Oh boy, let’s take this piece by piece…

DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A LAWYER AND THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE

First: let’s talk about the difference between copyright, patents, and trademark

A patent protects a method of doing something - like a novel piece of code, or a newly invented drug formula - from being duplicated and used or sold without your consent.

Copyright protects creative works - like art, books, and computer software - from being mimiced. It literally deals with the rights to copy something

Trademark protects brands - like a logo or company name - from being used by other people for profit. It usually deals with marketplace confusion, as when someone creates a competing product with a similar logo to try to benefit from the logo’s recognition and popularity.

So, with that said, what are YOU dealing with?

Well, since you’re not selling software or utilizing anything from the WatchDogs game universe, you’re pretty much free and clear on both patent and copyright.

What about trademark?

Well, on the one hand, you are not competing with Ubisoft in any way, nor are you attempting to represent yourself as related to WatchDogs. So, by the letter of the law (in the US), they don’t have a valid complaint.

However, trademark under US law has this funny feature where an entity that holds a trademark is required to vigorously defend it when they become aware of potential infringement. This is to prevent the selective application of trademark. That is, if I know John is using my trademark and I don’t go after him, then Steve uses my trademark too, I can’t suddenly claim to have an interest in defending it when I didn’t care before. Steve can point at the fact that I didn’t go after John and say “you already gave up your trademark by failing to enforce it”.

So how does this impact you? Well, unfortunately, even if you are technically allowed to use “dedsec” under US law, if Ubisoft has a trademark on the term “dedsec” specifically, AND if someone at Ubisoft became aware of your use of their trademark, they would likely come after you for trademark infringement just to cover their ass. You might even win in court, but it would cost a whole lot of money that you would likely never be able to recover.

The good news is that the very first step in a trademark dispute is a cease and desist letter. They’ll demand you stop using their trademark. At that point you can either comply, refuse, or offer to settle the matter by selling them the domain.

What you do with this information is up to you.

Thwo him to the fwooaa, Centuwion!

I’m an effort to get you an answer that isn’t dismissive:

1. Youth indoctrination, social conformity, and cultural isolation. If your parents, friends, and most of your community tells you something is true, you are unlikely to challenge it for a variety of reasons including trust (most of what they’ve taught you works for your daily life), tribal identity, etc

2. People naturally fear death, and one coping strategy for the existential fear of death is to convince yourself that the death of your body is not the end of your existence. Science does not provide a pathway to this coping strategy so people will accept or create belief systems that quell that fear, even in the face of contradictory evidence. Relieving the pressure of that fear is a strong motivator.

3. Release of responsibility. When there is no higher power to dictate moral absolutes, we are left feeling responsible for the complex decisions around what is or isn’t the appropriate course of action. And that shit is complicated and often anxiety inducing. Many people find comfort in offloading that work to a third party.

That it would be viewed as awkward and unwelcome by the other participants. Consent is key, yo

I go for the hug when I see friends I haven’t seen in a long time, or when I’m parting ways with someone I know I won’t see for a while. But it’s definitely not a regular occurrence

No, it’s not socially acceptable. Yes, I wish it were. I don’t know if I’d go for full on snuggling but I come from a physically affectionate family and in general wish people were more comfortable with that kind of thing

Sorry, this was pushing back on the person I replied to, not you. I generally agree with your take

Hmmm. I want to push back on this a bit…

We can all recognize deeply, egregiously unhealthy parasocial relationships, so I’m not going to bother talking about those.

But there are plenty of what I would call parasocial relationships the track back quite a long time in human history that I think are completely normal.

Take, for example, the famous athlete. If you find a particular athlete to be your favorite, and you watch their interviews whenever they’re available, and you get excited when they get paid a bunch of money in a trade, that’s a low-key parasocial relationship. Maybe you even send them regular fan mail, cheering them on when they do well or consoling them when they do poorly. You are invested in their life without reciprocity, and find joy and value in simply observing their existence.

There are lots of actors and actress that we love to love, where many people have formed a parasocial relationship: Tom Hanks and Keanu Reeves are two that come to mind.

These are situations that go beyond “yeah I’m a fan” and into feeling some level of investment in their success. It doesn’t have to be extreme.

I think, as with many things, there are healthy ways to engage in parasocial relationships in moderation. It becomes a problem when it becomes detrimental to your daily life, especially if it begins to replace other forms of human interaction. If it’s just a thing you enjoy on top of other, more typical relationships, them IMO there’s nothing wrong with that.

Ok, because it could be read the other way as well which would be seriously fucked up :/

Found the war criminal! 🙋

Are you suggesting that the massacre itself wasn’t a mistake?

EDIT: To clarify, are you saying it wasn’t an immoral choice? Or simply that it was intentional?

Oh I read the whole thing. Doesn’t change my opinion of your behavior one bit

Yikes. That’s a while lot of words just to show exactly how much you are part of the problem.

This isn’t about you. It was never about you. Your desire to pivot this to a class issue is some hardcore mansplaining. Get over yourself and listen to victims instead of thinking you know better than everyone.

You think most adults were 100lbs heavier than me at 18?

Bruh, based on your criteria I had until maybe 15 at the latest and then only for men on the larger end of the spectrum.

Fact is, my family was kind and loving, I associated with other families that were equally so, I went to a private school with caring, supportive teachers, and I was certainly never left alone with someone my parents didn’t know well.

Whether it happened a handful of times I can’t say, but I certainly have no memory of it until my mid to late teens when I started spending most of my time with people of my own accord and took more risks.

I was truly blessed to grow up the way I did. I’m sorry you didn’t have the same

ENORMOUS +1 for Sunshine + Moonlight. I’d play just about anything shy of a twitch shooter on it, if your network is nice and stable

Dr. Strange Bear

I’ll leave it up to you whether that’s Marvel’s Dr. Strange or a twist on Dr. Srange Love

Have a rough childhood? I was never in a room with an angry human who was a foot taller and 100lbs heavier until much later in life. Sounds like maybe there’s something to consider here in terms of normalizing aggressive male behavior… hmmm

Does the question say “with a bear, in an enclosed space, where the bear only has you as a source of food?” No, it didn’t. Your entire argument is based on “women - and people like you - are dumb and don’t know what they’re talking about if they think men are less scary than bears.” But the truth is, YOU don’t understand the question being posed. You are literally doing the thing that people have a problem with. You aren’t asking questions. You aren’t seeking clarification. You aren’t giving the benefit of the doubt. You aren’t trying to understand. You aren’t doing anything to indicate that you aren’t exactly the reason why so many women picked the bear.

You could have said all of this in a way that wasn’t being an ass. But you chose not to. Thank you for self-identifying as part of the problem.

deleted by creator

I understand that it wasn’t your intention, but by shifting the conversation towards “have these people been near an angry bear? Well I have” you inadvertently detract from the issue at hand. It misses the point of the conversation: everyone knows an angry bear in your face is a more immediate threat than an unknown average male on the street. That’s not why the women pick the bear.