(July 7, 2014 at 11:51 am)Rhythm Wrote: ........um, no, check the user manual your language filter comes with. They did have every motivation. It was a high profile case with a very specific sort of claim. They knew they were going to face competent opposition. Their rights were - ostensibly- being infringed upon. They could save a few dimes if they won. The strength of their case translated directly to the strength of their overall groups opposition to the law. I'm sure I could go on and on.......but I'd say that's plenty of motivation to act, in fact - every motivation. They didn't act on any of it, they correctly judged that it wouldn't be necessary - it's either that...or their (presumably)very expensive lawyer is a rank fucking amateur in addition to their being hypocrites.So they had every motivation to act, but correctly judged that action wouldn't be necessary. Do you seriously not see the contradiction?
Quote:Christ man, we're all "jumping in" - it's a forum. I've also been "jumping in" prior to your comment and opining on their hypocrisy across two threads. Look, if you want to sound smart - red herrings, contradictions and such...l2fucking logic, firstly...and secondly, take the time to read through the damned thread.If you want to jump in with me, don't be such a douchebag.