#coercion to arbitrate

[andrewjbernhard]

U.S. Public Policies Against Coercion to Arbitration Without a Contract

If you have any questions about arbitration without agreement in advance, coercion to arbitrate, and recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration awards in the U.S., please contact Bernhard Law Firm at www.bernhardlawfirm.com.

This article briefly discusses the U.S. public policies that are well-defined and dominant, ascertained by reference to the laws and precedents cited, against coercion to arbitration without contract. If you have any questions about arbitration without agreement in advance, coercion to arbitrate, and recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration awards in the U.S., please contact Bernhard…

[dailyanarchistposts]

Anarchists and Neo-anarchists: Horizontalism and Autonomous Spaces

It is not uncommon, particularly in North America, to see anarchism defined as an ideology rooted in ‘direct democracy’, consensus decision making, and the maintenance of ‘horizontal’ (i.e., ‘non-hierarchical’) social relations, particularly in autonomous zones or public spaces.

This idea of anarchism is unusual in that it places at the centre of its definition an adherence to very specific forms of procedure and interpersonal behaviour while downplaying the political ends a ‘horizontal’ movement should be trying to establish. From this perspective, reclaiming public space as an opportunity to hold non-hierarchical public assemblies, where we can hammer out decisions by consensus, is, in itself, ‘anarchist’ – whatever the result of such processes.

This has little to do with the classical, mass-anarchist tradition and its politics of revolutionary socialism. It is, instead, an approach which is better described as falling under the banner of ‘neo-anarchism’ (or ‘small-a anarchism’). Neo-anarchism is a modern conception of anarchism largely informed by the feminist and peace movements of the 70s, the environmental movement of the 80s, the alter-globalisation movement of the 90s, and the Argentinian uprising of 2001; which coined the term horizontalidad (‘horizontalism’) to describe the movement’s rejection of representative democracy, the use of general assemblies to coordinate activity, and converting abandoned or bankrupt factories into cooperative businesses.

Take, for instance, the insistence by neo-anarchists on the use of consensus decision making. Though consensus (or ‘unanimity’, as it was typically called) was sometimes a feature of anarchist political organisations, and often seen as an ideal to work towards through comradely discussion, it was never a fundamental component of the anarchist movement. Anarchists have generally agreed that the appropriate form of decision making depends on the circumstances concerned, and frequently endorsed variations of majoritarian voting; particularly in mass organisations based on commonalities other than close-ideological affinity, such as unions. The focus for anarchists has generally not been the form of decision-making, but instead the principles of free association and solidarity. Furthermore, though anarchists have always stressed the right ofthe minority to be free of the majority’s coercion, it is even more important that the great majority be free of minoritarian rule or sabotage. As Malatesta wrote in his pamphlet Between Peasants: A Dialogue on Anarchy:

everything is done to reach unanimity, and when this is impossible, one would vote and do what the majority wanted, or else put the decision in the hands of a third party who would act as arbitrator, respecting the inviolability of the principles of equality and justice which the society is based on.

In response to the concern over minoritarian sabotage, he continues by asserting that such a situation would

[make it] necessary to take forcible action, because if it is unjust that the majority oppress the minority, it’s no more just that the contrary should happen. And just as the minority have the right of insurrection, so do the majority have the right of defense, or if the word doesn’t offend you, repression.[3]

As for ‘autonomous zones’ and the tactic of reclaiming public spaces (as seen in the Occupy movement) – here we have no connection to anarchism as a revolutionary tradition, and an example of a tactic which has repeatedly shown its inability to extract significant reforms, let alone revolutionise production and destroy the State.

The fundamental limitations of the ‘public occupation’ or ‘autonomous zone’ , and the defeats which have followed from these limitations, have led some former advocates of the strategy to make a notable transition from neo-anarchism to parliamentary politics. Though inexplicable to some outside observers, the change is easily understood when we consider neo-anarchism’s peculiar view of ‘direct democracy’, or ‘horizontally organised spaces’, as the defining characteristic of anarchism, and not a theory of libertarian revolution against the State and capital.

If we accept the idea of anarchism as proposed by the neo-anarchists, there is no fundamental contradiction between anarchism and involvement in parliamentary politics. If the political party is a directly democratic one, composed of social movements, and committed to horizontal interpersonal relations, what difference does it make if the decision made (ideally by consensus) is to campaign for political candidates, or even administer the State?

We have seen this with the so-called ‘Movements of the Squares’ in Europe. Activists who took part in the 15M (or ‘Indignados’) movement in Spain abandoned their dismissal of all politicians (“¡Que no nos representan!” – “They don’t represent us!”) with the formation of Podemos and various other ‘municipalist’ parties.[4]

A similar trajectory was followed by the anthropologist David Graeber towards the end of his life. Graeber – a figurehead of Occupy Wall Street and, prior to that, a participant in the alter-globalisation movement – apparently saw no contradiction between his professed (neo-)anarchism and his efforts to join the British Labour Party in support of Jeremy Corbyn. In particular, Graeber was enthusiastic about the Labour-affiliated organisation Momentum; an outgrowth of the Corbyn leadership campaign, which he argued constituted a unique attempt to fuse a radical social movement with a traditional parliamentary party.[5]

More recently we have witnessed the absurdity of a self-proclaimed ‘libertarian socialist’, Gabriel Boric (who touts his association with Chile’s radical student movement), ascending to the presidency in the aftermath of a militant popular uprising.

The damage caused by these supposedly ‘unique’ attempts to translate the ‘horizontalism’ of neo-anarchism into the party-form – which, in reality, hardly differs from the historic approach offered by Marxists as an alternative to anarchism – has been outlined well elsewhere, and there is no need to go over the details here.[6] It suffices to say that in each case there was bureaucratisation, accomodation with the necessities of administering the capitalist state (or even just campaigning to administer it), and zero empowerment of workers against the bosses.

The reality is that there is no way to fully ‘prefigure’ anarchy and communism through ‘directly democratic’ spaces of ‘autonomy’. Anarchism requires a specific anarchist movement and anarchist practice. Though we must certainly organise ourselves from the bottom up, with a consistent federalist structure, we can not simply bring about our ideal by ‘living anarchisticly’ or relating to one another as ‘horizontally’ as possible. Similarly, the content of anarchism can not be limited to the structure of our movement – its content of revolutionary class struggle must be maintained. To quote Luigi Fabbri:

If anarchism were simply an individual ethic, to be cultivated within oneself, and at the same time adapted in material life to acts and movements in contradiction with it, we could call ourselves anarchists and belong to the most diverse parties; and so many could be called anarchists who, although they are spiritually and intellectually emancipated, are and remain, on practical grounds, our enemies.But anarchism is something else… proletarian and revolutionary, an active participation in the movement for human emancipation, with principles and goals that are egalitarian and libertarian at the same time. The most important part of its program does not consist solely in the dream, which we want to come true, of a society without bosses and without governments, but above all in the libertarian conception of revolution, of revolution against the state and not through the state… [7]

[sankhlaco]

The Industrial Disputes Act: Key Provisions and Importance in India

The Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 is a crucial piece of legislation in India that governs the resolution of disputes between employers and employees in the industrial sector.

The Act was enacted with the primary objective of ensuring fair and peaceful resolution of conflicts, promoting industrial harmony, and protecting the rights of workers while balancing the interests of employers.

Key Provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act

Definition of Industrial Dispute: The Act defines an industrial dispute as any disagreement or conflict between employers and employees, or between employees themselves, related to employment, non-employment, terms of employment, or conditions of labor.

Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: The Act outlines several mechanisms for the resolution of industrial disputes, including conciliation, arbitration, and adjudication. Conciliation officers and boards work to mediate disputes and encourage a mutually acceptable resolution. If conciliation fails, the matter may be referred to arbitration or adjudicated by labor courts, industrial tribunals, or national tribunals.

Strikes and Lockouts: The Act regulates the conduct of strikes and lockouts, ensuring that they are carried out within legal parameters. It requires proper notice to be given before initiating a strike or lockout and outlines the circumstances under which such actions are permissible.

Retrenchment and Layoffs: The Act includes provisions for retrenchment, layoffs, and closure of industrial establishments, ensuring that employees are adequately compensated and that the procedures are followed in accordance with the law.

Unfair Labor Practices: The Act identifies and prohibits certain unfair labor practices by both employers and employees, including coercion, discrimination, and victimization.

Importance of the Industrial Disputes Act

The Industrial Disputes Act plays a vital role in maintaining industrial peace and fostering a stable working environment in India. By providing a structured framework for resolving disputes, the Act helps prevent conflicts from escalating into strikes or lockouts that could disrupt production and harm the economy.

It also ensures that workers' rights are protected, promoting fair treatment and job security. For employers, the Act offers a clear process for handling disputes and managing workforce issues, contributing to a more predictable and harmonious industrial environment.

In the last, the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 is essential for both employees and employers in India, as it helps maintain a balance between the rights and responsibilities of both parties. Understanding and adhering to the provisions of the Act is crucial for ensuring long-term industrial harmony and productivity in the country's diverse industrial landscape.

[vaseeyatnama]

The Legalities of Will Writing: How a Professional Service Can Help

Writing a will is an essential step in ensuring that your assets and wishes are honoured after your passing. However, the process can be fraught with legal complexities that can make it daunting for the uninitiated. This is where a professional will writing service comes into play. By providing expert guidance and support, these services can help you navigate the legal intricacies involved, ensuring that your will is both valid and comprehensive. In this article, we will explore the legalities of will writing and how a professional service can be invaluable in this important task.

Understanding the Legal Requirements for a Valid Will

To ensure that your will is legally binding, it must adhere to specific requirements as outlined by UK law. A valid will must be:

Written and Signed: The will must be in writing and signed by the testator (the person making the will).

Witnessed: The signature must be witnessed by two individuals who are not beneficiaries of the will.

Made by a Competent Individual: The testator must be of sound mind and at least 18 years old.

Voluntary: The will must be made voluntarily, without any undue influence or coercion.

A professional will writing service can help ensure that all these requirements are met, thereby reducing the risk of the will being contested or deemed invalid.

Ensuring Clarity and Precision

One of the primary legal challenges in will writing is ensuring that the language used is clear and unambiguous. Ambiguities can lead to disputes among beneficiaries and potentially result in legal battles. A will writing service employs experts who are well-versed in the appropriate legal terminology and can draft your will with the necessary precision. This ensures that your intentions are clearly articulated and less likely to be misinterpreted.

Addressing Complex Family Dynamics

In today's world, family structures can be complex, with blended families, stepchildren, and second marriages being commonplace. These dynamics can complicate the will writing process. A professional will writing service can provide guidance on how to fairly distribute assets in such scenarios, ensuring that all family members are considered and that your wishes are respected.

Handling Estate Taxes

Estate taxes can significantly impact the value of the assets you leave behind. Understanding the tax implications and planning accordingly is crucial to maximise the inheritance your beneficiaries receive. A will writing service can offer valuable advice on estate planning and tax efficiency, helping you to structure your will in a way that minimises tax liabilities.

Protecting Vulnerable Beneficiaries

If you have beneficiaries who are minors, disabled, or otherwise vulnerable, a will writing service can help you set up appropriate provisions to protect their interests. This may include establishing trusts, appointing guardians, or setting conditions for the inheritance. Such measures ensure that your vulnerable beneficiaries are cared for in accordance with your wishes.

Updating and Reviewing Your Will

Life circumstances can change, necessitating updates to your will. Marriage, divorce, the birth of children, or the acquisition of significant assets are all events that may require a revision of your will. A professional will writing service can provide ongoing support, helping you to review and update your will as needed to reflect your current situation and intentions.

Legal Dispute Resolution

Even with the best planning, disputes can sometimes arise among beneficiaries. A will writing service often includes provisions for dispute resolution, such as mediation or arbitration. These services can help resolve conflicts amicably, without the need for protracted legal battles, ensuring that your estate is distributed according to your wishes.

The Role of Executors

Executors are responsible for administering your estate according to the terms of your will. This role carries significant legal responsibilities, including applying for probate, settling debts, and distributing assets. A will writing service can assist in appointing a suitable executor and provide them with the guidance needed to fulfil their duties effectively. This ensures that the administration of your estate proceeds smoothly and in compliance with the law.

Safeguarding Against Challenges

A professionally written will is less likely to be challenged in court. The involvement of a will writing service adds a layer of credibility, as it demonstrates that you took the necessary steps to ensure your will was drafted correctly and in accordance with legal standards. This can be particularly important in cases where there may be potential disputes or challenges from disgruntled family members.

Peace of Mind

Ultimately, one of the greatest benefits of using a professional will writing service is the peace of mind it provides. Knowing that your will has been drafted correctly, in accordance with legal requirements, and with all potential complexities addressed, allows you to rest assured that your wishes will be honoured. This peace of mind extends to your beneficiaries, who can be confident that your estate will be administered as intended.

The legalities of will writing can be complex and challenging to navigate without professional assistance. A will writing service offers the expertise and support needed to ensure that your will is valid, clear, and comprehensive. By addressing legal requirements, providing precise language, handling complex family dynamics, and offering ongoing support, a will writing service can help you create a will that truly reflects your wishes and protects the interests of your beneficiaries. Whether you have a straightforward estate or a more complicated situation, the peace of mind and legal assurance provided by a professional will writing service is invaluable.

[anarkittyuwuuniverse]

"Coercion is the question. The majority can do whatever it pleases — with itself. In a further irrelevance, Bookchin demands to know how to make decisions if not by majority — the standard statist query, as noted by Robert Paul Wolff.[1205] Not tarrying for an answer, the Director Emeritus launches into a long Thersitical tirade against consensus decision-making, as illustrated by what must be a personalistic, self-serving account of the Clamshell Alliance.[1206] Consensus must have been frustrating for someone with Bookchin’s will to power, but an argument against consensus is not an argument for majority rule. He hates it so much that he calls it “degrading, not ‘democratic’” (!) because it elevates quantity over quality.[1207] Plato or Nietzsche — I was about to write, “couldn’t have said it any better,” but, of course, they did.

There are other possibilities, including temporary inaction[1208] and temporary separation. Brian Martin advocates demarchy, the random selection from volunteers of the members of functional decision-making groups. Barbara Goodwin proposes selection by lottery for a wide range of positions besides juror.[1209] The decision-rule might not be that important in structures like those proposed by Vaclav Havel, which are “open, dynamic, and small” — and temporary.[1210] The best method is, “whenever possible a solution is to be found whereby majority and minority can each follow their own policy and combine only to avoid clashes and mutual interference” (Giovanni Baldelli).[1211]

Malatesta points out the obvious: “In our opinion, therefore, it is necessary that majority and minority should succeed in living together peaceably and profitably by mutual agreement and compromise, by the intelligent recognition of the practical necessities of communal life and of the usefulness of concessions which circumstances make necessary.” He also suggested arbitration, but expected it to be as occasional as formal voting. If separate options are impossible; if differences in opinion aren’t worth splitting up over; if “the duty of solidarity” argues for unity; then the minority should recede, but even then, only voluntarily.[1212] Still another possibility is taking turns. In contrast, “democracy, as usually understood, does not include such a notion.”[1213]" -Bob Black, Nightmares of Reason

[warningsine]

BEIJING/MANILA, Dec 10 (Reuters) - The Philippines and China traded accusations on Sunday over a collision of their vessels near a disputed shoal in the South China Sea as tensions over claims in the vital waterway escalate.

The Philippine coast guard accused China of firing water cannons and ramming resupply vessels and a coast guard ship, causing "serious engine damage" to one, while China's coast guard said the Philippine vessel intentionally rammed its ship.

China claims almost the entire South China Sea, a conduit for more than $3 trillion of annual ship-borne commerce, including parts claimed by the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. The Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 said China's claims had no legal basis.

Beijing and Manila have been playing cat-and-mouse around the uninhabited Second Thomas Shoal in the Philippines' exclusive economic zone when the Philippines deploys resupply missions for Filipino soldiers living aboard an aging warship deliberately run aground in 1999 to protect Manila's maritime claims.

The shoal is part of what are known internationally as the Spratly Islands.

On Saturday, the Philippines accused China of "illegal and aggressive actions" by China for firing water cannon at a civilian-operated government fishing vessel, a move Beijing called legitimate "control measures".

In Sunday's incident, China's coast guard said in a statement that two Philippine vessels, ignoring repeated warnings, had "illegally entered the waters adjacent to Ren'ai Reef in the Nansha Islands without the approval of the Chinese government."

It said the Unaizah Mae 1 "made an unprofessional and dangerous sudden turn, intentionally ramming into China Coast Guard vessel 21556." It said the Philippine side bore full responsibility.

China Coast Guard spokesman Gan Yu called on the Philippines to stop its "provocative acts", saying China would continue to carry out "law-enforcement activities" in its waters.

Philippine coast guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela posted on the social media platform X that the "M/L Kalayaan suffered serious engine damage. Contrary to China Coast Guard disinformation, UM1 rammed by CCG vessel."

A Philippine government task force condemned "China's latest unprovoked acts of coercion and dangerous maneuvers against a legitimate and routine" resupply mission. China's action "puts into question and significant doubt the sincerity of its calls for peaceful dialogue", it said in a statement.

The National Task Force-West Philippine Sea said a coast guard ship was towing the Kalayaan back to Palawan province and that coast guard vessel BRP Cabra had "suffered damage to its mast after being directly targeted by the full strength of the water cannon".

U.S. Ambassador to Manila MaryKay Carlson posted on X that China's "aggression undermines regional stability in defiance of a free and open Indo-Pacific".

Around 200 Philippine fishermen, youth leaders and civil society groups have joined a Christmas mission to the area, organised by the Atin Ito ("This is ours"), a civilian-led network asserting the country's rights in the South China Sea.

The group said Sunday they have decided to return to El Nido town in Palawan province, "erring on the side of caution ... after the constant shadowing of four Chinese vessels" in their voyage. It is not immediately clear if the group will wrap up their mission or sail back in the South China Sea in the coming days.

Earlier in the day, ten fishing boats have decided to pull out from the voyage due to safety concerns.

[coprelawland]

The Role of The Non Conveniens Doctrine in the Aguinda v. Texaco Case

By Summer Lee, University of Colorado Boulder Class of 2023

November 21, 2023

The Aguinda v. Texaco caseis an example of how applications of the non conveniens doctrine can contribute to complex litigation scenarios. While the motion to non conveniens was approved and Ecuador’s courts provided a final decision, the case was further complexified by a reassessment of Ecuador’s legal framework and the evidence that was used to provide the final decision. The lawsuit began in 1993 when the plaintiff, Aguinda, accused Chevron of producing environmentally harmful toxic waste and lacking sufficient environmental controls on pollution produced during the oil extraction process. The plaintiff also filed a lawsuit on the grounds that accidental oil spills during the extraction process have affected the local communities’ access to fresh, clean water [1].

After nine years of litigation in U.S. courts, there was a motion by the defendant party, Chevron, to apply the non conveniens doctrine to the case. The non conveniens doctrine is defined as a court's ability to transfer the case to the jurisdiction of another court if it would promote convenience and be adequate enough to conduct the legal process. While determining requests for non conveniens, courts perform a balancing test and an adequate alternative inquiry test to determine whether or not the request should be accepted. During a balancing test, a court considers the different and conflicting interests of the parties involved in the lawsuit. It takes into account private and public factors, such as the different, competing interests of the parties involved in the lawsuit, and how juries are relevant or connected to the case. In an adequate alternative inquiry test, the court considers the alternative courts that the defendant suggests, and whether or not the alternative court can provide legal remedies to the plantiff (e.g., injunction, equitable rescission, subrogation, etc.) [3, 6].

  In response to Chevron’s request to implement the non conveniens doctrine, the plaintiff argued that the case should remain under the jurisdiction of U.S. courts, and that the request for non conveniens should be rejected because Ecuador’s courts may not exercise legal impartiality [1]. The Southern District of New York also questioned the ability for Ecuador’s courts to engage in due process, arguing that the request for non conveniens should ultimately be rejected. Despite these objections, however, the U.S Courts viewed forum non conveniens as an appropriate next step because they argued that the motion to non conveniens passed the balancing test and that Ecuador’s courts were a sufficient alternative court to the U.S. District Courts [2].  In the context of Aguinda v. Texaco, legal scholars have also argued how the defendant’s use of the non conveniens doctrine was used as a way to obtain a strategic advantage during the case, rather than solely for the sake of convenience. As Ecuador’s government generates significant revenue from oil extracting industries, Chevron assumed that Ecuador’s final decision would rule in the company’s favor [2].  Other scholars have noted how Chevron possibly attempted to gain a strategic advantage through interactions with the local officials involved in the lawsuit [1]. 

Although Chevron's request to transfer the case to the jurisdiction of Ecuadorian courts was accepted, the company did not find the court’s final decision acceptable. In the final decision, Ecuador’s courts held Chevron liable for damages in the lawsuit [4]. In response, Chevron asserted that the court’s decision was unreliable because the evidence used during the case was obtained via fraud, coercion and bribery, which influenced the court’s final decision [2]. Chevron appealed to an international tribunal under the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague to review the final decision and seek compensation for the damages it faced as a result of the decision [5]. Throughout the appeal process, Chevron’s expenditures on legal costs and compensation for damages were worth millions of dollars, and the company has requested the tribunal to further assess these damages [5]. On August 30, 2018, the international arbitration tribunal ruled in favor of Chevron and lowered the compensation amount for damages [7]  

______________________________________________________________

Summer Lee is pursuing a B.A. in International Affairs at the University of Colorado Boulder. She is planning to graduate in the Fall of 2023 and pursue a J.D. in international law.

______________________________________________________________

[1] Kimerling, J. (2013). Lessons from the Chevron Ecuador Litigation: The Proposed Intervenors’ Perspective. Chevron Ecuador Litigation: The Proposed Intervenors’ Perspective, 1(2), 241–291. https://doi.org/https://law.stanford.edu/publications/lessons-from-the-chevron-ecuador-litigation-the-proposed-intervenors-perspective/ 

[2] Erichson, H. (2013). The Chevron-Ecuador Dispute, Forum Non Conveniens, and the Problem of Ex Ante Inadequacy. Stanford Journal of Complex Litigation, 1. 

[3] Cornell Law School. (n.d.). Forum Non Conveniens. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/forum_non_conveniens 

[4] Chevron. (2014, March 14). U.S. Court Declares Ecuador Judgment Against Chevron Corporation Fraudulent. Unenforceable. Press Release . https://www.chevron.com/ecuador/press-releases/archive/u-s-court-declares-ecuador-judgment-against-chevron-corporation-fraudulent-unenforceable 

[5] Nagarkatti, K., & McWilliams, G. (2018, September 7). International Tribunal Rules in Favor of Chevron in Ecuador Case. Reuters: Environment. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-chevron-ecuador/international-tribunal-rules-in-favor-of-chevron-in-ecuador-case-idUSKCN1LN1WS/ 

[bhattandjoshiassociates-blog]

"Liberty" : How the Delhi High Court asserted its jurisdiction over the arbitration between Liberty Footwear Company and Liberty Shoes Ltd

The court rejected the challenge to its jurisdiction and held that the first court where an application under Part-I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is filed must be a court of competent jurisdiction The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a challenge to its jurisdiction by Liberty Footwear Company, which is engaged in a dispute with Liberty Shoes Ltd over the sale of the trademark ‘Liberty’. The court held that it has jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 9 of Part-I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim measures, as it was the first court where such an application was filed in accordance with the arbitration agreement between the parties. The dispute and the arbitration agreement for Liberty The dispute arose from an agreement dated 15.01.2021, where Liberty Footwear Company agreed to sell its trademark ‘Liberty’ to Liberty Shoes Ltd for a consideration of Rs. 100 crores. However, Footwear Company later refused to transfer the trademark and claimed that the agreement was not valid, as it was executed under coercion and undue influence. The agreement contained an arbitration clause, which stated that any dispute arising out of or in connection with the agreement shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The clause also specified that the seat of arbitration shall be Delhi and the language of arbitration shall be English. The application for interim measures and the challenge to jurisdiction Liberty Shoes Ltd invoked the arbitration clause and filed an application under Section 9 of Part-I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Delhi High Court, seeking interim measures to restrain Footwear Company from using or transferring the trademark ‘Liberty’ pending arbitration. Liberty Shoes Ltd also sought an order directing Liberty Footwear Company to deposit Rs. 100 crores in an escrow account as security for the performance of the agreement. Footwear Company challenged the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court, arguing that the application should have been filed in the court of competent jurisdiction where the cause of action arose or where the defendant resides or carries on business.  Footwear Company contended that since it is situated in Mumbai and the agreement was executed in Mumbai, the Bombay High Court would have jurisdiction over the matter. The decision of the court and its reasoning for Liberty The Delhi High Court rejected this argument and held that the first court where a party to an arbitration agreement files an application under Part-I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must be a court of competent jurisdiction and the petition must be validly/properly constituted. The court explained that the court of competent jurisdiction is defined under Section 2(1)(e) of the Act as the principal civil court of original jurisdiction in a district, and includes the High Court in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction. The court further noted that Section 42 of the Act provides that where an application under Part-I has been made in a court, no other court shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings arising out of that agreement. The court also relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., where it was held that Part-I of the Act applies only to arbitrations where the seat is in India, and Part-II applies to arbitrations where the seat is outside India. The court clarified that Section 9 of Part-I is an exception to this rule, and allows parties to seek interim measures from Indian courts even if the seat of arbitration is outside India. The court concluded that since Liberty Shoes Ltd had filed its application under Section 9 of Part-I in the Delhi High Court, which is a court of competent jurisdiction as per Section 2(1)(e) of the Act, no other court can entertain any application arising out of the same arbitration agreement as per Section 42 of the Act. The court also found that the petition was validly/properly constituted as it contained all the necessary particulars and documents required by law. Therefore, the court dismissed Liberty Footwear Company’s challenge to its jurisdiction and proceeded to hear Liberty Shoes Ltd’s application for interim measures. If you want to read more about this case, you can check out , , and from this link . Para 15 : Para 16 : Para 23 : https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/delhi-hc-asserts-jurisdiction-over-arbitration-between-liberty-footwear-company-and-liberty-shoes-ltd-178881 : https://indiankanoon.org/doc/140737050/ : https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/liberty-footwear-company-vs-liberty-shoes-ltd-395892.pdf : https://www.bing.com/search?q=delhi+high+court+asserts+jurisdiction+over+arbitration+between+liberty+footwear+company+and+liberty+shoes+ltd Read the full article

[caba-111]

How do the different lizard cultures handle criminals? Is lizard jail a thing or do you just get exiled instead?

Family culture doesn't have jail. Families use shame and arbitration to address misbehavior. Exile is the worst punishment they give out. Normally it leaves open the possibility of getting adopted into another Family, but if you did something really heinous, they'll brand you first, marking you as a criminal and guaranteeing you'll be an outcast for the rest of your life.

In Duhr isn't big on depriving people of personal agency. The main exception is crimes where you're depriving someone else of THEIR agency (most dramatic example is murder-- can't fulfill your contractual obligations if you're dead... but also less serious crimes, like exploitation and coercion). In these situations, the response is depriving YOU of your agency by throwing you in prison for a while, plus saddling you with all of your victims' obligations.

Temple States has prisons but they're supposed to be rehabilitative. When someone commits a crime, it's not seen as their fault. It's seen as a failure of society and/or mental illness. A serious criminal act results in an investigation to determine what societal conditions lead to the crime being committed. The perpetrator is usually also detailed to be healed and rehabilitated. Depending on the crime in question, this falls between "an extremely ethical way to treat criminals" and "reeducation camps for political dissidents".

[maadriahtheresecervera]

IS South China Sea ACTUALLY THE West Philippine Sea???

South China Sea is no doubt the West Philippines Sea. To start with, this matter is not even debatable. According to the UNCLOS and International law, there is no such statements such as “indisputable sovereignty”, “Historical rights” and “9-dashed line nor 10-dashed line” which was basically the counterarguments of china that in fact does not even support and/or follow a legal document nor law. Honestly, I’m enraged and deeply hurt while reading the material given that even though I already knew about this certain matter a couple of years ago but it is just that during and after reading the article, that really brought back the hatred and the passion, passion that is burning of revenge and the hopefulness that the rule of law along with a lasting peace should and forever prevail but as we all know, china is china. They will and would eventually get what they want, with the usage of coercion, violence, and their complete war ammunition that our country lacks in which made this administration’s scapegoat that whenever asked by the people of their stand/take in the issues concerning our country and china, that due to of our country’s absence of war materials and the inadequacy of competent and strong militaries and police, we cannot fight china which is in my opinion, does not speak of his political persona or contrast to the president’s persona that as everyone knew him as the “strongman of the Philippines” that when it comes to china this display of the president is not applicable because he is considered “bffs” with china. There are different ways that the Philippines can acquire ammunitions and can eventually train men and women to guard and fight for our nation’s right especially to the nation’s exclusive economic zone and/or basically, to guard and fight for what is rightfully ours that eventually china, our dear best friend considered as “theirs” for baseless arguments, their reasons are all eventually made-up like it was stated that there was a map that was presented by them, a map that has a 9-dashed line which was presented in the later years already and not during the time when UNCLOS was promulgated, they did not present this argument or in the later part. China basically are those big bullies, those entitled bullies that we encounter in our lives, they are just so reliant with their myriad of strong weapons waiting to be unleash anytime soon when the Philippines declares war to them with high hopes, in the future. And if ever this south china sea that they claim is really theirs, then why they did not even care to respond in the arbitration trial aside from that it also shows of how highly they think of themselves that they do not respect the international laws so therefore, I conclude this thought of mine by stating that South China Sea is once and for all, the West Philippine Sea, no doubts and questions. WEST PHILIPPINE SEA IT IS.

[alexsmitposts]

Battlefield Social Media: The West’s Growing Censorship Censorship in the West flourishes as tech giants turn social media back into traditional programmed media. The United States, United Kingdom and the European Union are fond of passing judgement on nations around the globe regarding “free speech.” While it is increasingly clear to a growing number of people that this “concern” is disingenuous and aimed at merely defending agitators funded and directed by Western special interests in these targeted nations, the West still likes to fashion itself as a sort of champion of free speech. Yet back home the Internet has been taken over by social media and tech giants like Google, Facebook and Twitter. Their platforms clearly serve as online public squares where everything is discussed and even election campaigns play out. Yet these companies have, over the years, begun to eliminate voices of dissent against a notion known as “consensus.” If you are speaking out against “consensus” you are in real danger of disappearing from these platforms. Some of these platforms, like Google-owned YouTube, serve as the livelihood to people who have for years built up their audiences, produced hundreds of videos and when their accounts are deleted for speaking out against the “consensus,” they have their livelihoods destroyed. In the wake of these incremental “purges” is a chilling effect with content creators self-censoring or even withdrawing entirely from Western social media. It is the sort of very real censorship the West has crusaded against in fiction around the globe for decades. Concensus or Else A more recent example is Google’s decision to ban ad revenue for those going against the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) “consensus.” CNBC in their story “Google will ban ads from running on stories spreading debunked coronavirus conspiracy theories,” would claim: Google next month will ban publishers from using its ad platform to show advertisements next to content that promotes conspiracy theories about COVID-19. It will also ban ads that promote those theories. In cases where a particular site publishes a certain threshold of material that violates these policies, it will ban the entire site from using its ad platforms. Those “conspiracy theories” might include questioning the official death rates of COVID-19. Yet even the British government itself has been recently forced to investigate its statistics regarding death rates, vindicating the very sort of people who would have been either forced into silence or forced to give up ad revenue. The London Guardian in its article, “Matt Hancock orders urgent review of PHE Covid-19 death figures,” would admit: The UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, is ordering an urgent review of the daily COVID-19 death statistics produced by Public Health England, after it emerged that they may include recovered former sufferers who could have died of other causes. False reporting over deaths to hype COVID-19, induce greater public panic and pave the way for billions in government handouts to pharmaceutical giants is at the very core of many of these so-called “conspiracy theories” Google seeks to silence through its campaign of financial coercion. Imagine if this chilling effect was achieved sooner. Would the British government have even bothered investigating its faulty statistics if there weren’t people suspicious of them? The chilling effect this has over openly discussing something as serious as COVID-19 considering its socioeconomic impact is truly alarming and much more so because it is happening in the so-called “free world” overseen by its self-appointed arbitrators in the US, UK and EU. A similar campaign was carried out to purge Google, Twitter and Facebook of anyone allegedly connected with “Russia” who also so happened to be anti-war and anti-NATO for waging those wars. Entire lists are compiled by Western government-funded organizations which are then submitted to these tech giants for purging. The Western media writes accompanying articles announcing, justifying and spinning the purges… but also sending a warning to those left about what is and isn’t going to be tolerated on these platforms. Social Media Transforming Back into Programmed Media Content creators are faced with two decisions; to either self-censor themselves to protect their work, their audiences and their livelihood, or to accept the possibility they will eventually be “purged” (censored) and need to rebuild their audiences from scratch on platforms with far fewer potential readers, viewers and patrons. Social media, of course, is no longer social media in this sort of environment, but more akin to the sort of programmed media giant Western special interests built their power on over the course of the 20th and early 21st century. Private Public Squares? Of course the defense is that Google, Facebook and Twitter are “private companies”and can do as they please with their platforms. In reality, these companies work in tandem with Western governments whether it is fomenting political destabilization abroad or creating “concensus” at home. The notion that censorship is “ok” because the US, UK and EU governments launder it through private companies ignores the close relationship these companies have with the government and how their platforms have been transformed into defacto public squares and critical channels of public communication and participation. The West’s growing overt censorship leaves it with a choice; to either accept that it is in reality as guilty of censorship and manipulating the public as it has claimed its opponents are, or continue pretending it isn’t but at the continued cost of its legitimacy upon the global stage. There is a very good reason the West is in decline around the globe and why its attempts to leverage notions like “human rights” and “free speech” against nations like China or Russia are increasingly impotent. That reason can be found, at least in part, among the growing number of purge lists, censorship campaigns and calls for “consensus” across Western social media. Finally, the increasingly overt nature of censorship and controlled narratives promoted by tech giants like Google, Facebook and Twitter should have them facing restrictions and bans around the globe. Why should any nation host a “public square” where discourse is entirely controlled by interests oceans away? Why shouldn’t a local alternative be created instead where the revenue is kept locally and if narratives are to be controlled, controlled in a way that best suits people locally? It is ironic that, China for example, is condemned for not allowing Google, Facebook and Twitter to operate freely within their information space because it is a violation of “free speech,” even as Google, Facebook and Twitter cudgel free speech on their own respective platforms. How much longer will the world tolerate these double standards? How long until individuals, organizations and even entire nations begin creating alternatives to Google, Facebook and Twitter to at the very least balance out the lopsided power and influence they have collectively accrued and abused?

[dailyanarchistposts]

Chapter 5. Crime

Beyond individual justice

The notion of justice is perhaps the most dangerous product of authoritarian psychology. The state’s worst abuses occur in its prisons, its inquisitions, its forced corrections and rehabilitations. Police, judges, and prison guards are key agents of coercion and violence. In the name of justice, uniformed thugs terrorize entire communities while dissidents petition the very government that represses them. Many people have internalized the rationalizations of state justice to such an extent that they are terrified of losing the protection and arbitration states supposedly provide.

When justice becomes the private sphere of specialists, oppression is not far behind. In stateless societies on the cusp of developing the coercive hierarchies that lead to government, the common feature seems to be a group of respected male elders permanently entrusted with the role of resolving conflicts and meting out justice. In such a context privilege can become entrenched, as those who enjoy it may shape the social norms that preserve and amplify their privilege. Without that power, individual wealth and power rest on a weak foundation that everyone can challenge.

State justice begins with a refusal to engage with human needs. Human needs are dynamic and can only be fully understood by those who experience them. State justice, by contrast, is the execution of universal prescriptions codified into law. The specialists who interpret the laws are supposed to focus on the original intention of the lawmakers rather than the situation at hand. If you need bread and stealing is a crime, you will be punished for taking it, even if you take it from someone who doesn’t need it. But if your society focuses on people’s needs and desires rather than on the enforcement of static laws, you have the opportunity to convince your community that you needed bread more than the person you took it from. In this way the actor and those affected remain at the center of the process, always empowered to explain themselves and to challenge the community’s norms.

Justice, in contrast, hinges on judgment, privileging a powerful decision-maker over the accusers and defendants who powerlessly await the outcome. Justice is the enforcement of morality — which, in its origins, is justified as divinely ordained. When societies shift away from religious rationales, morality becomes universal, or natural, or scientific — spheres ever further removed from the influence of the general public — until it is shaped and packaged almost exclusively by the media and government.

The notion of justice and the social relations it implies are inherently authoritarian. In practice, justice systems always give unfair advantages to the powerful and inflict terrible wrongs on the powerless. At the same time, they corrupt us ethically and cause our powers of initiative and sense of responsibility to atrophy. Like a drug, they make us dependent while mimicking the fulfillment of a natural human need, in this case the need to resolve conflicts. Thus, people beg to the justice system for reforms, no matter how unrealistic their expectations are, rather than taking matters into their own hands. To heal from abuse, the injured person needs to regain control over her life, the abuser needs to restore healthy relations with his peers, and the community needs to examine its norms and power dynamics. The justice system prevents all this. It hoards control, alienates entire communities, and obstructs examination of the roots of problems, preserving the status quo above all.

Police and judges may provide a limited degree of protection, especially for people privileged by racism, sexism, or capitalism; but the greatest danger facing most human beings is the system itself. For example, thousands of workers are killed every year by employer negligence and unsafe working conditions, but employers are never punished as murderers and virtually never even charged as criminals. The most workers’ families might hope for is a monetary settlement from a civil court. Who decides that a boss who profits from the deaths of workers should face no worse than a lawsuit, while a wife who shoots her abusive husband goes to prison and a black teenager who kills a police officer in self-defense gets the death penalty? It certainly isn’t workers, women, or people of color.

For every human need, a totalitarian system must provide it, subdue it, or substitute a surrogate. In the above example, the justice system frames the killing of workers as a problem to be addressed with regulations and bureaucracies. The media assist by focusing grossly disproportionate coverage on serial killers and “cold-blooded murderers,” almost always poor and usually not white, thus changing people’s perceptions of the risks they face. Consequently many people fear other poor people more than their own bosses, and are willing to support the police and courts in targeting them.

To be sure, in some cases the police and courts respond when workers or women are killed — though this is often to offset popular outrage and discourage people from seeking their own solutions. Even in these cases, the responses are often half-hearted or counterproductive.

Meanwhile, the justice system serves quite effectively as a tool for reshaping society and controlling lower class populations. Consider the “War on Drugs” waged from the 1980s up to the present day. Compared with work and rape, most illegal drugs are relatively harmless; in the case of those that can be harmful, medical attention has been thoroughly demonstrated to be a more effective response than prison time. But the justice system has declared this war to shift public priorities: it justifies the police occupation of poor neighborhoods, the mass imprisonment and enslavement of millions of poor people and people of color, and the expansion of the powers of police and judges.

What do the police do with this power? They arrest and intimidate the most powerless elements of society. Poor people and people of color are overwhelmingly the victims of arrests and convictions, not to mention daily harassment and even murder at the hands of police. Attempts to reform the police rarely do more than feed their budgets and streamline their methods for imprisoning people. And what happens to the millions of people in prison? They are isolated, killed slowly by poor diets and miserable conditions or swiftly by guards who are almost never convicted. Prison guards encourage gangs and racial violence to help them maintain control, and often smuggle in and sell addictive drugs to fill their wallets and sedate the population. Tens of thousands of prisoners are locked up in solitary confinement, some for decades.

Countless studies have found that treating drug addiction and other psychological problems as criminal matters is ineffective and inhumane; mistreating prisoners and depriving them of human contact and educational opportunities has been proven to increase recidivism.[84] But for every study that showed how to end crime and reduce prison populations, the government has gone and done the exact opposite: they cut educational programs, increased the use of solitary confinement, lengthened sentences, and curtailed visiting rights. Why? Because in addition to a control mechanism, prison is an industry. It funnels billions of dollars of public money to institutions that strengthen state control, such as the police, the courts, surveillance and private security companies, and it provides a slave labor force that produces goods for the government and private corporations. Forced labor is still legal in the prison system, and most prisons contain factories where prisoners have to work for a few cents an hour. Prisons also have the modern equivalent of the company store, where prisoners have to spend all the money they make and the money their families send them, buying clothing, food, or phone calls, all at inflated prices.

The prison system is beyond hope of reform. Reformist prison bureaucrats have given up or else come to support prison abolition. One high ranking bureaucrat who directed juvenile corrections departments in Massachusetts and Illinois concluded that:

Prisons are violent, outmoded bureaucracies that don’t protect public safety. There’s no way to rehabilitate anyone in them. The facility produces violence that calls for more of the facility. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Prisons offer themselves as a solution to the very problems they’ve created. Institutions are set up to make people fail. That’s their latent purpose.[85]

These are not problems to be solved with reforms or changes of law. The justice system has set its priorities and arranged its laws with the specific purpose of controlling and abusing us. The problem is law itself.

Often, people who live in a statist society assume that without a centralized justice system following clear laws, it would be impossible to resolve conflicts. Without a common set of laws, everyone would fight for her own interests, resulting in perpetual feuding. If methods of dealing with social harm are decentralized and voluntary, what’s to keep people from “taking justice into their own hands?”

An important leveling mechanism in stateless societies is that people sometimes do take justice into their own hands, especially in dealing with those in leadership positions who are acting authoritarian. Anyone can abide by her conscience and take action against a person she perceives to be harming the community. At best, this can push others to acknowledge and confront a problem they had tried to ignore. At worst, it can divide the community between those who think such action was justified and those who think it was harmful. Even this, though, is better than institutionalizing imbalances of power; in a community in which everyone has the power to take things into their own hands, in which everyone is equal, people will find it is much easier to talk things out and try to change the opinions of their peers than to do whatever they want or cause conflicts by acting as a vigilante. The reason this method is not used in democratic, capitalist societies is not because it does not work, but because there are certain opinions that must not be changed, certain contradictions that must not be addressed, and certain privileges that can never be challenged.

In many stateless societies, bad behavior is not dealt with by specialized defenders of justice, but by everyone, through what anthropologists call diffuse sanctions — sanctions or negative reactions that are diffused throughout society. Everyone is accustomed to responding to injustice and harmful behavior, and thus everyone is more empowered and more involved. When there is no state to monopolize the day-to-day maintenance of society, people learn how to do this for themselves, and teach one another.

We do not need to define abuse as a crime to know that it hurts us. Laws are unnecessary in empowered societies; there are other models for responding to social harm. We can identify the problem as an infringement on others’ needs rather than a violation of written code. We can encourage broad social involvement in the resolution of the problem. We can help those who have been hurt to express their needs and we can follow their lead. We can hold people accountable when they hurt others, while supporting them and giving them opportunities to learn and reestablish respectful relationships with the community. We can see problems as the responsibility of the entire community rather than the fault of one person. We can reclaim the power to heal society, and break through the isolation imposed on us.

[priceofliberty]

in regards to that ask about antitrust laws, and laws in general, what would you have as "laws" in an anarchic society? i dont know much about common law, is that your/a solution?

Anarchist philosophy, in practice, is a society “without rulers” (the literal definition). Many people conflate “anarchy” with “lawlessness”, and the confusion is certainly understandable. However, governance exists with or without the State and it begins with the self, extending into the home, and beyond. Many people struggle because they conflate the concept of governance with the function of a State; I had been guilty of this before I understood anarchy to mean self-governance.

We are self-governing in all of our relationships, whether it’s between a mother and child; between her and her employer; between child and teacher; buyer and supplier; disputing parties and an impartial arbiter, etc.

Mutual assent to the establishment of these relationships (and the countless others I didn’t list) is an inherently regulatory act because people set their terms, expectations, conditions, etc. before committing to them voluntarily with the exception of that between a parent and child (because who can ask you if you want to be born?)

The beauty of a free and open marketplace of ideological exchange is that people have the ability to come together and brainstorm solutions to problems that are impacting their lives. It is a far more direct and sensible approach to delegating those decision-making powers to some bureaucrat 2,000 miles away with absolutely no interest in your interests apart from saying the right combination of words to assure they are reelected for the benefit of legal and economic privileges which invariably manifest when a single, central authority has a monopoly on force and law.

Consider reading up on legal pluralism (I write about it a lot, as well). This is the notion that all people follow multiple codes, bodies of law, or moral guidelines simultaneously, even while some may conflict or overlap. Studying how various cultures throughout history have solved conflict or maintained peace can help people recognize solutions outside of the narrow confines of the State. For example, many individuals conform to social norms within the home that they would not exhibit in the workplace (and vice versa).

Anarchy isn’t the establishment of a DMV to issue you a driver’s license (that’s Statism). Anarchy is the privatization of roads, car insurance, and licensure so that the three can work in tandem to provide and maintain the infrastructure which services us as freely and efficiently as economically possible without coercion. Anarchist society, much like an economy, organizes itself without an arbitrary central authority; what works for some may not work for others. Communities are self-organized, markets are spontaneous. For instance, take this excerpt from Everyday Anarchy on dating, marriage and family:

In any reasonably free society, these activities do not fall in the realm of political coercion. No government agency chooses who you are to marry and have children with, and punishes you with jail for disobeying their rulings. Voluntarism, incentive, mutual advantage – dare we say “advertising”? – all run the free market of love, sex and marriage.

What about your career? Did a government official call you up at the end of high school and inform you that you were to become a doctor, a lawyer, a factory worker, a waiter, an actor, a programmer – or a philosopher? Of course not. You were left free to choose the career that best matched your interests, abilities and initiative.

What about your major financial decisions? Each month, does a government agent come to your house and tell you exactly how much you should save, how much you should spend, whether you can afford that new couch or old painting? Did you have to apply to the government to buy a new car, a new house, a plasma television or a toothbrush?

No, in all the areas mentioned above – love, marriage, family, career, finances – we all make our major decisions in the complete absence of direct political coercion.

When you barge into your friend’s room to ask them if you can borrow their shirt, most people close the door behind them when they leave (especially if the door was closed before you entered). It’s almost an unspoken rule to close the door behind you in such a scenario and adherence to this rule illustrates the concept I mentioned earlier: legal pluralism. This concept reflects the reality that human interaction, left to our own devices, is governed by prevailing social and cultural values and that those values are inherent to our conduct.

Besides what we consider to be “the law,” we also follow an innumerable set of unwritten rules in our day-to-day conduct. You must have noticed at this point in your life, for example, that your behavior alters between spending time among friends and spending time among family. Likewise, in the work place your demeanor shifts to conform to the standards expected of your performance in that setting. In every scenario, the penalty for breaching the terms of these unspoken norms is usually a sanction in some form or another: your parents ground you, your friends ostracize you, your boss docks your pay, etc. They do this because people respond to incentives.

Though you don’t realize it, this is anarchy in action. More examples of this are virtually limitless; the relative silence one finds in theater atmospheres is a result of a mutual, unwritten understanding between all patrons. Commercial businesses regularly agree to third-party arbitration clauses all the time, regulating the conduct of their contractual obligations outside of the confines of the Uniform Commercial Code or Federal government. Even the Juggalos have been known to settle their disputes within the context of their own communities. There are no ‘one size fits all’ answers to “what if?” scenarios.

Anarchy should not be conflated with lawlessness. A great reading recommendation on customary law, culture, and history is short book written by Dorothy Bracey called “Exploring Law and Culture”. I think its perfect introductory material to the principles within legal theory, especially for people unfamiliar with the murky concept known as “the law”. It’s short and written for the average reader rather than legal scholars. 

And finally, here are a few more resources:

Mutualism:

A Mutualist FAQ

The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto (2010) by Kevin Carson

Studies in Mutualist Political Economy (2007) by Kevin Carson

Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective (2008) by Kevin Carson

What is Property? An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government (1840) by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

The Philosophy of Poverty (1847) by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Individualist anarchism:

The Ego and Its Own (1845) by Max Stirner

Vices Are Not Crimes: A Vindication of Moral Liberty (1875) by Lysander Spooner

Individual Liberty (1926) by Benjamin Tucker

Anarchist Individualism and Amorous Comradeship by Émile Armand

The Anarchism of Émile Armand

Agorism

Voluntaryism

[emisonme]

How shit works.........

OK Guys, let me explain how all this shit REALLY works. When you make the choice to sign a contract with a Record Label, you usually know you are signing away some of your rights, from creative control to image control. Why? Because, once you sign a recording contract, with a Label, you become a Brand. You become the Brand that produces the product, the record Label has agreed to invest in and market.

To market and sell your music, people will mold your PUBLIC image, to your managed Brand, and market you and your music to the demographic, that will consume your brand and genre of music.

The professional team, you hire, Manager, Agent, PR team, etc, are the ones that manage your Brand. They, in conjunction with the marketing and A&R departments of the Labels, will mold your PUBLIC image, that will capture the interest and imagination, of the demographic they will market your product to.

Now, let’s talk about the contracts. First, there isn’t a contract out there, that can’t be re-negotiated, if you have the knowledge, and a good Attorney willing to advocate for you. In fact, with contracts where the albums are optioned, it is general practice for there to be a re-negotiation with each option. Of course, if you don’t have that knowledge, and your management and attorney are advocating for the label, then you are stuck with the contract you signed, originally.

On to the legality of contracts. Not all contracts are legally binding. As I’ve stated before, a minor can’t sign a legal binding contract, even with the consent of the parent. A child can not sign away their legal rights, and a parent can’t sign their child’s legal right’s away.

When a minor signs a contract, it’s what’s called a “voidable” contract. It’s up to the minor, to honor the contract or not. But, there is a caveat. The minor can only opt out of the contract, while still a minor. Once the minor reaches 18, adulthood, it becomes a legal binding contract, and they are legally bound to abide by it.

So, with all the Astroturfers out there trying to convince you that Camila, or any of the girls, had to re-negotiate their contracts when they turned 18, just know they are blowing smoke up your ass. That’s why THEY waited until after June of 2015, to start derailing the 5H train.

Dinah Jane’s 18th birthday, was June 22, 2015. She was the last member of the group, to become an adult. They had to wait, until they were all legally bound to their contracts, to really start implementing the plan. They couldn’t have allowed Camila to release a solo project, and tell the other girls NO, while one of them still had a voidable contract.

That’s why things seemed more happy and free within the group, in 2013, 2014, and part of 2015, because there was still the potential of one of the girls bolting. The worse part, for the Labels, was they could have bolted free and clear. They would not have had to utilize the “Leaving Member Clause”, and they could not have been taken to court for breach of contract. The Labels and Management, had to be a little more lenient, until all the girls were legally bound by their contracts.

What makes a contract legally binding? You have to be 18 or over, you have to be of sound mind, and you have to be a willing participant. You can not form a binding contract, for illegal activities, or through illegal means. (Examples: you can’t contract a drug deal...You can’t force someone to sign a contract, through coercion or blackmail, for those are illegal activities.) It is also ill-advised to give someone an ultimatum, to force them to sign. If you can prove, you were put under “duress” to sign, it will be deemed a void contract.

Of course, the Music Industry uses these illegal means of keeping their artists under control, all the damn time. It’s up to the artist to decide, if what THEY are using against them is worth it, if they want to pursue legal action, or not. That’s one of the reasons why in most, if not all Entertainment Industry contracts, there is a stipulation included, that if you want to fight something or think you have been wronged, you have to go through arbitration instead of litigation . Arbitration is conducted in private, and results can be kept confidential. This is more for the benefit of the Big wigs, than the artists, because we all know when the Industry wants the public to know something, they have no problem “leaking” it. If the Industry wants the public to think something, they have no problem faking shit and "leaking" it.

The next question is, how does all this pertain to PR contracts? You CAN NOT force someone to sign a PR contract. You can NOT force someone to have ANY intimate relations, of any kind, through a contract. That would be, at best harassment or prostitution, at worst assault or rape, ALL ILLEGAL ACTS.

So, how do the Labels or their Managers get Artists to willingly conduct PR stunts, or Agree to sign PR contracts? One of the reasons a celebrity will contract a "public relationships" is so they can keep their private life private. Usually, it is their Manager or A&R who convinces them, this is the best way to handle the situation. There is also, the well known "beards" to hide a celebrities sexuality. A celebrity is convinced, and or manipulated, into thinking a "beard" is the best way to go, to hide their sexuality...Of course, they are also manipulated into thinking, if they are Gay, they better keep their mouths shut. If they are attracted to all genders, that's better. You can come out, you just have to PR up with the opposite sex.

The media sees a private celebrity, as a prime target. If you are keeping everything private, you must have something to hide, therefore, the paps and media will try and discover your secret. If you want to keep your private life private, you give them something else to focus on.

The Paps and the Media, are like a dog. If you give a dog a bone, they are happy. They don't give a shit if it's a fake bone, or a real bone, just as long as it's a bone. The Media don't care if the "relationship" is fake or not, just give them something to photograph, report on, gossip about, and they are happy. If a celebrity goes out of their way, to avoid the media/paps, they will hound your ass until you give them something, or they get something you don't want them to have.

When a celebrity needs to get media attention, for whatever reason, be it a product they are trying to sell, or just to gain some notoriety, they are convinced/manipulated into thinking a PR relationship, again, is the best way to go. Why? Because in actuality, IT IS. Like I've said before, the media will report on a relationship, before they will report on a single/album. They are more than happy, to report on your project after they  gossip about your "private life".

If you have a manager, that has your best interest at heart, they will help you conduct these damn PR stunts in a way that is less stressful on you, and your private life. I've already discussed the types of PR relationship contracts, in a previous post, so not going to rehash that.

So, knowing all that, how were the labels and management able to have so much control over Fifth Harmony? The answer is quite simple. Simon Cowell, and Syco/Sony owned Fifth Harmony. He manufactured the group. He owned the rights to the girls images and the group, through their X-Factor contracts. He owned the Fifth Harmony Brand, and the Trademark. What Simon/Syco/Sony wanted from 5H, they got from 5H. Period!

How was Simon/Syco/Sony able to get 5H management to go along with their plan, and NOT have the girls best interest at heart, like a good manager is supposed to do? That's simple, as well. Syco/Sony made a deal with Front Line Management in 2011, to manage some/all of the X-Factor USA's finalists. Front Line Management was run by Irving Azoff, and two of the managers working with them, was Jared Paul and Janelle Lopez.

So yes, Simon chose 5H's management for them, from the start. They made a deal of who would manage them, and how they would be managed... Unfortunately, the girls had to pay the bastards 15/20% of their earnings, to do the Labels bidding.

In mid 2014, Jared Paul ventured out on his own, bringing Janelle Lopez with him. This is when he created Faculty Productions. How did JP keep the girls as clients? JP was a partner in AGP (Azoff, Geary, Paul) Management. AGP was a division of Front Line Management Group. When JP ventured off on his own, he got to take his clients with him.

It wasn't as simple as just taking them from Front line/AGP to Faculty, though. New company, new contract. JP had to re-sign Fifth Harmony to his new company, Faculty. Since the 5H Partnership was formed by then, this contract would have been negotiated and signed between Faculty and the 5H Partnership.

Fifth Harmony's attorney, didn't exactly have their best interest at heart either. Eric Greenspan was the groups attorney, through the release of their Reflection Album. Eric Greenspan's law firm had a deal with X-Factor, to represent ALL X-Factor contestants.

So, it's pretty easy to see, how the deck was stacked against the girls, from the start. They had absolutely NO ONE from the Music Industry, or associated with the Music Industry, on their side. Everything was arranged, to be most advantageous for Simon/Syco/Sony.

[crystalsundered]

VarMa and UngIm headcanons ;;

-- VarMa was a peace-keeper on the homeworld who enforced the elders’ laws and occasionally brought deviants before them for trial. VarMa, however, was soft-hearted and chafed underneath his responsibilities. he always erred on the side of mercy and reconciliation rather than punishment, and, as a result, he was sympathetic to SoSu’s dreams of a reformed utopic homeworld. the elders, noticing this, had him lead certain members of the twice-nine through the crystal portal (SilSol and ZokZah) before throwing him in after them.

-- after the conjunction, urMa served as an arbitrator and councilor to urSu.

-- skekVar, shortly after the rendering, served as a diplomat and mentor for the palace guard. there was still enough of VarMa in him for him to care about those under his charge and for him to settle disputes peacefully. however, as time went on, he became more and more willing to enact the Emperor’s desires for a ‘better future’, even if that meant harming gelfling and other species native to thra, such as the arathim.

-- UngIm was a member of one of the lower castes: the healer caste. since urSkek are energy-based beings that cannot become injured by physical means, healers are mainly tasked with re-education. They heal perceived imperfections in their brethren and, if the imperfections cannot be healed, they send the urSkek up to the chief elders for either extermination or exile.

-- UngIm naturally disliked this position because he wanted to truly heal his patients. “re-education” was just a patch on a festering wound made up of fear and coercion. UngIm also contained an ‘imperfection’ themself: one of anger. they hated the control the elders exerted over them.

-- UngIm embraced the exile on Thra because they were able to learn how to heal physical wounds, and emotional wounds through camaraderie and genuine care. urIm is the part of UngIm that retained this attribute. skekUng is the part that still defiantly rages against restrictive control. he is brash and quick to anger and reveled in the power he exerted over the gelfling with the garthim.

-- after the conjunction, even though they took over leadership of the twice-nine in SoSu’s stead, they did so hesitantly due to the guilt they felt over skekUng’s actions. nevertheless, their past life gave them a renewed dedication to healing, and they present themself as more of a servant-leader than an elder or emperor figure. 

-- not exactly related to the above characters but here is what I imagine the caste system to look like on the homeworld: chief elders (rulers), peace-keepers, historians (disseminators of propaganda), scientists, mariners, bards, healers, aesthetists (architects and designers), and caretakers (split between those who care for the homeworld’s flora and fauna and those who care for newly formed urSkek).

[legdriver81-blog]

Who Are Our Mediators?

Negotiator - What Are Its own Advantages?

As a negotiator, you should guarantee that your task is actually to help with a feasible conflict in between 2 or even even more celebrations. If you want to aid produce the process hassle-free working, you ought to also ensure that you may help various other gatherings within a concession. This post will definitely talk about the high qualities of a great conciliator and some of the advantages that you can easily manage possessing one.

The best significant perk of being actually a conciliator is that you reach deliver a mediating service. The usefulness of being actually an arbitrator has been actually getting much more prominent considering that the majority of people do certainly not have the expertise of being actually an arbitrator. A conciliator is generally entrusted to provide an option that would take care of a particular concern between the two parties. Since the arbitrator is actually supposed to embody each celebrations, there are actually no worry in conveying the message of each celebrations. The conciliator can easily have different abilities like speaking, being actually a forerunner, or showing sympathy for the sufferer or even the other gathering.

An additional conveniences of being a conciliator is actually that you are actually anticipated to possess experience in arbitration. Many individuals believe that adventure is actually not needed but it is essential. Along with the understanding of just how to solve issues, you can easily provide insight or even referrals to both celebrations and permit them understand the most ideal method to move toward a certain concern.

The usefulness of being an excellent moderator has to do with the demand of trust in the negotiator. Many people have a tendency to trust others without also knowing that they are trusted. For that reason, you need to possess powerful interaction capabilities. You ought to have the ability to interact in an appropriate method, without seeming overbearing or creating it seem like you are demanding. If you possess a solid command of the language, you can easily assist impart the ideal message and also make sure that the two events know just how to come close to the problem in a proper manner.

The best significant conveniences of being a mediator is that you reach function as a third party. This is actually a benefit that you ought to consider given that it could possibly help you get rid of a lot of communication issues that you may experience down the road. People often tend to connect and also make the interaction channel merely when the person that the communication was wanted for is absent. For instance, if you are presenting a presentation, you may refer to as an individual that can listen closely to your presentation to ensure that he or she can offer responses as well as comments.

The requirement for trust is additionally significant since the negotiator is actually anticipated to act as the "gatekeeper" of the communication network. The negotiator is the one who has to determine whether the communication has worked out or not. If the interaction went well, the arbitrator is going to determine whether the celebrations require to see each other once more or otherwise. If the communication was not working out, the conciliator will hold all of them answerable as well as aid them settle the complication.

You are going to additionally reach participate in the task of the "non-attached individual". Due to the fact that the negotiator is actually not straight involved in the conflict, he or she is actually often seen as a person that is actually simply viewing. As a result, the negotiator is phoned call to act as a neutral gathering in addressing disputes.

The relevance of being actually a conciliator has to do with the premiums of an excellent mediator and also the conveniences that you can get by possessing one. Currently, you know what a mediator is actually as well as exactly how to become one.

What is actually the Part of the Arbitrator in the Case of Divorce?

A separation is a complex and also stressful issue that calls for effective and also relevant discussion, but it requires to become taken very seriously with help from a mediator. Breakup commonly indicates lots of changes taking place in the lives of the parents and little ones. It might additionally indicate a separation from the spouse that had actually been along with all of them for a number of years. All these are actually extremely hard to approve and to take care of. In addition, the youngsters may remain in the middle of feeling lost without their moms and dads. This is actually why it is actually essential to seek the assistance of a great conciliator that will certainly moderate so as to arrive at a reasonable as well as reliable remedy to the concern.

At the time of breakup, numerous married couples attempt to maintain their children after the breakup by using residence after separation insurance policy that is generally discussed due to the companions of the marriage or by utilizing medical care service providers to care for the youngsters. Both the home after a breakup and the home after breakup insurance coverage is actually beneficial if managed properly. Yet the mistake for this is that the children may end up residing in poor circumstances as well as in danger of being actually abused or ignored. This is actually why it is necessary to take the youngsters and also the other partners seriously and also to look after them. In such scenarios, it is better to go through the residence after a separation as well as the residence after separation insurance so as to get what you actually wish and to stay away from losing your money in a needless option. If the youngsters are actually involved in the discussions between the gatherings after that it is actually wise to experience the mediation method as well.

After property after the separation, it is essential to also avoid any kind of coercion in the home after divorce specifically the use of management mechanisms like physical violence and also emotional adjustment. The situation of splitting up can easily also cause clinical depression in the kids if the parents carry out certainly not alleviate them just as. This is why it is vital to move toward a moderator in such cases. The arbitrator will certainly deliver his advise on just how to help make the parents agree to an answer on the manner of common regard as well as decency. This may help each events in addressing the case in a favorable manner in order that they can proceed on the manner of common respect as well as modesty.

What is actually the Duty of the Arbitrator when it comes to Separation?

What is actually the function of mediator when it comes to breakup? If your partner is actually informing you that the youngster is actually living with an additional moms and dad and also this various other parent is well spent, and it is actually achievable to get the house after separation? This could be an extremely psychological moment for you and your ex-spouse. It is actually regularly most effectively to consult with a mediator who is trained and also a specialist. If you perform certainly not recognize exactly how to set about obtaining an arbitrator or even if you would like to learn more concerning just how to complete this then the following will certainly provide you some good advise on just how to cope with this scenario.

In a divorce there are three primary variables to look at, one is actually the kid is actually coping with yet another parent, the 2nd aspect is actually the division of the residential property as well as the 3rd is actually the principle of power circulation. If the youngster is coping with an additional parent, the negotiator will sit along with the parents to identify a method to receive the little one back together with its own biological parents. The kids can easily keep in the same property, or they may move and live with their moms and dads. There is also the complication of property. Currently the arbitration may not permit the parties to agree on specifically what building is not theirs. They can agree upon a crack of your house as well as various other possessions.

The principle of electrical power distribution is probably one of the most essential point to pick when your partner is mentioning that they do not yearn for the child back. If they have the capacity to acquire wardship of the youngster, they are going to find yourself getting the exact same quantity of funds and costs as you carried out. If they do not have that advantage, after that you must be sure that you acquire your fair portion of the cash. One thing that is actually going to come up with the branch of power is that acquires little one assistance remittances. You and your ex-spouse will certainly must discuss the volume of amount of money you will certainly pay out to see to it that both of you are getting the exact same volume. But once that has actually been actually agreed upon https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/scheiden is actually best to deal with your ex-boyfriend to make sure that they are actually not drawn to scam on you. That is actually the task of negotiator in the case of separation.

What's the Job of Moderator on Youngster in Separation?

When our company discuss arbitration on kids in divorce, our experts can easily never visualize that must discover the job of arbitrator on children in divorce. In the course of a divorce, kids are an incredibly integral part of every household, as well as if children are removed coming from their parents, it will certainly be actually a major reduction for the little ones and also they will likewise be actually a fantastic reduction to the whole family members. The arbitration in between the two edges is looked at to be one of the greatest achievable methods when it pertains to rejuvenating the really good connections between the divorcing gatherings. There are actually numerous factors in order to why you need to discover the job of moderator on little ones in divorce. These main reasons are actually essentially all related to the health and wellness and well being of the children, as well as it is an essential factor to consider in a case when the youngsters are actually worried.

One more explanation is that when both sides have actually reached a concession, as well as when they continue to communicate with one another and meet a good understanding, there will be a wonderful result of the mediation on kids in divorce. Among the things that are actually looked at to be among the vital things to find out by moderators on little ones in divorce is the task of adolescence. It is actually just during the course of teenage years that teenagers begin to become independent as well as begin to encounter various situations that might be actually damaging to them. This is likewise the age where the children learn exactly how to deal with the various disagreements that are actually encountered through all of them in a typical method, and also this is also the age where they start to cultivate a school kid during breakup. This will definitely be actually a critical procedure if both the moms and dads are actually economically powerful enough to assist the education of their kids in the course of separation.

Another cause as to why one needs to have to learn the function of moderator on youngsters in separation is that during the procedure of arbitration, parents need to regularly bear in mind that they must be actually completely detached from their little ones. It is crucial that while the procedure of arbitration is going on, moms and dads ought to certainly not create their youngsters aware of the factors for breakup, or they could believe uneasy during the course of the mediation. They should keep in mind that during the course of mediation, they should only be concentrating on the procedure as well as the concerns entailed, and also they should avoid from the court proceedings and also deal with the kids's' concerns during the arbitration process.

What's the Role of Moderator in Parental Program?

In any sort of condition involving breakup, which one will be the best handy to the person needing to have the details? Which one will help the individual securing the guidance? The majority of people are going to go with the initial concern yet you may correct. And an excellent inquiry will obtain the person the solution you are actually seeking. You can't merely inquire what is actually the role of arbitrator in the adult plan?

There is actually an extremely important main reason that this holds true and also our experts will review it as well as our role as an arbitrator so as to guarantee that all events are going to understand what each people can do and what the various other individual requires to perform to possess a healthy and balanced connection. Think of it momentarily. Which one perform you think would help you even more? The response is both of them interacting in tranquility. Consider it and also choose.

There is a really necessary element to consider and also is actually that the process of mediating in any kind of situation is a two-way process where you as an arbitrator necessity to bring the two celebrations together in order that they understand the mutual understanding and also each other's demands. If the 2 of you do not understand what one another needs after that no quantity of mediation may assist. Our company as mediators recognize what needs to be done and also our experts can help all of them attain that target. What's the task of the negotiator in the parental program? This is actually something that needs to have to be accurately understood due to the fact that it will definitely assist you in the procedure of mediating as well as aid you along the way to results.

What is actually the Role of Moderator in Retirement Life Pension?

What is actually the duty of negotiator in a retired life pension plan? A moderator will definitely exist at every step of your life in the course of your life expectancy. He is the one that will certainly be resting at your edge to supply you the opinions as well as ideas pertaining to how to become pleased as well as how to achieve success in your business or even social life. He is not certainly there to judge you, however he will definitely be giving you guidance on just how to thrive and also exactly how to deal with all the important things that turn up.

When you are ready to move up in your profession or even the institution, your mediator will certainly be actually sitting with you and will certainly offer you a heads up on the concerns that might surface or even your move to a greater ranking within the organization or company. You are certainly not expected to inquire your arbitrator excessive inquiries that may start a conversation. He is going to just tell you to sit and think just before you make a move up the step ladder of your job. He is going to make certain that you do certainly not slip and also drop on your technique to accomplishing success. To stay away from any sort of future conditions, it is consistently great to work with a reputable arbitrator that is going to listen closely to you as well as aid you through giving you impartial advise.

Thus what's the role of arbitrator in a retired life pension plan? Our experts have discussed the truth that he will definitely help your firm. But what else should you learn about your moderator?

Social Media https://www.facebook.com/ScheidingsCenter/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-kanters/ Our Blog https://scheidingscenter.nl/artikelen/