Like Jack Harkness, Clara oswald is a fixed point in time, except she’s not fixed she moves throughout space in time not in the same way a timelord or any time traveler would though- arbitraryexistence
Small note: the movie did have a moment when the idea of lawyers was explicitly laughed off by a character. I hope fans would think to ask for one of their basic human rights in similar circumstances.
Yes! And that was something I found incredibly disturbing. Over and over they kept putting people into situations where they needed some form of representation in order to move the plot along by them not having it.
I’ve had some people take me to task over the fact that contracts can be amended, and Tony states that in the movie, and I get what they’re saying. But…the instant you sign a contract you’ve lost any leverage you have to make changes to it. You are no longer in a position of power to bargain with anything – you’re at the will of the person or company forcing/asking you to sign. We’ve seen that over and over in the U.S. since the ‘80s, when things like forced arbitration and smear campaigns of “frivolous lawsuits” came up (if someone’s not familiar with these, I’d recommend a documentary called Hot Coffee).
I also saw a person I loved driven to attempt suicide because she was promised amendments to a contract in bad faith, and when she tried to fight it they tied her up in legal proceedings for years and years, and destroyed everything she had. Thaddeus Ross is the epitome of bad faith, which we saw at the end of the movie. So I’m not a super big fan of “once we sign, we can make changes from within.” That seems hopelessly naive to me.
On the topic of devs being legally disallowed from looking at unsolicited materials- how does that affect devs on a personal level? Can they not read reviews, look at fan art, interact with the community anonymously (like you do)? How would that even be enforced? Side question: lotsa games have systems in place that are clearly similar to other games- ie, Assassins Creed climbing in Shadow of Mordor, a portal gun in Darksiders. Where does taking inspiration from other games fall, legally?
So… let me preface this by saying “I am not a lawyer”. I make games, I don’t arbitrate them.
First, you have to remember that unsolicited material means “stuff somebody sent us that we didn’t ask for.” On a personal level, we generally can’t look at stuff that concerns our specific field. A writer shouldn’t read fan fiction, a character artist isn’t supposed to look at character fan art, a programmer shouldn’t look at mod code others have written. Designers can’t look at game mechanic ideas. We can (and do) look at things like reviews, anything created with our own tools (e.g. a character creator), interact with the community anonymously, and so on… but never anything submitted in any official capacity.
Overall, in order to sue for plagiarism the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had access to the thing in question. This is what the unsolicited material ban is intended to stop - the policy acts as a hedge against the potential lawsuit. Once the access has been proven (by accepting unsolicited stuff sent to us), then the plaintiff can move on to prove that there is substantial similarity between the two works. Of course, it’s impossible to avoid everything. There might be something that sneaks in at some point. However, the point of the policy is plausible deniability. It’s much more difficult to prove it happened unofficially.
This is very different from similar game mechanics, because game mechanics can be patented, while unsolicited materials are generally not.
With regards to similar game mechanics, it depends on the language of the patent. Some studios or publishers have patents on specific elements of look and feel, and on certain mechanics. Those are the ones they can sue over. It’s up to the government patent office to determine whether something can or cannot be patented. Zynga, for example, [holds a patent for “Online game with animal-breeding mechanic for combining visual display parameters”] - they can sue anyone for developing an online game that has a mechanic where male and female animals breed to create a third animal with similar features from its parents because they own this patent. If the lawyers can show that the mechanics are sufficiently different from the patent language (or that the patent language itself is too broad and general), they can get the case thrown out.
Albert “Matt” Arevalo was fired in September after being charged with DWI last May. Arevalo was stopped after driving 91 mph in a 55 mph zone, and his blood alcohol content was more than twice the legal limit, police said.
The arbitrator mandated that Arevalo should only serve a 180-day suspension and receive back pay for any days over that period, said Austin police union president Ken Casaday in a letter members of the Austin Police Association.
So I want to talk about DDOS: how long have Richard and Gavin been hooking up? Does anyone else suspect? Do they always meet at Gavin's Hoth-bachelor-pad or has there been (/would there ever be) anything approaching dating?
okay, so. in my mind, this all starts after the arbitration and the moment in the bathroom. richard is 90% sure that gavin was putting something down there, but he doesn’t want to reach out to pick it up until he’s absolutely sure. and, like, luckily gavin has all the subtlety of a jackhammer, so he makes himself very clear in a followup phone call, and it just… begins.
so by the time DDOS takes place, they’ve been hooking up for a few weeks? with regularity. once or twice a week. gavin always initiates it and reaches out. it’s still recent enough to be new and exciting and so richard has a hard time rationalizing himself all the way out of it. and the other guys are starting to suspect that something’s up – jared, especially, because he’s the most attuned to richard’s fluctuations in personality and notices him just being a little more calmer and handling crises with more focus on certain days. but erlich, also, figures that richard’s doing something to deal with the stress, and he’s not sure what it is but i think he’s annoyed that richard isn’t sharing with him regardless. his interest/jealousy is entirely self-motivated and would evaporate entirely if he knew the truth – whereas if/when jared finds out, it’s going to be really upsetting to him.
anyway: it starts as stress relief. it starts as something totally physical, where they only meet at gavin’s house and wreck each other and try to manipulate the other into spilling trade secrets about pied piper/endframe. (it especially helps that gavin has, in the interest of trying to professionally fuck richard in the ass, has accidentally fucked himself by jacking up the valuation of pied piper via financially overestimating endframe.) but, you know, they’re assholes, but they’re assholes with human emotions, and over the course of a few months, it goes from hooli-calendar-facilitated booty calls to occasionally eating dinner with each other at gavin’s, and then to occasionally going out to eat at other places and pretending they’re meeting to try to call a truce between their companies but really just… eating dinner together. because they start noticing these weird little things they kind of like about the other. richard almost reminds gavin of a young peter. gavin is selfish and ruthless but also incredibly insecure, and richard finds that big gaping flaw almost endearing, how much gavin worries about the way he’s perceived. when they can put away the posturing and just talk as equals, they actually find themselves admiring the other’s strengths. it’s mutually assured destruction after a while, and that’s when they start letting their guards down.
gavin is the one who accidentally catches feelings first. richard isn’t far behind. he promptly freaks out upon realizing that he’s eventually going to have to tell his friends and colleagues that he has accidentally fumbled his way into a romantic relationship with the person they still think is his greatest professional enemy.
in the end, he doesn’t have to tell anyone himself, because a year and a half into the secret relationship, endframe collapses the same weekend that gavin convinces richard to take a couple days and go out of town together. they both teleconference in from the same room and it doesn’t take long for everyone to realize that they’re together, and the whole situation comes out in an embarrassing but efficient way. the downside: both hooli and pied piper are investigated by the FBI for possibly violating antitrust laws. they technically didn’t intend to collude or price-fix, but – the de facto leaders of both companies were sleeping together for a year and a half. the feds, naturally, have to look into it.
richard and gavin get a quickie marriage to get out of having to testify against each other. it’s a terrible idea. but it sticks.
and out of one question, i have managed to worst-case-scenario these two into a committed relationship with a marriage certificate. sorry. you knew what i was capable of when you asked this.
The One who is the supreme arbitrating magistrate.
The One who is the only true judge. The One who always delivers justice in every situation.
The One whose judgments and decrees are never over-turned or thwarted. The One who makes the final
decision of the nature of all matters. The One who arbitrates all disputes.
Why are you trademarking GAS? Wouldn't that require a government to enforce the trademark?
No way, because voluntary bounty organizations can arbitrate my trademark claim in a way that is compatible with free associations. For example, if people try using GAS™ without my consent, then “Boba Fett” there can just let them know that they’re treading on my private property. Once they are aware, they can cease voluntarily; if they do not, then they are violating the Non-Aggression Principle (hopefully a ™ on that soon, too) and must be stopped, aggressively if necessary.
In regards to the marriage article you just posted, I know that the libertarian stance is for the govt to get out of marriage entirely since most ppl see it as a religious institution. The problem I see with it is that certain rights, such as, presumed power of attorney, inheritance benefits, protection from incriminating a spouse in court, govt guardianship of marriage records, are not decided by the Church, but by the government. Wouldn't it be more problematic if the govt gets out of it?
I regularly conduct business with individuals in China, Taiwan, Brazil, Russia, and through Latin America. I don’t recall ever having to resort to a third party to resolve a dispute, though that option is always available, using arbitration that doesn’t involve any government system. If I ever had to resort to government arbitration for one of these disputes, it would be a clusterfuck of international law, probably lasting for months at least, and most likely never coming to a resolution which was acceptable for both parties.
Do you believe that chaos would erupt if government oversight ceased to exist? Look at the way most people trade, and you can see that it normally doesn’t need supervision, and it mostly doesn’t even need third party arbitration. Do you gasp in horror to think how the world will function, if it were to function as most of it already does? If so, why?
Any discussion on recent developments in the field of civil litigation must address the virtual revolution that has taken place with regards to alternative dispute resolution. Needless to say that the legal system has witnessed a steady growth in litigant’s recourse to Alternative dispute resolution (the ADR).
The Respondent dismissed the Claimant’s allegations that PMI Group had ‘good reason’ to think that Plain Packaging Measures would never be implemented in Australia because Prime Minister Rudd 'had developed a reputation for announcing ambitious proposals and later backing down’.
Professor Karl-Heinz Böckstiegel (President), Professor Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler and Professor Donald M. McRae, Arbitral Tribunal, PHILIP
MORRIS ASIA LIMITED
(“Claimant”) v THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
(“Respondent”) AWARD ON JURISDICTION AND ADMISSIBILITY (17 December 2015) .
New York According to FINRA records, Rafael Santiago, a broker who is not currently registered with any firm, discloses a pending customer dispute. Rafael most recently was employed by Primary Capital until 2/2016. Prior to that he was employed by several other firms including, COR Clearing, Morgan Stanley and Lighthouse Financial Group. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is…
Far from burying its arbitration clause in its employment contracts, WeWork is proud of its policy. The company’s top executives said they thought that by adopting an arbitration clause as part of a broader dispute resolution program, they were staying true to their principles, which prize all levels of employees as members of a single community. WeWork says its employees are eligible for bonuses and equity in the company in addition to their salaries.
“We want to show the world that this works,” Jennifer Berrent, WeWork’s general counsel and chief culture officer, a recently created position, said of the dispute resolution program.
For start-ups — many of which began in Silicon Valley — the clauses can seem to conflict with professed goals of upending business as usual and being open with employees. Arbitration, by its very nature, is a secretive process that is often lopsided in favor of the employer. That secrecy, federal labor officials said, can allow widespread problems to persist because the process bars employees from sharing their experiences with others who might be in similar positions.
“They give their young workers Ping-Pong tables and take away their constitutional rights,” said Cliff Palefsky, an employment and civil rights lawyer in San Francisco.