kvasir476 @ kvasir476 @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

53

Joined

2 yr. ago

Two things not mentioned it that article:

1. Why would anyone want to fight for a country that is so callously disinterested in the welfare of it's citizens?
2. In the last quarter-century it has become extremely apparent that the US Military is not the "global force for good" that it wants to portray itself as. Most young people probably aren't interested in joining up to commit war crimes in the name of making money for the military industrial complex.

No, bins marked for recycling batteries, phones, etc.

I don't know if they were/are at every store though.

Used to be bins right inside the door. If they're gone I'd just ask customer service.

Michael Reagan, the son of President Ronald Reagan, is an author, speaker and president of the Reagan Legacy Foundation.

Tells you all you need to know.

Yes.

Bruh, how can you laugh when the illuminati is shrinking men's taints?

Generally one of the more unhinged and disturbing things I've read. Even the ghouls who lead the charge to invade Iraq and Afghanistan weren't as callous and insane as to use nuclear weapons. Don't take this the wrong way, but IMO you should consider seeking professional help to deal with your anger and your indifference to massive human loss of life.

I custom designed and 3D-printed a prop from an anime I like.

Image from the show

What I made

This is a really cool question OP. Do you have anything you want to share?

So more kids are shot where there are more lax gun laws; who could have ever foreseen that?

IMO the difference between this and paparazzi is that you aren't legally compelled to allow the paparazzi to take photos of you. If paparazzi gets the photos then they're theirs, but you can at least try to prevent them from taking them.

US copyright law is unsalvageably fucked

Yes

I get that the copyright is traditionally held by the photographer and not the subject. I guess the issue I have with it is how Trump (or anyone charged with a crime) is legally compelled to allow it to be created.

Also, if we assume Fulton County Jail owns the copyright, could they sell mugshot merch? If yes, that's horrifically dystopian. If no, are they entitled to claw back any money made from the sale of mugshot merch?

Personally, I would like to live in the world where jails can't profit off the mugshots of their inmates.

That is not how public domain works, and the article contends that the copyright is owned by the law enforcement agency that took the mugshot. If the photo was public domain it would be free for anyone to use as they see fit.

You hate to defend Trump, but that's absolutely fucked. As far as I know you can't refuse a mugshot, so you're essentially compelled to release the rights to your likeness if you're charged with a crime. I could see the logic if you're convicted (under the 13th, which is still fucked), but that's crazy before a trial/guilty verdict.

Anyway, just a layman's take. Would love to hear what an actual lawyer has to say.