Sounds like a typical Japanese composition...

No, I only have this one account.

The only person acting like a child is you. You're the one stating that you are going to figuratively stick your fingers in your ears so you don't have to listen to someone who disagrees with you.

There's nothing dishonest about it. They didn't like it. They removed it. There's no duty to warn, no duty to comment about why they were removed. The removal of those comments is actually a GOOD public relations move; the fact that a vocal minority disagrees is not sufficient reason for the admins to change their…

Yep. And there's not a damn thing you can do about it. There's no duty to disclose rules...hell, there's no duty to even HAVE rules. They could go about deleting every 3rd comment and it would still not be "wrong". If the admins want to remove my comments, they are free to do so as they see fit.

I still fail to see…

"Dishonest censorship"? Kotaku has no duty to allow any comment to appear on their page. It's hardly censorship; it's intelligent public relations.

This website is Kotaku's property. They can do what they like with the comments here. If they find it objectionable, they can remove it without notice. If you're using their playground, you have to play by their rules.

As a straight man who has been gaming since the 1970s, I say: "Preach on!" If you have a newsletter, please sign me up for it.

Long story very short: If you make a copyrighted work available for download, it's a felony.

You are completely misrepresenting Liebeck's case against McDonald's. The coffee was served hotter than normal and the elderly woman suffered third degree burns on her thighs and required skin grafts because of it. She originally asked for just her medical bills and lost wages to be paid (about $20,000), and that…

It's sad that the attorneys for the plaintiffs actually bothered to file the suit. Since part of the reason for the dismissal was FRCP 12(b)(6), they could end up being sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit...and probably should!

"This game does not require download of the Origin Client"

The real issue is: Should JRPGs die? And the resounding answer is "Yes!" The only reason they were made in the first place was because consoles couldn't run the vastly superior RPGs being released on the computers of the day. Now that consoles can run equivalent RPGs as computers, there's no reason for JRPGs to…

Honestly, all Dan Snyder needs to do is to change the logo to a potato and "Redskins" would be perfectly fine. ;-)

Can we start the hashtag #ChopSueyPark? ;-)

Actually, YouTube cannot be sued for lost advertising per their Terms of Service. Posting other people's content without their consent, even if fair use, is against YouTube's TOS and it can be removed.

benoregon, please learn a bit more about copyright law before you make comments like that. Reviews are found to be covered under Fair Use if they don't use a significant portion of the copyrighted work. Let's Play videos are usually in multiple parts and use the entirety of the work (or at least a large portion) and…

The designer doesn't own the copyright. The company owns the copyright when a person is employed to create a work.

If a game company licenses music in their game from a music company, that music company still owns the copyright to that music and can certainly make a valid claim of copyright violation.

I trust my knowledge of contracts and contract law (as an attorney) more than a Kotaku article, honestly.

You can't have an unwritten contract when one of the parties hasn't agreed to the terms. There's no such thing as an "unwritten NDA" in this case - if the guy got his hands on an Xbox One legally, he's not doing anything wrong in telling people about it.