pemerton's latest activity

Arguably, the word "arguably" is a word indicating that the statement is "arguable" and not an assertion of uncontroverted fact...

No there would not have to be. That statement is not the matter being litigated. Why do you think it would?

I found the closing paragraph a little self-important: All we know is that like that soldier, Margaret and I are both willing to stand...

No dissent from any of that - we're all speculating here. But I think this is consistent with my (mild, but also genuine) scepticism...

I mean Superman, of course, though I was being coy and should have been direct. The point of copyright may be as you say, but the point...

The claim that there are few or not intended non-literal or non-surface meanings in JRRT's work simply isn't true. Nowhere does JRRT...

Rewrites under editorial direction/suggestion - sure. In response to sensitivity reading? I'm less persuaded. I've got no view on...

The lawsuit document explains (i) how 70+ pages of rewrites were done to meet WotC's requirements, and (ii) how WotC's conduct has cost...

"Allegory" has a technical meaning when JRRT denies that his work is allegory - roughly, "isomorphism". It's not a synonym for...

WotC never contracted the authors to do any work. They licensed some IP. The authors were to be paid by the publisher. Part of their...

I don't think it's clear that WotC "reversed" anything: Para 5: "By June 2019, Defendant received and approved a full outline of the...

@Mistwell Here's the bit about WotC retaining payments, from para 25: Per the terms of the License Agreement, Plaintiff-Creators in...

IANAL, but as far as I know the answer is a somewhat roundabout "yes, that is required". It's called the Erie doctrine.

Cool, thanks. Makes sense, especially in the diversity jurisdiction context. This bit caught my eye: "the [federal] court may elect to...

There's no contradiction. Here's the passage (from para 2): their Dragonlance World of Krynn is arguably the most successful and...