She said they were odd BECAUSE of how it juxtaposes against the lack of environmental destruction from the first announcement of there being destructible environments in the single-player game. Why make a juxtaposition against a no longer relevant piece of information unless you are misinformed or purposely trying to…

She literally said “This is odd” and “Now, the destruction has been relegated to a competitive multiplayer mode...”), except it’s not odd is it and it’s not just now relegated to multiplayer is it? They announced that it would be multiplayer only 4 years ago. It’s fine to say “I’m disappointed that the destructibility…

And four years before this review...

idk, eggs do come out of a derriere...

Ok. I mean, that really isn’t related to my comment, but nice to know I guess?

What are you talking about? Who would be getting sued for malpractice?

Only if that information was found during that investigation. I’d be surprised if it did as it would then be odd that the restaurants haven’t be found negligent or that a criminal investigation hasn’t occurred.

She was convicted of getting drunk and killing a 72-year-old woman with her car. Whether or not she was overserved had nothing to do with her conviction. The question of whether she was overserved is being explored via a lawsuit from the victim’s estate. They can’t get any money from the drunk driver, so they’re going…

I had hopes that they’d pull a Dredd and have Gyllenhaal in the mask the entire movie since as far as I know it’s a rarity in the comics to see him unmasked. Although then it kind of makes hiring Jake somewhat worthless because at least Karl Urban in Dredd could still emote a little.

Except that’s coming from someone who made a terrible admiral and he’s telling it to someone who would make a great admiral.

If you still had the magazine in your back pocket, how would they have possibly known it wasn’t one they sold? Obviously, once you showed them the mag, they should have dropped it and apologized, but it’s still a fairly reasonable assumption to make that you may have stolen it. But it’s totally bullshit that they…

Cause we all know that 12-year-olds check the BBB for games to play.

That also seems a little similar to the 2001 movie “The One” with Jet Li.

They do have to register them in order to sue for them.

I don’t give a shit about Fortnite. I just find hypocritical morons like you to be fucking annoying and I think frivolous lawsuits are not good things and copyrighting a couple of simple dance moves could actually lead to problems in the world of dance and choreography. But you don’t care about those things because…

Actually not enforcing your copyright in one instance but doing it with another can affect a copyright case. So by ignoring its use in the game and showing you supported it in one instance and then suing for it later can affect the final judgement. Although none of this matters because he can’t copyright a single…

Did any of the other dozens of video games with dancing emotes ask for permission as well? Or do only hugely popular games that people hate for being popular need to do it?

Choreography has, but dance moves have not. There are several limitations to what actually is copyrightable in Choreographed work and Pantomimes and what isn’t. Individual moves cannot be(so Backpack Boy is out), as well as derivative works(so Faison and Ribeiro should be out as they used moves they didn’t create).

Do they do anything neat like using a two-way mirror or taking photos/videos or something or is it all just them not looking.

Looks like there are a couple of Cool Spots in there as well.