Somewhere Pamela Geller is licking her lips and smiling.

And with that criteria like that, you'll have already legitimized their silly argument.

Religions aren't the problem. The problem lies with particular judges and legislators that nearly legitimize theocracy, allowing certain religions to obey or flaut the law at their whim. It's a constitutional shit show and they know it.

That set should've been completed what... two years or more ago?

It can be confusing and I think we've come to the same sentiment, just through a cloud of misunderstanding. For what it's worth, I raise my glass to your efforts.

Ahem.

Well no because the trademark is People Magazine, isn't it? Not 'People'. And as Hogarth has explained, GW neither has claim on the trademark in fiction NOR was the term 'space marine' their invention. But none of that matters so long as GW has the legal weight to bring to bear.

I'm not sure of the point of contention. That the OP confused the terms doesn't invalidate the fact that trademark law still allows individuals to establish claim on a name, even a very common name. As someone else pointed out, the Edge Games lawsuits, attacking companies that put the word 'edge' in their games, is a…

Sorry... what does Games Workshop have to do with Eric Shawn's trademark squatting on the term 'Dreamworld'?

This means nothing if Games Workshop has the legal muscle to enforce their 'trademark'. That's how the modern IP & trademark game is played.

Actually I'm pretty ambivalent on the Tolkien movies. But thanks for this. You made it all worthwhile.

Hey, these torches and pitchforks don't wave and stab themselves.

I'd like to point out to you that Fellowship of the Ring has a 92% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, The Two Towers has a 94% rating and Return of the King a 96% rating. Could they be wrong? Sure. I hate The Hobbit cartoon with a horrible fiery white hot passion. But you pointing to a reviewer on the radio doesn't really…

What do you believe those consequences should be? What's the preventative measure? Should we consider legislation that phone pranks should be banned? How far down this road are you willing to go?

You seem to forget your original argument was one of dismissal, compounded by some fallacious argument that I should just abandon my perspective "because look! Here is its score on Rotten Tomatoes! Ergo, yours is the flawed minority opinion!".

I'm sorry but... what is the NAIEA? Are you talking in reference to that illegitimate scam "agency" run by William LameBull?

Yep. It was done fairly well in the Incredible Hulk movie.

I'm slightly puzzled by the first 30 seconds. Was she trying to walk up a downward moving escalator (only to be accidentally turned into a character in a stop motion cartoon)?