Currently Browsing: Lawsuits

Revealing The Common Side Effects of Taxotere

Taxotere is a chemotherapy drug used in the treatment of most cancers especially breast cancer. The objective of most chemotherapy drugs is to eradicate or slow down the growth of cancer cells without the risk of permanent side effects. Taxotere is associated with a wide range of side effects but one such consequence has been a subject of defective drug lawsuits against Sanofi Aventis, the manufacturer of Taxotere.

In a survey involving cancer patients, taxotere caused bone pain and muscle aches. Some claim that their arms and legs ache while others feel pain in their neck, back, and shoulder. Taxotere is also associated with neuropathy resulting to numbness and a tingy feeling in the feet and hands. It may also cause diarrhea, stomatitis, thinning of nails, and nail hyperpigmentation. The side effects of taxotere are individual and dosage dependent.

One of the most controversial side effects of taxotere that has put its manufacturer Sanofi Aventis in hot water is permanent alopecia. Although hair loss is common in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, the hair loss associated with taxotere is quite different. According to the website of Williams Kherkher, approximately 10 – 15% of women who used Taxotere reported no hair growth for as long as ten years after treatment is no longer undergoing.

The side effect of permanent alopecia has been one of the main issues raised in lawsuits against the manufacturer of the drug. Most of the cases filed by cancer patients revolve around the failure of Sanofi to indicate in their warning label such risks. For most of those who suffered from the hair loss, their condition is considered as “disfiguring” for them and has affected their quality of life. Aside from the impact it can have on body image, the permanent hair loss could also have an impact on the family of the patient.

Copyright Infringement and Illegal Downloads

Thousands of people download movies from legal peer-to-peer (P2P) sites like BitTorrent with impunity, but just because the hosting site is legal doesn’t mean that the files are not subject to copyright laws. If the movie is copyrighted and you download it, you can be sued for copyright infringement. This is something that numerous people all over the US are finding out to their dismay after they illegally downloaded the 2013 film “Dallas Buyers Club.”

Dallas Buyers Club LLC has already filed more than 1,000 lawsuits against individuals who were initially identified only by the internet protocol (IP) addresses, and whose identities were culled from internet service providers after being served with a subpoena. In many cases, the defendants settle between $2,000 and $5,000 rather than go to court, making for a pretty expensive movie that can be downloaded legally from sites like Amazon for less than $10.

However, when it comes to litigation, there are some issues with using the IP address to identify the culprit. For one thing, the internet service provider can only identify the person who pays the bill, who may or may not be the one doing the actual downloading, and who may or may not be aware of such activity. It is even possible, in this wireless age, for the actual culprit to be a neighbor piggybacking on the signal. This is clearly a challenge for Dallas intellectual property lawyers on both sides of the fence, as well as for lawyers outside Dallas, TX.

Copyright infringement through digital piracy is an ongoing problem with copyright owners, and even with increasingly sophisticated traceback capabilities, it is too easy for a case to fall apart if the defendant does not want to settle and mounts a viable defense. Moreover, the defendant may actually be perfectly innocent, so a lawsuit would have wasted the time and resources of both the plaintiff and defendant.

School Hosts Televangelist-Sponsored Toy Drive; Receives Lawsuit Threat

A charter school in Highlands Ranch, Colorado recently received a letter from the American Humanist Association threatening a lawsuit for their involvement in a charity event sponsored by a Christian minister, and the moms are mad.

Operation Christmas Child, the charity event in question, is basically a toy drive. Families put gifts together in a shoebox so less privileged kids in third-world countries can have Christmas presents.

Although the event was not a school project, and no grades were based off of it, minister Franklin Graham sponsored the project. The drive was promoted by teachers and administration during school hours, and the school was officially affiliated with the project, according to the article.

The school ended their official affiliation with the event after receiving the letter, and mothers and their students decided to hold the event on the sidewalk a few blocks from the school in protest. They have allegedly received over 500 shoe boxes in one day.

However, even after the success of the drive, parents are still indignant. One mother even claims that the group was “bullied”.

Few could fault parents for encouraging their kids to give to the less fortunate. However, the violation of church and state is glaring. A charter school can’t host a charity event promoting a Christian holiday, which is funded by a Christian minister, on school property and promote it during school hours. It’s against the law to entangle church and state to that extent.

The fact that the group was able to give gifts to less fortunate children is commendable. They should hold the drive every year on the sidewalk. In fact, the religious leaders should sponsor as many drives as they can—so long as they’re kept off of school campuses.