- “Wisconsin Judge Rules No Right to Own a Cow or Drink Its Milk” [Food Freedom; related on demonstration at FDA]
- We’re from the authorities, and we’re shutting down your “farm-to-fork” dinner [Amy Alkon]
- “FTC Makes Strategic Concessions on Food/Beverage Marketing Guidelines” [Lammi, WLF]
- Given a little humility, NYT’s Mark Bittman might have noticed that his new junk food insight contradicts his old [Jacob Sullum, Reason]
- Urban myths about Halloween candy tampering [Free-Range Kids]
- New Jersey lawsuit over serving of meat to devout Hindu vegetarians [Abnormal Use; compare 1999 case]
- “First lady will achieve goal of eradicating all food deserts by 2017” — calm down, that’s “deserts” with just the one “s” [Obama Foodorama, more, more] Premise that lack of access to fresh fruits/vegetables accounts for poor urban diet, however, is sheerest fantasy [Katherine Mangu-Ward/WaPo, earlier here and here]
Archive for 2011
A copyright troll’s downfall
“US Marshals turned loose to collect $63,720.80 from Righthaven” [Nate Anderson, ArsTechnica]
Booster clubs and bake sales
The anti-obesity campaign isn’t the only policy initiative that’s leading to regulatory scrutiny of high school bake sales. There’s Title IX and its state equivalents, too:
Controversy in New Mexico continues over booster club funding and Title IX implementation as discussion heats up over the state’s Schools Athletics Equity Act. The issue remains whether private donations raised by parents through bake sales and working concession stands, or whether philanthropic contributions by private businesses, should be pooled together and distributed among all boys and girls teams under the guise of Title IX equality — and regardless of which parents/teams raised what.
Not surprisingly, many expect volunteerism to droop if the chance to raising funds for your team’s road trip or new equipment is replaced by a new rule prescribing that you can only raise money for school sports generally and hope that some fraction gets passed through to your team. [Deborah Elson, Saving Sports; earlier on booster clubs]
“Kurt Vonnegut And The Maddening Zealotry Of Literary Estates”
Whether it’s family members’ touchiness or lawyers’ zealous interpretation of intellectual property rights, things seem to be getting worse for biographers and others requesting permission to quote from letters and documents. [Craig Fehrman, The New Republic]
November 2 roundup
- A request for anti-SLAPP lawyers in Maine and Maryland [Popehat]
- “Gallup: Government Regulation the Top Concern Among Small Business Owners” [NRO Corner] Almost as if in rebuttal to claims from Treasury economist [Business Roundtable]
- Foreclosure law firm in upstate NY under fire after pics posted of its Halloween party [Nocera, Mystal]
- “GAO Report Details Secrecy Of Asbestos Trusts” [Dan Fisher, Forbes] Crown Cork & Seal seeks successor-liability bill in Massachusetts [Eagle-Tribune]
- Case against FMCSA’s rule change on truckers’ hours-of-service [Marc Scribner, CEI]
- Richard Epstein on John Paul Stevens as justice and, now, author [Hoover]
- Feds say lawyer who advised giant theft ring was partly paid in chic shoes and other designer gear [ABA Journal]
The high cost of a feel-good measure
“Tulane Study Says SEC Estimate of Cost of Conflict Mineral Rules is 100x Too Low” — headline at Business Law Prof (via Prof. Bainbridge), describing a new calculation that the implementation of the complication Dodd-Frank provision will in fact cost American business upwards of $7 billion, not the $70 million the Securities and Exchange Commission optimistically foresaw. (Typo fixed now.) Earlier here, here (“devastating” effect on Congolese).
Update: ousted Congressman sues opponents for “loss of livelihood”
Updating our story of last December: A federal judge has given the go-ahead to former Rep. Steve Dreihaus’s suit against the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List for allegedly falsely characterizing his stands on issues during last year’s race, thus causing him to lose. Earlier, Driehaus had filed a complaint against the Anthony List under Ohio’s remarkable False Statements Law, “which criminalizes lying about public officials” and has been assailed by the ACLU among other groups as inconsistent with the First Amendment. [Seth McKelvey, Reason; Peter Roff, U.S. News]
Labor and employment law roundup
- Ohio vote looms on Wisconsin-style public labor reform [NRO Corner, Columbus Dispatch, Atlantic Wire, Buckeye Institute “S.B. 5”, Brian Bolduc/NRO]
- Florida lawmaker proposes leave for some employees with domestically abused pets [Eric Meyer]
- UK proposal: let employers have frank talks with underperforming workers without fear of liability [Telegraph]
- “Wisconsin legislation could restrict punitive damages for job bias” [AP]
- No, your mover can’t enter the building: a Chicago lawyer encounters union power [Howard Foster, Frum Forum] An insider’s game: “Two teachers union lobbyists teach for a day to qualify for hefty pensions” [Chicago Tribune]
- Alternatively, we might just want to go back to freedom of contract: “An employer’s bill of rights” [Hyman]
- Michael Fox on “Healthy Workplace Act” proposal creating rights to sue over on-job bullying [Jottings]
- Feds put employer use of “independent contractors” under microscope [Omega HR] FLSA risks to employer of using unpaid interns [SmartHR]
- A bit of health care deregulation from Obama [Tyler Cowen] Related on nurse practitioners: [Goodman]
Welcome Lars Larson listeners
I joined the radio host yesterday evening to talk about how sexual harassment law works in practice, in light of the reports that presidential candidate Herman Cain was a target in two employee actions alleging “inappropriate” conduct. More on the “hostile environment” branch of harassment law here.
Californians can’t get Dunkin’ Donuts coffee online
“When consumers in California visit the Dunkin’ Donuts website hoping to order a bag of their favorite java, they are met with the following message: ‘Important Notice: We are temporarily suspending the shipment of orders to California while we work to comply with Proposition 65 with the State of California. We apologize for any inconvenience.'” Acrylamide, a compound naturally present in many roasted or cooked foods, is among the hundreds of substances that must be warned against under Prop 65, which has led, as we noted in May, to a lawsuit against more than 40 coffee companies. [TechNewsWorld] Author Vivian Wagner quotes me:
“The law empowers private litigants to enforce its terms without having to show that any consumer has been exposed to any material or substantial risk, let alone harmed,” Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, told the E-Commerce Times. “As a result, entrepreneurial law firms roam the state identifying new, often far-fetched, unwarned-of risks and extracting cash settlements along with promises to warn from hapless defendants.”