And yet millions of people absolutely love doing this with movies. I don’t think their plan was a total grab at your wallet. It probably looked really good before the publishers and reality pushed back. Then they tried to stay the course, found resistance, and opted out.

That’s literally the concept of Google. Fair-use laws are actually pretty good and cover these scenarios well. The issue is an indiscriminate, automated ban-hammer.

I hear ya, but it can be...complex. Addiction to maladaptive behavior is still addiction. Try this: spend a month pretending to be blind.

A good article, save the “male idea of female attractiveness.” That’s a huge misconception that misses the root of the problem, though admittedly the deeper issue is a lot harder to deal with. Everyone is burdened by the inheritance of culture. Granted the effects are not necessarily equivalent (privilege!) but the…

...it’s not a competition?

If you think Cersei’s walk was fan service...meh. You’re very much supposed to be sympathetic to her during the scene. Those who aren’t are missing a rather large point, perhaps the biggest political point in the show/books.

Was she identifying as black in order to exploit?

It’s not a clear-cut argument by any means, certainly. A good part of why I support capitalism is because money, and the free market, are somewhat blind to such issues (though unfortunately also blind to ethical considerations and reinforcing of stereotypes, but that’s another matter.) However an individual’s activity…

Despite your capitalization and profanity: no, not nearly enough. Unfortunately “normal, fair minded” is exactly the subjective context which requires the protection of freedom of speech. It is the founding reason for the bill of rights, as the majority gets to decide what’s normal and fair-minded. You might also…

That specific part seems to me to be an almost reasonable part of a generally unreasonable bill, if not for the greater context. I understand the doctors’ points of view, as (as conveyed) even medically necessary abortions would be liable which clearly interferes with their ability to provide medical care. Identifying…

I’m confused. Is she saying that if you’re naked in bed, well, go through with it even if you change your mind? Or is she saying that changing your mind while already naked in bed is a difficult proposition?

The first is clearly bad, the second has some leeway. Consent is MANDATORY! No argument there. But sex is part…

That’s the point?

Hilariously, these are all likely covered in DMV license manuals.

To them, it’s not just your body! The fetus is a separate life, it’s a decision between two people. So not much of a contradiction there. The female and pope thing? Yeah, that’s a little hypocritical.

Perhaps I’m missing something. Are they forcing modders to charge for their services?

Yeah...but the scenario previously was like “hiring” artists and compensating them with “exposure” instead of cash.

• I expect the modders would only be responsible for their content, as usual.

That’s like asking artists to work for “exposure.” It’s insulting and taking advantage of individuals’ inability to negotiate legal contracts and navigate distribution. Worse, modders generally do work that generally isn’t legal to sell to begin with.

Studios: I want to encourage modders to add value to our IP without…

As opposed to 0%? Yeah, it kinda is.

Why did they cooperate to begin with?