Strategies for using context, word breakdown and the dictionary to determine an unknown word’s meaning.

Passport video produced a video documentary titled the definitive elvis, comprising sixteen one-hour episodes. the producers interviewed more than 200 people regarding virtually all aspects of elvis's life. passport sold the videos commercially for a profit. approximately 5 to 10 percent of the videos were composed of copyrighted music and appearances of presley on television and in movies owned by copyright holders other than passport. passport did not obtain permission to use those copyrighted works. elvis presley enterprises, inc., and other companies and individuals that owned copyrights to the presley works used by passport sued passport for copyright infringement. passport defended, arguing that its use of the copyrighted materials was fair use. the u.s. district court held in favor of the plaintiff copyright holders and enjoined passport from further distribution of its documentary videos. passport appealed.did passport act ethically in including the elvis presley copyrighted material in its video? why do you think passport video did so? has there been fair use in this case, or has there been copyright infringement?

Give an example to prove that your society is developed more than it was before 10 years ?

Awoman was found strangled in the basement of her home where she lived with her husband. the crime scene was processed and investigators left. the next day, the medical examiner reported that a scalloped, woven belt was used to strangle the victim. the police asked the husband to search the house again to look for such a belt and he agreed. a belt was found that matched marks on the victim. the man was arrested. his attorney made a motion that the belt be excluded from the evidence as he contended that the search was not legal. which statement is true? a. the belt should be excluded because the search was not legal. the police did not obtain a search warrant, as needed according to the fourth amendment to the u.s. constitution. b. the belt is admissible because the man gave his consent to the second search. c. the belt should be excluded because the search was not legal. the police did not obtain a search warrant, as need according to michigan v. tyler. d. the belt is admissible as evidence, according to mincey v. arizona.