giovanni_fitzpatrick
Giovanni McFarlane Fitzpatrick
giovanni_fitzpatrick

My absolute best friend is a Christian Republican (was sent to Christian school and everything), whose parents are both in the medical field (as is he), and all of us couldn’t disagree more on most politics. Not to mention the fact that he’s white and I’m black. But I’ll be damned if someone tells me that he, along

He’s stayed active throughout all of these years, both physically and mentally.

One of my close friends in Atlanta went to dinner at his house with him and First Lady Rosalynn, and said that both are still sharp. Not moving as fast as they used to (both are in their 90s), but you’d be convinced from a phonecall that

You’re putting the cart before the horse.

The moment that Epic started paying people for these dances (many of which don’t meet the burdens required for copyright), they’d set themselves up for a world of trouble. Why? Because eventually the story would get out, and people would try to fleece Epic and other companies

I don’t think Epic would settle, for the simple fact that case law is pretty clear about the degree of dance moves and choreography that is necessary for a copyright claim. Also, there’s another element I think is lost.

It’s one thing for a human being to replicate a dance move done by another human being. However,

That’s not true.

Disney routinely sues schools who show Disney movies in the classroom without express permission of paying a fee, even though the school itself isn’t charging the students to watch the movie.

Copyrights don’t have to be tied to for-profit works. A writer who posts a story to their blog that has no

Yes, but most of those copyrights and case brought to court involving potential copyright infringement have been either 1. Entire choreographies or 2. Dances only performed to a specific accompanied song. Almost no case has been brought, let alone successful, when the “dance” in question was nothing more than one,

How do we know it was “created” by him?

The thing is this: the copyright code for dances is very specific. It must be created by you, meaning you’re the original person to do it and it shows a minimal level of creativity. But most importantly, it must also be fixed on a tangible object, so it’s either recorded, or it’s

And Bill Bailey invented (or at least was the first person filmed doing it) back in the 1930s.

I find these lawsuits ludicrous, and I’m a trained dancer. 2 Milly attemping to monetize his gyrations is no different than Fred Astaire trying to monetize a specific tap. An entire choreographed number I can understand, but

Their ignorance is irrelevant and it also wouldn’t pass the reasonability test.

The fact that a 15 kid could see the Fortnite dance first, then see a clip of Donald Faison as Turk hitting the moves, and assume that Fortnite came first, doesn’t preclude the fact that any reasonable person has the means to quickly

As a dancer myself (and a superfan of MJ), I agree that it’s muddy.

One of the main elements of dance that separates it from other arts is that, intrinsically, there isn’t any particular dance move that is fundamentally unique towards any person. What I mean by this is that no move is of such a manner that it can solely

While I agree that what they did with 2 Milly’s dance is wrong, Donald Faison doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

His dance wasn’t at all unique. It’s merely a combination of the running man, along with footwork cribbed from Bell Biv Devoe themselves. Honestly, look at some of their lives performances from the time around

I was with you up until the last part.

As much as it’s horrible how many of these cops have gotten away with summary executions of unarmed men and women (most of whom tend to be minorities), I don’t think by hamstringing the authorities by only being able to use their firearms after being directly fired at is the way

My issue is with the concept of forced tithing. However, have their been times in the past where I went to church and dropped a few dollars into the collection plate? Of course, but this was a church that I had been going to for quite awhile and was reasonably sure of where the money was going (and further, was more

Again, I’m not religious, and I hope I made that clear. I think the concept of a forced tithe is inherently wrong and counterproductive. That being said, if I were a person who was religious and regularly went to church and tithed, with the expectation that my money is going specifically to the church, I’d definitely

To your point about Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, you have to think about it like this.

Let’s say Trump had a 1/3 chance of winning each state. Since winning one state is theoretically independent of winning another (meaning that since voting is done on the same day, in real time, there simply isn’t enough

Polling is almost always guesswork, namely for one reason: it’s a poll. A poll has a limited number of respondents, hence why there’s a statistical margin of error. Because of that. statisticians use prior data to determine whether those polled are a good enough representation of the entire body to make a prediction

That wouldn’t matter in Florida.

If the police catch you asleep or drunk behind the wheel of a vehicle, even if the vehicle is parked, so long as the vehicle is running, you can still be popped for a DUI/DWI. Hell, I’m pretty sure that even if the car is off, they can still catch you passed out in the front seat so

I’m not religious, and haven’t been to church in quite awhile, but I could imagine a situation where I’d be rather pissed if money I set aside specifically for a tithe (a concept I find inherently egregious, but I digress) was later taken by another parishiner and is being used in lord knows what way. Not that it

That’s what you said.

Now, my question is where is your logical reasoning for making that statement, and how would you go about determining what is the difference between a power dynamic merely skewed vs. heavily skewed, because as someone who has encountered both a boss/employee and inmate/guard situation, those

Okay. But doesn’t that degree of strictness simply result in a reduction of an individual’s agency to be with who they want to be with, so long as they conform with the laws of the state and the country?

It does seem to be a bit Puritanical for us, in 2018, to say that any large age imbalance, or any wealth imbalance,