History Main / ArtisticLicenseLaw

13th Jun '18 3:38:38 PM Hjortron18
Is there an issue? Send a Message


->'''Strong Bad''': This is a sub-poe-eena! I summons Exhibit 4-B to my chambers!\\
'''Homestar Runner''': Sustained! (hits self in face with gavel)

to:

->'''Strong Bad''': Bad:''' This is a sub-poe-eena! I summons Exhibit 4-B to my chambers!\\
'''Homestar Runner''': Runner:''' Sustained! (hits ''[hits self in face with gavel)gavel]''
1st Jun '18 8:17:27 PM HasturHasturHastur
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* AbominationAccusationAttack: Making these is a great way to find yourself receiving a cease-and-desist from the other party's attorney, and if you don't back off or they can demonstrate that they suffered economic harm as the result of inflammatory falsehoods, you have a good shot at finding yourself on the wrong end of a defamation suit.
28th May '18 4:57:23 PM Vilui
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* NoWarrantNoProblem: Varies by jurisdiction, but broadly speaking it is illegal in most jurisdictions (either barging into a house to obtain evidence without a warrant or stalking a suspect for the sake of PerpSweating) "In plain view" is the most common exception (i.e., the police pulled you over for expired tags and spotted meth-making equipment through the back window), but most exceptions are extremely circumstantial.

to:

* NoWarrantNoProblem: Varies by jurisdiction, but broadly speaking it is illegal in most jurisdictions (either barging into a house to obtain evidence without a warrant or stalking a suspect for the sake of PerpSweating) "In plain view" is the most common exception (i.e.(e.g., the police pulled you over for expired tags and spotted meth-making equipment through the back window), but most exceptions are extremely circumstantial.
28th May '18 4:27:19 PM Vilui
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ConvictionByContradiction: While a legal case has to hold together logically to some extent, "logic dictates that this must be what happened" is ''not'' sufficient for a conviction in a criminal case. In a civil case, the principle of ''res ipsa loquitur'' (the thing speaks for itself) applies, and it basically amounts to "we can't conclusively prove just ''how'' this occurred, but there is simply no explanation that does not open the defendant up to liability" (i.e., a section of pallet racking collapses and crushes an employee; whatever the reason may be, properly maintained and loaded pallet racks are not supposed to suddenly collapse on people). Furthermore, an investigation that seems may be running solely on the fact someone used [[SuspiciouslySpecificTense the wrong grammar]] on his statement as "'''the''' clue" (to give an example, but equally flimsy things have been used in fiction) would probably be dismissed as harassment.

to:

* ConvictionByContradiction: While a legal case has to hold together logically to some extent, "logic dictates that this must be what happened" is ''not'' sufficient for a conviction in a criminal case. In a civil case, the principle of ''res ipsa loquitur'' (the thing speaks for itself) applies, and it basically amounts to "we can't conclusively prove just ''how'' this occurred, but there is simply no explanation that does not open the defendant up to liability" (i.e.(e.g., a section of pallet racking collapses and crushes an employee; whatever the reason may be, properly maintained and loaded pallet racks are not supposed to suddenly collapse on people). Furthermore, an investigation that seems may be running solely on the fact someone used [[SuspiciouslySpecificTense the wrong grammar]] on his statement as "'''the''' clue" (to give an example, but equally flimsy things have been used in fiction) would probably be dismissed as harassment.
7th May '18 10:20:15 PM marcoasalazarm
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* LeonineContract: Varies wildly by jurisdiction, but in general contracts that have flat-out inhumane terms and conditions (such as forcing the signer to become a literal life-long slave of whoever owns the document) are considered unenforceable or at least severely looked down on by the law.
6th May '18 8:30:24 AM StarSword
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** In real life, the Geneva Conventions actually ''don't'' outlaw bioweapons; those are covered by a different set of treaties (the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibits their use but not their creation, while the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention outlaws them altogether). However, in addition to citing the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention as above, Burnham also cites a fictional 22nd century version of the Conventions under which these are apparently covered.

to:

** In real life, the 1949 Fourth Geneva Conventions Convention cited actually ''don't'' ''doesn't'' outlaw bioweapons; those are covered by a different set of treaties (the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibits their use but not their creation, while the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention outlaws them altogether). However, in addition to citing the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention as above, Burnham also cites a fictional 22nd century version of the Conventions under which these are apparently covered.
19th Apr '18 11:41:15 AM HasturHasturHastur
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* FreudianExcuse: In fiction, defense attorneys have a pretty good track record with getting clients off incredibly light or getting them off completely by using a deeply painful or abusive childhood or a generally terrible life as a defense for why they did what they did. In real life, courts don't really care about how shitty your childhood was or how much your life sucks for the most part, they just care about what you are accused of doing. If it ''does'' come up, it's usually during sentencing, though it can also affect flimsier charges (usually by invalidating the intent portion) and may also be a factor in competence evaluations and/or insanity pleas, as people who have been so warped by trauma as to become fundamentally divorced from reality may present a compelling case for insanity or incompetence.

to:

* FreudianExcuse: In fiction, defense attorneys have a pretty good track record with getting clients off incredibly light or getting them off completely by using a deeply painful or abusive childhood or a generally terrible life as a defense for why they did what they did. In real life, courts don't really care about how shitty your childhood was or how much your life sucks for the most part, they just care about what you are accused of doing. If it ''does'' come up, it's usually during sentencing, though it can also affect flimsier charges (usually by invalidating the intent portion) and may also be a factor in competence evaluations and/or insanity pleas, as people who have been so warped by trauma as to become fundamentally divorced from reality may present a compelling case for an insanity plea or incompetence.incompetence finding.
19th Apr '18 11:32:59 AM HasturHasturHastur
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* FreudianExcuse: In fiction, defense attorneys have a pretty good track record with getting clients off incredibly light or getting them off completely by using a deeply painful or abusive childhood or a generally terrible life as a defense for why they did what they did. In real life, courts don't really care about how shitty your childhood was or how much your life sucks for the most part, they just care about what you are accused of doing. If it ''does'' come up, it's usually during sentencing, though it can also affect flimsier charges (usually by invalidating the intent portion) and may also be a factor in competence evaluations and/or insanity pleas, as people who have been so warped by trauma as to become fundamentally divorced from reality may present a compelling case for insanity or incompetence.
10th Apr '18 11:22:29 AM rjd1922
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ConvictionByContradiction: While a legal case has to hold together logically to some extent, "logic dictates that this must be what happened" is ''not'' sufficient for a conviction in a criminal case. In a civil case, the principle of ''res ipsa loquitur'' (the thing speaks for itself) applies, and it basically amounts to "we can't conclusively prove just ''how'' this occurred, but there is simply no explanation that does not open the defendant up to liability" (i.e., a section of pallet racking collapses and crushes an employee; whatever the reason may be, properly maintained and loaded pallet racks are not supposed to suddenly collapse on people). Furthermore, an investigation that seems may be running solely on the fact someone used [[SuspiciouslySpecificGrammar the wrong grammar]] on his statement as "'''the''' clue" (to give an example, but equally flimsy things have been used in fiction) would probably be dismissed as harassment.

to:

* ConvictionByContradiction: While a legal case has to hold together logically to some extent, "logic dictates that this must be what happened" is ''not'' sufficient for a conviction in a criminal case. In a civil case, the principle of ''res ipsa loquitur'' (the thing speaks for itself) applies, and it basically amounts to "we can't conclusively prove just ''how'' this occurred, but there is simply no explanation that does not open the defendant up to liability" (i.e., a section of pallet racking collapses and crushes an employee; whatever the reason may be, properly maintained and loaded pallet racks are not supposed to suddenly collapse on people). Furthermore, an investigation that seems may be running solely on the fact someone used [[SuspiciouslySpecificGrammar [[SuspiciouslySpecificTense the wrong grammar]] on his statement as "'''the''' clue" (to give an example, but equally flimsy things have been used in fiction) would probably be dismissed as harassment.
10th Apr '18 11:13:03 AM rjd1922
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* DiplomaticImpunity: Real-life abuses of it definitely occur, but any nation that values its relationship with the host country ''will'' deal with it. International incidents do not exactly foster goodwill, especially serious criminal offenses. Should the sending country not deal with it, the host can always make the offender "persona non grata" (or, in layman's terms, "you've more than worn out your welcome, get out and don't come back"), which is not great for international relations, but neither is inaction on the sender's part. Matters can be complicated in cases where the offender has committed an offense that is treated far more harshly in the sending country.

to:

* DiplomaticImpunity: Real-life abuses of it definitely occur, but any nation that values its relationship with the host country ''will'' deal with it. International incidents do not exactly foster goodwill, especially serious criminal offenses. Should the sending country not deal with it, the host can always make the offender "persona non grata" "PersonaNonGrata" (or, in layman's terms, "you've more than worn out your welcome, get out and don't come back"), which is not great for international relations, but neither is inaction on the sender's part. Matters can be complicated in cases where the offender has committed an offense that is treated far more harshly in the sending country.
This list shows the last 10 events of 459. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.ArtisticLicenseLaw