|
ActusRhesus posted:Problem w UTPA statutes is most say you don’t have standing if you aren’t a “consumer or competitor” so since Walmart isn’t a law firm it may not work. So they’ll license one of legal zoom’s forms and bam! Competitor!
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:49 |
|
|
Change your name to Mart Murdock and open Daredevil Law, see who sues harder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Nice language though. "The TCPA's commercial speech exemption is no model of clarity, but we conclude that it is not ambiguous, at least on the issue presented here." Judge-speak for "this statute sucks rear end, looks like we're going to have to spend 5 pages explaining why we are interpreting it correctly." I've come across numerous opinions in which the Court outright states, in dicta, "Unfortunately, as presently worded, the plain language of this statute is such that it applies in almost any case."
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
I've finished the paperwork, please address me by my full name, Discendo Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher Lincoln, Cochrane, Latham & Watkins Vox
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
Speaking of absurd IP litigation, I'm not sure who I'm rooting for here: https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/18/entertainment/carlton-sues-fortnite-video-game/index.html Jk, I'm rooting for dem billable hours for lawyers on both sides.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
I mean... they didn’t do themselves any favors naming it the fresh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I mean... they didn’t do themselves any favors naming it the fresh. But also, almost 30 years later people (most people, not a bunch of nerds) immediately think of Alfonso Ribeiro? And somehow that dance isn't owned, if at all, by NBC or whoever produced the show? Joinder must be created.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:But also, almost 30 years later people (most people, not a bunch of nerds) immediately think of Alfonso Ribeiro? And somehow that dance isn't owned, if at all, by NBC or whoever produced the show? Never underestimate the power of reruns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
I mean isn't that like the dance every goofy white dude does? If anyone can sue it should be the Boss https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=129kuDCQtHs&t=48s
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:But also, almost 30 years later people (most people, not a bunch of nerds) immediately think of Alfonso Ribeiro? And somehow that dance isn't owned, if at all, by NBC or whoever produced the show? Also (and this is the bigger problem for Ribeiro) you can’t actually copyright a dance move. You can copyright a choreographic work, but that excludes single dance moves... like the Carlton.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
when you're a tenant in WA and your lease expires and you're month to month do you still have to abide by the rules of lease, things like "no birds or no aquariums" or poo poo like that that you agreed to in the lease?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 22:23
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Also (and this is the bigger problem for Ribeiro) you can’t actually copyright a dance move. Maybe as celebrity identity / publicity / character /likeness etc. ? I forget the term. It's not an abstract dance move, not "The Charleston, it's "The Carlton", i.e., a dance from a specific character played by a specific actor. It's one thing if it's just the dance moves, but if the game files are something like "type /carlton" and then the dance happens
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Doorknob Slobber posted:when you're a tenant in WA and your lease expires and you're month to month do you still have to abide by the rules of lease, things like "no birds or no aquariums" or poo poo like that that you agreed to in the lease? Usually a fixed lease that converts to month-to-month is subject to the terms of the original lease, yes. What does the lease say?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Usually a fixed lease that converts to month-to-month is subject to the terms of the original lease, yes. What does the lease say? it isn't converting to month to month though because no new lease was signed it was a one year lease and in WA leases can't auto-renew so you just go to a month to month with rules that are in the RCW, but I guess the rules from the lease continue to apply even after the lease has expired?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
As a practical matter, I would continue to abide by the terms of your old lease, unless you want your landlord to decide to stop renewing your month-to-month and start calculating how much of your deposit they can keep for bird/aquarium related cleanup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Doorknob Slobber posted:it isn't converting to month to month though because no new lease was signed it was a one year lease and in WA leases can't auto-renew so you just go to a month to month with rules that are in the RCW, but I guess the rules from the lease continue to apply even after the lease has expired? quote:Do I have to move out at the end of my lease? what does your lease say
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:https://tenantsunion.org/en/rights/faq/rental-agreements#do-i-have-to-move-out-at-the-end-of-my-lease I believe the OP is in Seattle, where a lease that doesn't say otherwise does automatically convert to month to month, iirc. IANAL.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
What it definitely doesn't do is turn into a free-for-all "you live here but there are no more rules" situation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
Does Seattle have different laws concerning leases than the rest of Washington State I don't practice in Seattle or Washington and I live in an extreme landlord friendly state, so I'm curious now EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Dec 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
KillHour posted:What it definitely doesn't do is turn into a free-for-all "you live here but there are no more rules" situation. One weird trick landlords hate!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 00:48
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:Does Seattle have different laws concerning leases than the rest of Washington State
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Yes. It is considered tenant-friendly, in spite of the fact that it is just ever-so-slightly less landlord-friendly than most places. Okay but how does it differ from the rest of Washington state law? Saying it differs but also saying you’re not a lawyer so you don’t really know what you’re talking about isn’t very helpful Also I googled this and I didn’t see any laws based on how Seattle treated fixed term lease expirations differently that the rest of Washington. It was mostly about fault v no fault evictions. Specifically, did not see any laws that changed how leases were treated at the expiration of a fixed lease term Also lol at calling them “slightly less friendly” landlord tenant laws compared to Texas Edit: this sounds more aggressive than I meant it to be EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Dec 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
was there ever an actual case where someone let their baby play with a plastic bag and they suffocated and that's why all plastic bags have that warning now
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
snack eater posted:was there ever an actual case where someone let their baby play with a plastic bag and they suffocated and that's why all plastic bags have that warning now I think babies suffocating on plastic bags used to be A Thing in the time before warnings on everything. I have hazy recollections of PSAs about it from when I was very little, but that could have been my parents yelling at me not to put a plastic bag over my head. Kids are curious and dumb; often a fatal combination.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
snack eater posted:was there ever an actual case where someone let their baby play with a plastic bag and they suffocated and that's why all plastic bags have that warning now Over 25 children a year suffocate to death due to plastic bags: https://web.archive.org/web/20120312000140/http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5064.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Over 25 children a year suffocate to death due to plastic bags: https://web.archive.org/web/20120312000140/http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5064.html I watched Dan Aykroyd personally advocate for the sale of a toy that was simply a plastic bag intended for children to place over the head And don't get me started on the dangers of the Bass-o-matic
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
Devor posted:I watched Dan Aykroyd personally advocate for the sale of a toy that was simply a plastic bag intended for children to place over the head Don't forget the rubber band used to securely fasten it around the neck
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
I mean yeah I'm sure babies suffocating happens but is there like one famous landmark lawsuit every lawyer knows as "the plastic bag case" or is it just a more general thing
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
snack eater posted:I mean yeah I'm sure babies suffocating happens but is there like one famous landmark lawsuit every lawyer knows as "the plastic bag case" or is it just a more general thing there's a microwaved cat
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
snack eater posted:I mean yeah I'm sure babies suffocating happens but is there like one famous landmark lawsuit every lawyer knows as "the plastic bag case" or is it just a more general thing Without actually looking, because I'm lazy and a piece of poo poo, I'd guess there are is probably a series of products liability suffocation cases where liability expanded a little more and a little more, and after a few then all the compliance departments for major manufacturers just said, "gently caress it, better safe than sorry" and started putting the warnings on there, but none of them are definitive, singular type cases in their own right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
Products liability is a deep deep whole. Almost as deep as IP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Products liability is a deep deep whole. Almost as deep as IP. Yeah, and because its a tort, its going to be a state-specific hole for each jurisdiction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
Well hot drat http://www.packaginglaw.com/
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
The Restatement helped some but yeah. It’s a loving mess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
Not that I have any intention of doing this, but would it be legal to use a pellet/bb gun to shoot pigeons or squirrels to eat in my suburban backyard? My dad is old as dirt and has lots of stories of hunting both as a kid when his family had no money. I’m curious if that sort of thing is still acceptable or legal, generally speaking, not in any one city/state jurisdiction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
Check the county and local code for a discharge of firearms ordinance. In my county, it’s fine. Most cities within the county, it’s banned. You just need to see if it’s banned and if so what it covers. BB guns usually aren’t covered, at least in smaller cities. You still may be criminally or civilly liable for errant shots and property damage though. If you’re unsure I definitely wouldn’t do it in the city limits of a place with a pop. over 50k. Even if it’s technically legal, cops may harass you and invent citations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
Also you know, you have no idea how safe that meat is to eat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Also you know, you have no idea how safe that meat is to eat. gently caress the po-lice (bites head off of pigeon)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 17:11
|
|
|
This company I'm looking at giftcards for family from wants me to click-agree that they expire in 180 days in violation of federal law. Who do I report this to?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:49 |
|
|
Pigeon is gross, but squirrel is fine, it's just really tough and chewy
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 18:08
|
|