Hi, I am 17 years old. I recently got a request from an adult company to build a website for them that is similar to naked.com 1) am I legally allowed to do this in the USA 2) Am I allowed to sign a contract (in general)? If not, what happens if I do? Thanks.
No and minors cant sign a legal contract without guardian permission. Although you can go underthe table but make them pay you first
The issue with minors entering into contracts is that they cannot enforce it against you, but you could enforce it against them. The law is to protect the minor. So, I see no problems with you doing the work if you want to - and having a contract to reflect the terms. As far as adult content I don't think there is anything illegal about your viewing and working on it. (I am not sure about this) Again, they might be breaking the law by providing a minor with adult content. If you want the work and don't mind the content, I would not worry about it. So, it is really all up to you. I don't there there is much risk to you to do the work if you would like to do so.
It's not a problem for you. It may, however, be a problem for your client (if someone wanted to get their knickers in a twist).... I had a client that was 17 and ran a porn server farm. He was hysterical when, after I did his TOS, he found out that he's not legally allowed on any of his sites. If the client is willing to contract with you, as Browntwn says, it's only voidable on your part, so it's otherwise legal... Let me know if you have other questions. Deena Burgess, Esq. _______________________________________________________________________________________ Any opinions are offered without knowledge of the specific law of your jurisdiction and with only the limited information provided in your post. No advice given here should be reasonably relied upon by you or any third party without consulting an attorney who is aware of all of the facts and law surrounding your situation. Any advice given here is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship in any way.
If you are aware that the contract is voidable due to your age, and do not disclose your age to the client then in Britain at least you may be guilty of a fraud offence under the 2006 act. Under that act one of the offences is fraud by false representation. You are guilty if you dishonestly (a very vague term) make a false representation to make monetary gain. Whilst I'm not sure if case law has stated that failing to disclose your age would count as a false representation, I would submit that failing to make it clear to your client that you are incapable of entering a fully binding contract due to your age is itself a false representation and therefore on this side of the atlantic at least you may be on thin ice. I'm not sure if similar law exists in the US. Perhaps the poster above can advise.
The point of being a minor is that you are not held to the same standard as adults. I doubt that the law you cite would be used against a minor who entered a contract. At least in the US, a fraud claim against a minor for entering a contract would get nowhere. It would negate the whole point of the law to protect the minor. It is nonsensical.
In the UK you are held to the full level of criminal responsibility from the age of 10 and so that law would apply with full force. Whilst it seems horrifically unfair, this is the state of British law today and many in the legal system feel the law has gone too far by effectively penalising lying.
We are not discussing criminal law. Fraud is usually a civil matter for this type of case. Are you are saying that 10 year olds can enter into legally binding contracts in England? Do you have any source for the notion that 10 year olds are treated as adults? EDIT: I just did a little research and it seems that the law in the UK is very similar to the US, and that a contract is not enforced against a minor except for necessities (same in the US). I think you are wrong and confusing different legal issues. You should read about the Minors’ Contracts Act of for more information.
Yep as you state civil law and contract law are indeed separate. However, when one does not have a remedy in civil law this does not prohibit there being a criminal law remedy. The criminal law cannot be simply disapplied due to some act such as attempting to create a contract. Indeed these fraud offences were in part designed to stop this very sorrt of thing. Imagine a more malicious situation where someone under the age of 16 continuely entered into contracts saying that he was 20 for example and never fulfilled them by voiding the contract due to his age. Don't you feel that there should be some sanction? As regards the treatment of children as adults in the UK you need to look at a doctrine called doli incapax. This doctrine used to state that children up until 14 could be separate but recent case law has evolved this to the point where children of 10 years and over are treated as adults. This application of law does not flow through to punishment as a child will go to different jails and have different types of punishment applied to him. And I'm pretty sure I'm right on the law - just finished it all in my first year of law at university
FaceJolt, That's really interesting about the UK. I didn't know that. I learn something new every day. The OP does specifically ask about US law, so BrownTwn is right. Deena Burgess, Esq.
Contract law is part of civil code/law. Contract law is not part of the criminal code. And again, I think you are confusing a criminal punishment which potentially can be applied to a minor over ten, with what happens to an eleven year old who gets into a contract by saying he is eighteen. I think you are taking something that might be theoretically possible and making it sound like the normal application of the law. Simply, in the UK and in the US, minors are allowed to void a contract. The idea that they would be subject to a criminal fraud prosecution / or even a civil claim of fraud for entering the contract is so remote and unlikely, that to bring it up as a serious possibility is misleading. This is part common sense. The idea of the law to allow minors to void contracts would be entirely gutted if those same minors were charged with fraud. What would be the point of the former law? A minor would be better off just breaching the contract and dealing with the results of that and not some fraud charge. It just would not make any logical sense to; allow them to void a contract because the are a minor, and also because they are a minor have that same voidable act constitute a fraud. The law, in both the UK and the US, does allow for the treatment of minors as adults under the law in certain circumstances. This would not be one of them. If you have any case law or anything that would indicate the contrary, I would love to read it.
First of all there are no codes in the British law - it is a concept alien to our legal system and any comparison with it is doomed to fail! Second, criminal prosecution frequently follows from what prima facea appears to be a civil wrong. As you have so eloquently put it, the 'minor' commits no civil wrong if he voids the contract. However, he does commit a criminal wrong if he fulfils the criteria I hope I clearly laid out. Third, the law in England and Wales allows for the treatment of a child over the age of 10 to be treated as an adult for any criminal offence. This was laid out clearly in the case of R v T where it was ruled that a child over the age of 10 cannot raise the defence of his age to ANY offence. Fourth, the situation I presented where one would be prosecuted is where one intentionally misled another to make a financial gain. Are you saying that such activity should be legal? I doubt that you are, and if indeed you are then I ask you why? On that same point, the reason the Fraud Act 2006 (A criminal bill) does not destroy the old law is that it applies only when there was the intent to defraud - NOT when a minor enters into a contract believing he has the capacity to do so. Finally, if the creator is dealing with a UK citizen - this may become important. It is not clear from the post whom his potential employer is. I hope this elucidates my position for you.
I am well aware of England's common law system. Cite me any case where a child is held for criminal fraud for entering a contract as a minor (where a misrepresentation about his age is the only fraud). I do not think you will find one. If you do, I will gladly admit to being wrong. I understand that you have been taught that criminal laws can apply to minors, but you are drawing a conclusion on these facts that is not supported by case law or logic.
The law has only been in effect for one coming on two years, it is impossible for limits of the law, such as these to have been explored at this early stage. There have however been interesting cases which show how far the law will extend. In one case - a man won the lottery and a very attractive girl became his girlfriend. Over a period of time she took money from him (when he was willing). This was held to be a case of fraud contrary to the above act. Admittedly this is nowhere near the same type of case but it goes to show how far the law is permeating and the circumstances in which it can be applied. I still hold that a conviction, by the law in the statute, could be secured on the facts I presented.
There are two things going on here. It is certainly fun to discuss the possible applications of the law. And in that regard, your theory is certainly possible - as you say, we will have to wait and see. On the other hand, we have someone on this forum asking a practical question. And I think in terms of that question, it is too remote to even suggest they might be criminally liable for fraud. The reality is that the minor who posed the question is in no jeopardy of criminal prosecution. Even if his customer is in the UK, the chance of UK claiming jurisdiction and then having the laws apply in the way you suggest is so small that it is really not a serious issue - as related to this particular set of facts. Good luck with the rest of your schooling, you are off to a nice start and have the right mindset - which is that you can and should argue your position with everything you can. That is advocacy.