New answers tagged

0

You should simplify your question to: Under California law, what is considered to be a licensed physician? Based on the summary below, where the following can be found: The California Licensure Statute does not allow for license reciprocity between states. you can assume that a non-US (United States) licensed physician is also not allowed since the ...


1

But when user connects to a VPN server physically located in USA but owned by company based in Switzerland, wouldn't the US law be applied in this case (concerning saving connection logs and all the other things), regardless of where company's headquarters are? The US law could well be applied if the VPN provider was challenged in a US court, or ...


3

The prohibition is against using a regular US passport to enter North Korea (you can apply for a special passport): or you can use a non-US passport. There is no prohibition against patronizing a North Korean business, be it in North Korea or elsewhere.


0

Yes, there are such “crimes” For example, possession of cannabis is illegal in, say Indonesia, but legal in, say Canada. An Indonesian citizen in Canada can possess cannabis without legal consequence.


0

Break down the question into its two main parts: Will country A prosecute the person for an act in country B if country A has no jurisdiction? No. Will country B prosecute the person for an act in country B if it's not a criminal offence in country B? No. Therefore it's obvious that the person will not be prosecuted by country A or B.


-1

There are countries which have laws that prohibit citizens from doing some things, no matter where. There are countries that ban certain actions for everyone, no matter where the action took place. So if you are ever in this country, you might be prosecuted. (e.g. you go from A to B, do something legal in B, go back to A but you might be prosecuted in C) ...


4

Questions about whether a certain action is "just" tend to be maters of opinion, politics and philosophy, but it can be addressed from the perspective of legal theory (especially following the model of common law, where legal principles are based on concepts of just and proper action). Whether or not a certain action is actually legal in a certain ...


0

Normally, the term "bond" is used to refer to the standardized promissory note of a company or government (the "issuer" of the bond) in exchange for money loaned by the original "purchaser" of the bond, who is not necessarily a financial company or bank. The rights of bondholders are governed by default rules of law that can usually be varied in the ...


1

No Archipelagic states are legally defined by the UN. China isn’t one of them. There are a number of countries with veto power in the UN who would likely block China becoming one.


1

Whether or not copyright infringement is legal does depends on the particular country, and apparently there is no copyright law in Eritrea, Turkmenistan and San Marino. Otherwise, this could be a clear case of copyright infringement. I say could because the party requiring payment is not necessarily the owner of the copyright – is is also possible that the ...


2

The exact crime varies from state to state and the details of the incident, but it's illegal everywhere I know of. To use the Washington State code as an example, pointing a gun at someone is, at a bare minimum, a violation of RCW 9.41.230 (aiming a firearm or dangerous weapon), which is a gross misdemeanor carrying a sentence of up to 364 days in prison. ...


5

It ultimately depends on the situation, but here's a general breakdown: Many states in the United States have anti-trespassing laws that allow citizens to use deadly force in response to threat of bodily harm. These laws and statutes intersect to provide more protections for gun owners encountering trespassers, burglars, or thieves in their home. However, ...


2

There is no possibility of legally holding a country "to account" for an action. An individual could be legally tried for a crime (murder), and a country could via a political process be made to suffer the consequences if a leader performs some act (it need not be illegal). Germany, Iran and Russia have historically suffered certain consequences of actions ...


4

When you are in another country, you are subject to their laws - you may be arrested and go through the due process as defined by that countries laws. This potentially means anything from a fine, to incarceration or deportation or even execution, depending on the local countries laws. A good example is the caning of American citizen Michael Fay in 1994 by ...


5

There is no internationally-enforceable mechanism regarding how other people call something, or what alphabet can be uses to write a word. I can legally call that country between Bangladesh and Thailand "Burma" or "Myanmar", I can call Україна Ukraine, The Ukraine, or Ukrainia (the latter seems to be old-fashioned, but it's still legal). As a diplomatic ...


1

Different countries are in different time zones. (Some even extend over multiple time zones, but none of the current EU states do). When it is important and not obvious, you specify the time zone. Brexit is at 11pm in the U.K., midnight in Germany, France, Netherlands and many others, and probably 1am on Feb 1st in Greece. For local situations, it will ...


4

You're completely misreading the goals and purpose of the Export Controls Office - Overview. They regulate the transfer of US regulated information and technology, commodities, and software in the interest of national security and economic growth. Transfer and export are not the same as the use of technology that personal devices contain. The simplest ...


2

Yes, there could be an obligation without needing retroactivity If Elgin never owned them then neither does the British Museum. It has been a feature of common law that only a person who has good title to property can pass on that title (unless the goods are a negotiable instrument, such as a banknote cheque or bearer bond acquired in good faith). I don't ...


0

There are 190+ sovereign nations in the world - generalization is not possible However, if it’s legal in each relevant country, there’s no reason to believe it wouldn’t be legal between them. That said, the risk involved increases massively as cross-border enforcement is considerably more difficult than the already difficult single jurisdiction enforcement.


2

The general answer in the US is that insurance is a state-regulated business, so insurance companies cannot just do whatever they want. Here is a central resource for Washington state. In general, if a person is "risky", the carrier can raise premium cost, and eventually can decide that the risk is too high. E.g. I cannot get earthquake insurance because of ...


Top 50 recent answers are included