Some of the best advice I've been given on the topic of bras is "Get one that fits". I don't think it's compelling to change that to "Get one that fits your keys, money, phone, pen, tampon, reading glasses, and knife."
Some of the best advice I've been given on the topic of bras is "Get one that fits". I don't think it's compelling to change that to "Get one that fits your keys, money, phone, pen, tampon, reading glasses, and knife."
In the past, more than once, I've been told that anything you create "within the scope of employment" is copyrighted to your employer of you are in a work for hire situation (I have never not been). And said scope can include consideration of being at the office between whatever your nine and five is.
Then I can only conclude you have no evidence for him to not being able to star in a major movie, since he has, and did well. If you had evidence, you'd have shown it to me.
I don't like him. I think he's plain and unexciting—remember when I said I'd only seen him in the one thing, and I recast him? That's what that was about, not liking him.
So there's a type of actor who can open a movie, and Jeremy's not it, and he's being some sort of a bad person by pretending to be that actor and accepting lead roles in Bourne Legacy (domestic gross of $113m, more than that foreign) and Hansel & Gretel (predicted to take the #1 spot this weekend)?
Why is he not that kind of actor? Has he not been doing the job well? (I couldn't give a rat's ass about him, and recast Hawkeye with Colin Ferguson, so it's not a fangirl question) But he seems to have showed up and earned his pay on a number of high profile, highly scrutinised movies, without ending up like Halle…
You've never googled your name? You don't know about the sexagenarian with your own pretty uncommon name living in Venezuela, and the Irish artist?
I don't have the room, actually. I recently did a brutal cull/foldering job just to be able to fit more widgets on. As long as I can navigate making a phone call with one hand, I'm good. The point of putting all this shit on my phone is for it to be too complex for just one finger.
I need the thumb thing explained to me. I don't use my tablet (tablet!) single fingered all the time, and when I do, it's not my thumb. Are people typing (Swyping?) with their thumbs? I hold with my offhand and navigate/type/manipulate with my dominant hand, and sometimes I put the damned thing down and type two…
aka Bruce Wayne?
He's good looking and stuff (stuff!), but I'm just not seeing it. I haven't bought him as the indomitable fighter in Person of Interest yet, and he's had hours and hours to sell me that bill of goods.
Looking back at the pictures, all the well rendered ones are pretty much the same pose—just the one in the catsuit (why is it called that, anyway?) has her right hand in a different position. Other than that? Very much the same.
I just turned around from explaining epigenetics to my sister and read that...I'm, like, that is the opposite of what I just said...
You do know that not all gay men have anal sex and not only gay men have anal sex, right? Your equivalence is facile and stereotypical. If you're a gay guy who has anus hate, the earth goes right on spinning, and you go right on having orgasms. Very unimaginative to consider that an obstacle.
To be honest, the original title didn't say claim, it said confirm. But at least they thought better of that reasonably quickly. But sitting they were one of the sites they discuss would be admirable transparency.
Would you imagine she knew the risks?
I'm surprised that this article never got corrected, since the researchers still haven't, as far as research indicates, claimed these lions are not panthera leo. Some details are complicated to fact check, but this one is really easy.
Big cats are being hunted to extinction too, though. The people who are doing this are never going to think any animals are cute. They're not wired that way. Certainly not cuter than their health/libido/living room rug.
I was explaining to the OP that they got their terms wrong. What does your comment have to do with that? How can the difference between trademark and copyright "mean nothing if GW has the legal muscle to enforce"?
It means precisely everything. This article is about trademarks. Copyrights don't apply (and are never mentioned), the OP just got their terms confused. This has nothing to do with GW.