Yeah, sure, but what right would they have to say not to use it in a defaming way if they couldn’t say not to use it any other way either? Who determines when using an IP for a political cause is defamation?

What would the basis for them losing one thing but not the other be? Seems like a case of “I want them to not have this but to keep this” even though it’s not actually logically consistent.

It’s been a pop culture fixture in the UK for sixty years, but decades being a deep cut even by the standards of sci-fi geeks in the US.

I don’t know how to tell you this, but this isn’t a court case. We do not need DNA evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he’s a dick.

I’m sure he’s a total dick in real life but dickish behavior is not enough to validate what I’ve already concluded anyway.

It’s so widely known they felt it necessary to make sure the school be kept up to date by them personally. Right.

He’s a student, not a member of the staff. Literally the only point is to harm his reputation beyond the means of the legal system by running around with a bullhorn about it. Why do we even have trials if we’re just going to say, oh, well, he hasn’t been punished YET, technically, so let’s harass him and yell the word…

What possible reason is there for contacting his school?

Streisand effect and all, but hot take: The family is in the wrong. There was absolutely zero reason to email his school about anything other than wanting to hurt someone who had hurt them. Just completely unnecessary and, yes, vindictive. This article is really gross for rubbing it in just how much human beings are…

I’m not sure what alternative clause you want instead.

I don’t know how to tell you this, but your ultimate freedom gangbang was done by a country that proceeded to haggle over how much of a person their slaves counted as for the purposes of census-taking. 

No one said it did, we’ve known practically since launch that it sold really well. There was obviously a huge amount of people condemning buying it, but considering how few of those people remained Harry Potter fans by then I’m not even sure there was an active “let’s boycott” movement considering they’d have not…

You’re assuming “those shitty thoughts he still has” are like, disliking gay people and not just using a word he shouldn’t say out loud. Will & Grace has nothing to do with this because around that time people his age said that word and it almost never had anything to do with actual gay people, it was a generic insult…

Just as as a supporting argument for the point about reproduction, which as I say in my response has to be justified with qualifiers like that to work.

They probably wouldn’t have announced the diagnosis if the situation hadn’t begun to crater.

I don’t think it’s alive, I just think your stated standards are arbitrary since it took you three tries to get it right. I’d have said it was an inert blob of material the first time.

If you want to say it’s not an organism because it’s an inert blob of material then go ahead, but you’re admitting that’s the better standard for if something is or isn’t an organism than “can it reproduce” if you can only justify the question with extra qualifiers. If this was five years ago before AI art hysteria…

This isn’t a species, it’s an individual.

That's a pretty harsh judgement towards people who can't reproduce.

Believe it or not, early life on Earth was extremely simple as well!