When Tom Rutledge throws a party, I'll bet guests aren't allowed to take a beer from the fridge because "it’s people consuming something they haven’t paid for"
That's pretty close to a canned "won't someone think of the children?" response.
Given how little thought seems to have gone into his bill, I'm not all that surprised that he couldn't come up with a more thoughtful response.
Aside from the horrible danger they put people into, wouldn't blindly throwing a flash-bang grenade put the evidence they came to search for at risk too?
(Unless we're going to start arguing that evidence is "warrant proof" unless it's fire proof...)
It would be different if Ubisoft implied that the people creating music were going to get paid, but then didn't pay them (e.g. write some music for us for $x! Later: oops, we didn't need it, so we don't have to pay you. Ktnxbye!)
That doesn't seem to be what's happening here - Ubisoft seems to be pretty upfront about the fact that most of the people who participate aren't going to get money. They can use that to figure out whether they might get something they are looking for before creating and submitting music (which might be more that just money - experience, prestige, collaboration, and just loving what you do as a hobby are things too!)
If you really want to foster appreciation for good filmmaking, you could use a televised award ceremony to highlight exceptional examples and share why they are so special. Or, you could just pile a bunch of thank-you speeches from people who are really good at following the rules in between a bunch of commerical breaks. You're the cinematic visionary I guess.
But, doesn't the DOJ have better things to do than try and scare the academy out of their plans to become less relevant?
So it's kind of like a happy hour special where you pay full price, but you only get a full pint if the brewer paid the bar extra Can't really say I've seen much of that - is it only "ubiquitous" in Washington D.C.?
My wife and I cut the cord two years ago because we were paying too much for lousy cable service - it got to a point where we had to call the cable company a half hour before we had guests over to make sure we had a signal (our provider had an odd habit of disconnecting our TV service if we went a day or so without watching it; I guess more than a hundred dollars a month wasn't enough for them to just leave it online...)
After a while, we thought we would give Sling a shot, but we recently cancelled it because we don't really use it. Sling works a lot like cable and satellite used to, where you pull up live broadcasts of TV channels. But, it occurred to me that we don't channel surf anymore: we've become accustomed to finding titles we like and watching them when we want to.
They may have tried to adapt to streaming delivery, but I don't they have adapted to the change in our viewing habits...
30 Years
Thirty year war?
(Although in fairness, the last four years have definitely felt more like sixteen)