on are for issues that are not "ripe" .

You can always appeal. This is what is known as the appeal of right. You get one by default. And optionally, more than that.

FWIW, I am in the middle of writing an appellate brief (for law school, not a real one...< bg ) - that involves a first amendment issue/free speech. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff/appellee. I represent the defendant/appellant that is appealing the summary judgment motion the trial court granted.

What do you need to prevail at the appellate level?

1. A good lawyer skilled at writing a persuasive brief..< bg >..
2. A good argument that the trial court incorrectly applied the rule of law.
3. A good argument that some material issue of fact existed.

Do you see the common element? a trial court. Appellate courts serve to ensure mistakes are corrected. Sometimes, while it may appear that a mistake was madel, the appellate courts will in effect, make law by deciding against the other party. Of course, this can be appealed as well.

The type of issues we are talking about here are very fact intensive. In fact, the issue, like most things, turns on the facts. Facts are for a judge to sort out in a bench trial or a jury in a jury trial. Appellate courts typically don't get involved in issues of fact. Facts are messy. Appellate courts typically deal in issues of law and whether the law was interpreted and applied correctly.

Here is where your lawyer comes into play? Can he interpret and apply the law in his breif that is most favorable to you that will appear more reasonable to the appellate court than the other side? If so, you have a shot!!

I hear you about your idealist argument. However, in cases like this, we are not talking about your local district justice here. Still, there is the issue of forum shopping and whether you go state or federal (assuming you can go federal)..

Many of your perceptions however about the judicial workings are incorrect. However, all I can do is try to enlighten you a bit....

< JVP >













>>
>>Don't quit your day job and decide to dispense legal advice!! < bg >...
>Now that's good advice:-)
>
>PS- Did you notice that ER used the word "invocation" in one of his recent posts<g>