I remember when virtually every single game allowed you to play a ‘Demo’ for free, so you could find out exactly what the gameplay is like in any game before playing it. They often came in my cereal boxes as a kid, or free to pick up at the checkout. I still have a cool CD from the 2000s which has like five big studio name Demos in one.
Now that’s Pepperidge Farm Remembers. Or did I out myself as too old?
Do you really think the cats would accept that? The only reason they let us have the internet is due to our worship for them. Try telling a cat there’s no cats on the internet, see how fast they start “playing” with the ethernet cables…
With our love for wireless, 5G, impending skynet, and starlink internet – the skies are the future; and the birds are merely its inhabitants. And the cats know. The birds and sky was there since the beginning. Terra firma bound and unreachable, they dole out the sweetness. Hoping we’ll stay down and give 'em head scritches forever – never looking up. As one by one little birdies amass tomorrow to blot out the sun. Cat, king of the landline!
As stupid as it is, it doesn’t stop a creator from simply demonstrating issues, without commentary. Just show people the issues and don’t remark on them.
That being said, nobody should sign this. Trying to forbid people from making satirical remarks? What the crap?
They literally can’t do that. Satire is a protected right under the first amendment. Anyone can make public satirical remarks regardless of signing that contract.
You are aware that first amendment protects speech from government actions/bodies only. It’s not something you can use against a private business (there are other laws for discrimination.)
The point of the contract is that if one is in breach the company can sue for damages and potentially remove the offending media.
The suing process would be through a legal body such as a court system, in this case federal court since the media is on the Internet, therefore the contract doesn’t hold any legal binding. No federal court would uphold a contract that violates the first amendment.
Contracts adhere to laws and rules just like any other legal document. You can’t just put whatever you want into a contract and have it be binding.
Sure, but that term does not violate the first amendment since the government didn’t stop you from saying it, so would hold up. You might be able to get it thrown out due to something else, you would need a lawyer for that.
That contract will have penalties for violations, and those are what you would be subject to if in violation.
That’s not how that works. The contract is in and of itself a violation of the first amendment. Therefore it has no legal binding. They wouldn’t be able to remove the offending media from any platform or sue for damages if someone breached the contract.
If there are internal ramifications due to a breach of contract that’s something that could be handled internally, such as the content creator not being offered any review materials in the future. But a contract wouldn’t be necessary for that either way.
Moreover, specifically for satire, there are whole acts in the law advocating for it. There is absolutely nothing, no clause or agreement that would ever prohibit someone from publicly satiring any given entity. Regardless of any contract.
files.catbox.moe
Top