BAM!

But they have now set precedent for future cases.

The law said it first:

For those wondering:

People will always have something to complain about.

It is, at least, the end of one particularly problematic group.

Ah, alright. Thanks.

Hey Kotaku!

Why can't we use the article photo? The one by Getty.

I am aware. I think you should read my other comments.

I understand that they're upset about the future update allowing the purchase of gameplay-affecting items.

Maybe you missed what he said...a document was leaked that detailed how future updates would allow the purchasing of weapons/ships/etc.

What the hell is a monocle, anyway?

Except the Matrix.

How do I connect this to my other Zords?

Then you probably know more than I do — I'm not in law; I apologize if I came off as demeaning, I was just responding promptly. I've just seen it in prior cases that will set precedent. The judge wants to be sure, especially concerning negligence, so he wants a high standard of proof. The judge may settle for clear…

I don't know many — the articles I linked to have just been shown to me by friends and colleaugues. I'm not in law or anything, I just try to stay on top of it. If you're wondering about particular cases, see what public court documents you can find. They often have plaintiff and defendant sides fo the story that…

Of course, of course — I don't mean that the judge will be correct, I just mean that judges know a great deal more about the law than we do.

That's obviously not what I was saying.

Who already covered that? And why would being Olympic not make them count?