Take Two doesn't have a leg to stand on because there are just too many similarities between Lyndsay Lohan and the character in the videogame. Take Two is going to take a hit on this they cannot just appropriate someone's likeness and expect to actually win.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click to show the comment.
Everyone needs to stop bitching about Comcast. Comcast is one ISP that offers far more data that any other ISP does. Most customers don't even use a fraction of that data unless you're doing something illegal, like sharing illegal torrent files. If you are, then you shouldn't have internet service in the first place.
Google should just de-list the websites of those newspapers simply for making such a ridiculous demand. I remember the last time this happened that some media organizers were outraged that Google had threatened to delist them and then halted their lawsuit over news snippets being posted on Google.
Even if this bill passes, it wouldn't prevent people from owning body armor, it would encourage more people to buy body armor. What do they think will happen? That they'll arrest every American who has body armor? It would create a nationwide riot.
They need to make it punishable up to 10 years for law enforcement to have this body armor as well.
Just love how the idiots try to throw around the word 'indict' like it's a guilty verdict. I don't see the Fedex indictment turning into a guilty verdict because Fedex didn't engage in criminal activities, it was the online business conducting illegal activity.
It's like holding USPS liable or holding the mail carrier liable for a package from an illegal business.
The real problem is "training and guidance"? Has Obama lost his freaking mind? The real problem is that our police being militarized at all. Law enforcement should not have any kind of military equipment at all.
I told everyone this was going to happen a long time ago, that our government wants to establish military law in this country and this is just another phase of Obama wanting to establish dictatorship control over our own country and he has the backing of the entire Democratic Party who are encouraging him to do just that.
I agree with the LAPD officer but not for the same reasons he states. It's true that there are a lot of people who don't listen to officers but that the number of people who don't listen aren't in the majority, they are in the minority.
The problem is that there are too many cases where morons feel they have an entitlement to ignore what the officer is telling them and the majority of those who are sticking their noses up in the air to the cops are those looking to deliberately provoke the cops into doing something they can catch on video.
Just a look at the majority of videos posted on youtube and you can see how these morons with their cameras deliberately go out of their way to make a spectacle out of themselves in order to create the next viral video and ti's simply gotten out of control. Here in Michigan, I have never had a problem with filming a police officer and I surely don't mouth off to the officer or act rude to them.
Don't know about you guys, but a cop is a person just like any of us. You treat them with disrespect and, guess what? You're going to get disrespected right back.
Where exactly in that letter did it say that they were denying the request? I saw no such thing other than "it may be necessary to release this document under request". How does that state that the FOIA request was denied?
These officers were very cordial to these drone enthusiasts but I watched that video about two weeks ago and these idiots were just trying to provoke a response with the police. Secondly, your right to record ends at the gate or the door. Just as you have an expectation of privacy in your home, these officers have an expectation of privacy at their own police station. Your right to record officers in public is legal; your right to record them in their own police station is not.
The LAPD is quite correct. Filming police in public is one thing but when you cross over onto public property, you are violating the law. It's why you can't fly a drone over the White House or why you can't fly a drone over an airport. Flying a drone over police department property and capturing license plate numbers, the payout of the police cruisers is a violation of the privacy and security of law enforcement.
This article completely misses the point and tries to make the excuse that police property is the public. The officers are correct because how would you like it if I decided to fly a drone close to your bedroom window and started recording you?
The prolem, and I read the writeup on Huffington Post days ago, is that there is a minimum of $5,000 compensation that athletes can be paid, which expect the NCAA to only pay athletes $5,000. Not only that, but the NCAA and the colleges they play for can both appeal the decision.
The morons with the videocameras and cellphone cameras are exactly what I'm talking about. I can't tell you how many times I've watched videos where idiots just deliberately stop to film police officers in order to provoke a confrontation. I just watched one video, a few days ago, where these idiots were flying drones over a private area of a police station in California and they proceeded to argue with the cops over it. It was obvious they were provoking a confrontation.
I never said we didn't live in a police state. But, then again, I don't go out actively trolling cops with a loud mouth and a videocamera or a camera/cellphone. While it technically isn't illegal, when you actively provoke a bear, expect to get chased down and attacked. How many of you deliberately provoke a hive of angry bees? Remember, never wake the sleeping dragon, because you're bound to get bit.