THEN. THEN. PETA's attorney says that marriage in the Copyright Act is originally intended to refer to marriage between man and a woman
-
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
But of course marriage is different now omfg
2 réponses 5 Retweets 38 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Bea: Is there a similar holding by the Supreme Court that man and monkey are the same?
3 réponses 18 Retweets 90 j'aime -
-
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Smith: I don’t think Congress ever had the intent to grant an animal rights under the Act
2 réponses 2 Retweets 32 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Bea: Do we look to the administrative guidance of the Compendium at all? Is it entitled to Chevron deference?
1 réponse 0 Retweet 15 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
PETA says no. Bea asks if Skidmore deference—PETA says it must be treated as superficial guidance
1 réponse 0 Retweet 14 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Here comes Andrew Dhuey, legendary lawyer for the photographer David Slater
3 réponses 0 Retweet 12 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
He's really fond of his "monkey see, monkey sue" line.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 5 j'aime
i mean, it's a new day, a new audience
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.