“an evident principle runs through the whole program i have outlined. it is the principle of justice to all peoples and nationalities, and their right to live on equal terms of liberty and safety with one another, whether they be strong or weak.” based on this information, what can you conclude about wilson?

a. he believed in equality for all nations.
b. he wanted to promote american interests.
c. he believed all nations had the same interests.
d. he believed weak nations could become stronger.

1. what was the premise behind the recording industry association of america’s lawsuit against napster? 2. based on your knowledge of how napster worked, if you downloaded a copy of a song from a friend’s hard drive using napster, would you be infringing on the musician’s or record company’s copyright? 3. describe the scope of the digital millennium copyright act and what or whom it protects. 4. what was the link between the digital millennium copyright act and the napster legal proceedings? 5. what are the legal implications of napster’s online music-sharing service?

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.

Belshazzar was grandson and second-generation successor of according to jeremiah 27: 7.