@Rawrnosaourous: I'll have to read his Astonishing X-Men work to be able to develop a more informed opinion. But his Runaways arc seriously causes me to doubt his skills when applied to interpreting existing Marvel characters.

@Rawrnosaourous: Ah, then you must not have read Whedon's arc on Marvel's Runaways.

@Midnight_Tengen: How about "Execute"?

So this is Google's "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish"?

@Kaiser-Machead v.2.1.1: Unfortunately it's only for issues like gay marriage that "state's rights" is an issue for most of the those making the argument. When it comes to guns (see DC v Heller, McDonald v Chicago), well, state's rights just go right out the window, don't they?

@loniusmonk: I'm going to like having you around these parts for Constitutional discussions. Welcome!

@loniusmonk: I think Thomas will affirm. He wanted to use Privileges or Immunities as the method to decide McDonald v. Chicago rather than Due Process incorporation. (His concurrence was an awesome read, actually).

@JBaker1225: "The Supreme Court will rule that this is a state's rights issue, as there is no such constitutional right as the right to marriage."

@SnowSoul: This is not judicial activism. This is proper application of the 14th Amendment. The courts exist to apply the law to real life. That is what has happened here. A state law is incompatible with the Constitution of the United States (particularly the 14th Amendment).

@chauncy that billups: Justice Thomas would not overrule which would be essential to a 5-4 decision overturning the current decision.

@itzikG35:

To anyone saying "ZOMG, a federal judge overturned a state law! The horrorz! Our democracy means nothing, and the Constitution is nothing but liberal toilet paper!":

@sugsesq: For making an argument grounded in Constitutional law, you get approved! Please continue introducing the good folks around here to the 14th Amendment.

I'm not really familiar with his work... Would a Rodriguez-directed Deadpool be a good thing?

If you can not read Japanese, there is an English version (in beta).

It doesn't change the reality on the ground, no. But it does legitimize the jailbreak communities, which is an important step in and of itself.

@Bobby Stanley: That is very specifically addressed in the ruling.

@eenmijay: I believe that you are reading the exemption correctly. It's much narrower than personal ripping of DVDs.

@Kaiser-Machead v.2.1.1: It would be fair use, yes, but I think this case was a very narrow ruling on DMCA anti-circumvention. GE was bypassing DRM to view diagnostic data on hardware they owned without using a third party's dongles. I'll be combing it further, but I'm not sure this is quite the fair use victory that…

@Kaiser-Machead v.2.1.1: If I'm understanding the full context, Judge Garza is saying that DRM can be bypassed to view material, but not copy.