Lawyer here, and generally no. At best, the judgment could be persuasive to other courts in the First Circuit–and of course that’s what Nintendo wants, hence the effort to craft language that could be easily ported to other sympathetic courts–but the legal theory is absolutely not binding on other parties until/unless the finding/rationale is adopted by a higher court.
Way to communicate contempt for your customers. If you’re in the business of selling decorative replicas of cartoon swords, you need to be in on the kayfabe. Nobody is expecting to take one of these to a real swordfight. What they are expecting, however, is to have a cool prop to show their friends, and it’s not unreasonable to expect the cool prop to feel like it’s not trying to fly across the yard if you swing it around.
If you don’t want people to touch the merchandise, the second sign is all you need.
I can’t wait until the everything-is-a-soulslike era has ended. I know some people like it, but it absolutely does not inspire any excitement for me.
“Piracy is a service problem.”
Narrator: It didn’t.
Violence. I hate it, but that’s the plan. Fight to survive by any means necessary. Things are going to get real scarce.
Community is definitely the winning ticket though. Get neighbors you trust.
No put down the paw right now! Stop it!
Your solution to rampant economic inequality is … campaign and vote downballot.
I mean, sure, that’s a great idea, but your argument essentially boils down to combating apathy (which isn’t a new or unique problem), and I guess attacking a hypothetical Sanders administration that never happened because–I dunno, you just wanted to get a jab in at voters who were actually motivated about a candidate for once in a lifetime? Well, good news for you; all the Sanders supporters are back to voting defensively until their kids grow up, if they vote at all. Does that feel like a win to you?
People aren’t “taking the easy way out” by not voting the entire ballot. In fact, split-ticket voting is down historically, at least as of 2020, across both parties. Blaming people for not devoting their lives to political activism is akin to blaming minimum wage workers for not walking out: Yeah, maybe things would be better if they did, but people have to survive. Choosing to use what little spare time one has with family instead of participating in local politics isn’t a moral failure, and it’s not the easy way out. It’s just rational. People have limited time and limited means, and there are more important things than who gets to be the constable next year.
Crime. I’d do crime. I’m too old to join the Navy, too poor to get some debt. So I’d do the same thing the overwhelming majority of Americans who find themselves in the situation do: Crime.
Which crime? Well, the likelihood of this actually happening to many people who are currently gainfully employed and financially stable is uncomfortably high, so some cards I just have to keep close, and you should too.
No war but the class war.
I mean, sure, this is a propaganda piece by a not-at-all-trustworthy rag that might as well be an extension of the IDF in this context.
But anyone who thinks women aren’t getting raped in war has never studied history. Are Oct 7 captives being sexually assaulted? Of course they are. Are Gazans also being sexually assaulted? Again, yes. Are female Ukrainian POWs being sexually assaulted? Almost certainly. Russian female POWs? Also yes. Anywhere there’s regular violence, sexual violence doesn’t follow far behind.
Every state, paramilitary, terrorist organization, and militia that has ever fired a shot in anger wants to be seen as honorable fighters with a righteous cause who respect the rules of war, and yet there’s not a single one of the same groups who hasn’t also been shown to torture and kill children, civilians, and POWs, and rape and sexually abuse women, both combatants and civilians.
No war but the class war.
Christ, this asshole.
It’s actually Rama, this asshole, apparently.
Ahh… classic.
US bad. Got it.
So you’re suggesting that North Korea is demonstrating its ballistic missiles solely in order to deter the United States from unilaterally launching an unprovoked surprise nuclear strike against North Korea. …
Okay.
Let’s talk about this, I guess.
In the universe in which the US launches an unprovoked surprise nuclear attack against North Korea, I’d like to think we could all agree that the rest of the world, including other nuclear powers, would be united in retaliating, NK ballistic missiles or not. Sure, it’s not impossible that the US government could become irrational, but that’s I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that nuclear deterrence is about more than that.
Even allowing ad arguendo a Hiroshima-like escalation scenario, we don’t actually need the US’s nuclear arsenal to do that (see: Tokyo and Berlin bombing campaigns). That is to say–to the extent that NK being a nuclear power might play in an actual deterrence scenario, it’s redundant. In all other scenarios, we’re not using 1945 military doctrine anyway.
Citation needed.
What’s there to deter? Anything NK could do to the US that would serve as a deterrent would immediately result in the US glassing Pyongyang. Lil Kim isn’t Putin. He doesn’t have a half-century of stockpiles to rattle at the US to pretend MAD is still a thing. And neither Putin nor Poohbear would lift a finger to stop it either, because NK’s friendship just isn’t that valuable, and it won’t be for another several decades of pouring the entire GDP into buildup, if ever. US war hawks don’t care about North Korea because they don’t have to.
The behavioral crisis is the failure of ordinary people to riot, shut down factories and refineries, and hang greedy CEOs. The research is correct insofar as it suggests people should become more conscious of the fact that a few individuals are marching humanity into oblivion, but the time for more research is past. We already know what needs to be done. If human psychology predicts that humans will never voluntarily give up consumption–and it does–then we ought not be targeting mankind’s goodwill toward the planet or even its foresight. Rather, our efforts–that is, the entire focus of every free society–should be directed wholly toward the annihilation of the institutions on which that consumptive philosophy depend and, where and as called for, the burial of those men who refuse to give them up.
Reason and education have proved insufficient. The remedy of a slave is not to break his shackles, but to kill the masters.
Nope. You’re still wrong, but it’s not worth the trouble. I hope you never have to learn the hard way. Take it easy.
It’s really for hostility for homeless people. The design is intended to make it difficult for someone to sleep on it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
I don’t know this design specifically, but absent another explanation, that’s become my go-to explanation for any unusual design in a public space.