When you're already a week behind...
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Mike Driver
Alisa U Zemlji Chuda

★
sheepfilms

⁂

Kaledo Art

Janaina Medeiros
No title available
tumblr dot com
todays bird
taylor price
d e v o n

Product Placement
YOU ARE THE REASON
RMH
dirt enthusiast

roma★
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Belarus

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Brazil

seen from United States

seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Argentina

seen from United States
seen from Argentina
seen from Brazil
seen from Netherlands
@lazybrains
When you're already a week behind...
Yago Hortal (Spanish, b. 1983, Barcelona, Spain) - SP70, 2014 Paintings: Acrylics on Canvas
PSA the ppl who do these vids are from Minnesota
This is too ridiculous not to reblog.
1) the music 2) how does the person in there even see? 3) also skating over its own tail 4) how is NO ONE on the ice fazed by this at all? 5) skating over its own tail 6) also is it hot in there? 7) there is a freaking T-Rex on the ice- how is no one staring?
8) going so fast the head tips right back so it looks like it’s permanently screaming
Need this for a laugh to get me over the hump.
Last fall we shared photos of an awesome Pac-Man evening gown, now here’s the perfect suit to go with it. OppoSuits just released this geektastic Pac-Man suit that even comes with a matching tie. Be forewarned that wearing this suit may cause ghosts to follow you everywhere. But don’t worry, just keep your eyes peeled for free fruit.
Currently available here.
[via Robot6]
More *Republican* senators.
I was doodling smol birbs and ended up with a birb that looks like it’s having an existential crisis
After staring at a laptop for 18 hours straight to finish a brief.
This company developed machines so that any person could start their own plastic recycling workshop.
A client approached me about creating a website. I asked him what he wanted, and he didn’t respond. Instead, he wrote back a few days later with this question.
Client: Can I copy the layout from this website? It’s for a business that no longer exists.
Me: No, that’s illegal. You can’t use someone else’s property.
Client: But there’s nothing to prove who made it!
Me: It doesn’t matter, you’re not the creator, nor did you pay for that site. You can’t take what’s not yours.
Client: Seriously? This guy doesn’t have provide any contact info, his Behance portfolio is clearly abandoned and his personal website is down. How could anyone say that it’s plagiarism?
Me: I can. It’s plagiarism.
Client: But would anyone catch me?
Me: …
The kicker? I know the designer he wanted to rip off, and you’d better believe I’d let him know if this guy stole his work.
Wellll, depending on the exact design of the site that the client wanted to copy, his request may be more more theoretically illegal than actually illegal.
The client’s arguments in support of his design theft are clearly incorrect, but it is by no means clear-cut when (and how much) copying someone else’s web design constitutes intellectual property infringement.
While an original web design is copyrightable subject matter, there is also a concept called “scènes-à-faire” in copyright law. In a nutshell, it means that the common ideas or purely functional elements embodied in a work are not copyrightable. Web design, by its very nature, is neither purely aesthetic, nor purely functional. In fact, the best designs are admired for their ability to beautifully and efficiently present a user with the desired information.
All web designs include a number of functional elements - navigation, menu, headers, columns, etc. - and there are fairly standard versions of the arrangement of these elements. At what point a design moves from “standard” to “original,” however, is not something that is clearly established by the law. Even some arrangements that seem to have more ornamental elements to them - overlays, drop-downs, highlights, etc. - might still not be original enough, due to the sheer proliferation of similar web designs and the need for standardization across platforms and user experiences.
“Not every elegantly-executed, award-winning page constitutes an original idea.”
- Jay Judge, quoted by Paul Wallen in “Design Plagiarism: Myth or Reality?”
“Building on the same foundation as other sites — specifically, layout and information architecture — often leads to intuitiveness and familiarity for the end user.”
- Cameron Moll, “Good Designers Copy, Great Designers Steal”
This is an instance in which UI/UX-based design may actually work as a double-edged sword (and I would love to know if someone else has done more in-depth research on this issue). Design that is geared towards increasing the functionality of the website might not be considered copyrightable. (Savant Homes Inc. v. Collins, pp. 14-15, has a list of architectural elements that the court held to be unprotectable because architects use them for practical reasons.) So, as design evolves, and we can build better and better user experiences, the elements of the design that create those experiences might become less protectable.
None of that is to say that there is no such thing as copyright infringement of another’s web design. It exists; it’s just not very clear what the law would say that infringement looks like.
Because designers regularly take inspiration from collections of other websites, and there are common trends in the industry (such as the adoption of responsive web design), there has evolved an implicit code of ethics, in which copying of elements is permissible, but only in moderation ... Perhaps the optimal solution ... lies in the © symbol itself, which derives significance not in legal strength, but rather in the cultural expectations of the web design community ... This notice is a signal that self-respecting designers taking inspiration from a given site should not copy directly.
- Florina Yezril, Somewhere Beyond the © : Copyright and Web Design.
And none of that is to say that there is no value (intrinsic or monetary) in creating original design. The best designers will always be at the forefront of innovation, giving us a web that is ever more beautiful and accessible. Just replace “architect(ure)” with “web design(er)” in the following quote:
[A]rchitecture, by its very nature is a “transformative” rather than an “inventive” process. Because it is a public art form, architecture is taught and learned by studying other architects’ work ... An architects’ motives for creativity are more complex than profit. In order to stay current, an architect must always innovate: “[t]o copy others is necessary, but to copy oneself is pathetic.”
- Antoinette Vaca, The Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act: Much Ado about Something? pp.120-122.
P.S. If you want (a) a horror story about a legal client, and (b) a further very thorough discussion of copyright in [architecture] design, read this case (esp pp.1293-1295).
The difference between nerds and geeks.
Daniele Romagnoli
finals fashion
Or taking a shower...
me at this point in the semester
where is the lie
Too true
Chance the Rappers helps get sleeping bag coats to the homeless
The project, called Warmest Winter, comes from a recent partnership between the rapper and Detroit nonprofit the Empowerment Plan. The initiative aims to bring the coats to Chicago by asking donors to help support the manufacturing of the coats. Each coat costs $100 to “sponsor.” The incredible progress they’ve already made will warm your heart.
Follow @stylemic
This is awesome
Love this idea. I kind of want one for myself. Would be nice for the awesome #roadtrip I'm taking this summer. Or for watching tv on the couch.
Warning to student journalists: ‘Asking hostile questions and videotaping’ may be treated as ‘threatening or endangering health or safety’
The Ninth Circuit has just handed down an opinion in O’Brien v. Welty, a case in which my UCLA First Amendment Amicus Brief Clinic students and I filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Student Press Law Center and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. The opinion does reaffirm student rights to some extent, but I’m afraid it also jeopardizes them to some extent.
1. Neil O’Brien was an outspoken conservative student and something of a campus gadfly. Upset at an item in a campus student newspaper published by the Chicano and Latin American Studies Department, he decided to ask two faculty members questions about this, on video. According to the complaint — the allegations in which the court assumed to be factually accurate for purposes of its decision —
[Without an appointment, O’Brien a]pproached Defendant Torres’ office door which was open. With video camera on, Plaintiff asked Torres if he had approved of the “America” “White Savage” poem published in that “La Voz” student newspaper. Defendant Torres refused to speak to Plaintiff. Nevertheless, Plaintiff calmly insisted on speaking to Torres about that poem. Defendant Torres’ reaction was to pick up his telephone and call the Fresno State Campus Police. Plaintiff then left Defendant Torres’ office …. Plaintiff then approached the open office door of Defendant Lopes and asked her the same series of questions, with his video camera running. She refused to answer the questions, and when Plaintiff asked again, Lopes stated that she did not want to talk to him. She went to the door, closed it, and then called Campus Police.
(Note that the allegations are that O’Brien was standing outside the offices, and talking and recording through the office doors.)
O’Brien was then disciplined by the university on the grounds that his actions constituted “harassment” and “intimidation.” (He was not disciplined under any policy specifically restricting videorecording, since there was no such policy.) The Ninth Circuit concluded that the university policies were limited to speech and conduct that “threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person.” But the court concluded that O’Brien’s persistent questioning and recording could indeed be seen as such a threat or danger:
Professors at work in their personal offices do not generally expect to be confronted without warning by a student asking hostile questions and videotaping. If the uninvited student refuses to cease hostile questioning and refuses to leave a professor’s personal office after being requested to do so, as O’Brien admits occurred here, the professor may reasonably become concerned for his or her safety. O’Brien’s behavior as described in the FAC could be considered “harassment” or “intimidation” and threatening under an objective reasonableness standard.
This has pretty striking implications for student journalists: “Asking hostile questions and videotaping” professors — or staff members — through office doorways could be seen as punishable “threaten[ing] or endanger[ing] the health or safety of any person,” at least so long as the journalist refuses to immediately stop when told to do so. And this is so even when there’s no indication that the journalist has been violent or threatening in the past (since the court didn’t rely on any such indication about O’Brien here).
Indeed, since the court’s reasoning turns on the conduct being supposedly “threaten[ing] or “endanger[ing],” rather than (say) intrusive on privacy, it may well apply to merely asking hostile questions, without videotaping. “Professor Volokh, aren’t you responsible for the evil Volokh Conspiracy blog post about Donald Trump?” “Go away.” “No, professor Volokh, I insist that you talk to me for my article.” That might well be enough, under the Ninth Circuit’s decision, for a student journalist’s speech to be punishable “threaten[ing] or endanger[ing] the health or safety of any person.” (Note that O’Brien is just as protected by the First Amendment as are traditional journalists, which the court indeed acknowledged on p. 23 of the opinion.)
And of course the court’s reasoning would apply to speech said to university students as well. To be sure, they may not have personal offices, but if “asking hostile questions,” after once having been told to stop, can be seen as “threaten[ing] or endanger[ing] the health or safety of any person,” presumably that would apply even when no personal office is involved. I doubt that courts would conclude that professors are more fragile and more easily intimidated than are students.
So I’m troubled by the Ninth Circuit’s opinion on this score. I agree that universities must have the power to restrict speech that genuinely threatens and intimidates people (e.g., true threats of violence). But defining threat and intimidation as broadly as the Ninth Circuit does here strikes me as quite dangerous for campus speech.
(Note that the university may have power to impose some viewpoint-neutral and reasonable restrictions in parts of its buildings, even in the absence of threat or intimidation; e.g., no demonstrations in the hallways, or perhaps even no videorecording of people without their consent in university buildings, though that’s a hard call. But the court read this policy as limited to threatening or intimidating behavior, and the court upheld it precisely because it was so limited.)
2. At the same time, I think the Ninth Circuit was quite right in concluding that O’Brien’s case could go forward on an unconstitutional retaliation theory:
Otherwise lawful government action may nonetheless be unlawful if motivated by retaliation for having engaged in activity protected under the First Amendment…. Therefore, though O’Brien was appropriately subject to discipline for his confrontation of Dr. Torres and Dr. Lopes, he may state a claim under § 1983 if his allegations, taken as true, could plausibly show that the defendants’ actions in disciplining him were substantially motivated by his protected speech or expressive conduct….
O’Brien’s [Complaint] plausibly supports a First Amendment retaliation claim…. O’Brien has alleged facts showing that he engaged in speech and conduct protected by the First Amendment in the months leading up to his May 11 confrontation with Dr. Torres and Dr. Lopes. For example, beginning in fall 2010, O’Brien posted on a website his opposition to the student government president and the school administration. He also made several public records requests to Fresno State….
The [Complaint] alleges that prior to May 11, as a result of O’Brien’s political activities and his criticism of university faculty and administration, Dean Coon “requested that students and other faculty members gather information and complaints to use against” him. At least one student provided complaints and other documents to Coon pursuant to this request. Some of the defendants, as well as other faculty members, sent emails to President Welty, Vice President Oliaro, and Dean Coon, “demanding that [they] do something about [O’Brien].” … In addition, at about the same time, the director of alumni relations sent emails to other administrators, including the university’s communications director, requesting that they “do something” about O’Brien and his website. On May 11 itself, before O’Brien sought to videotape Dr. Torres and Dr. Lopes in their offices, O’Brien overheard Lopes saying that O’Brien was “stalking” the hallway, and Torres saying that the faculty “should post ‘wanted’ signs with pictures of [O’Brien’s] face on them to mock [him] and to serve as a warning to other students and faculty as to what [he] looked like and warn of [his] potential presence.”
The [Complaint] also alleges that at the disciplinary hearing on September 13, O’Brien was not given a full and fair opportunity to present his side of the story. The hearing officer refused to look at, or to allow O’Brien to show, the videotape of his encounters with Dr. Torres and Dr. Lopes even though O’Brien represented that the videotape would contradict Torres’ and Lopes’ accounts of what happened on May 11. Dean Coon made, at most, a half-hearted attempt to locate Detective Manucharyan, who was sitting in the lobby prepared to testify, and who would have testified about the contents of the videotape. And the university refused to allow O’Brien to record the proceedings, or to obtain a copy of the recording that the university made of the proceedings. We do not hold that O’Brien’s due process rights were violated in the hearing; that question is not before us. But we do point out that the university, and several of the defendants, did not facilitate — and indeed impeded — O’Brien in his attempt to document and explain his side of the story.
[Further,] Vice President Oliaro … imposed an additional sanction [beyond that recommended by the hearing officer], putting O’Brien on “disciplinary probation” … for the anticipated duration of his time at the university. The consequence of O’Brien’s probationary status was that, by university rule, he could not be the president or treasurer of the campus branch of Young Americans for Liberty, the political advocacy group that O’Brien himself had founded. Further, and also as a consequence of his probationary status, O’Brien could not hold a position in Fresno State student government. In other words, the sanction added by Oliaro sua sponte, above and beyond the sanction recommended by the hearing officer, took direct aim at O’Brien’s political activities on campus …. [And the Complaint alleges that] in the fall of 2012 university officials deleted posts made by O’Brien on university-managed Facebook pages, permanently blocking him from posting about certain issues, while at the same time allowing posts expressing left-leaning viewpoints to remain….
We hold that a retaliation claim has been stated because the allegations of the [Complaint], if believed, could reasonably support a conclusion that faculty members and administrators at Fresno State not only disagreed with the expressed political views of O’Brien, but also sought to punish and muzzle him in retaliation for his expression of those views.
Originally Found On: http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/c/34656/f/669424/s/4ecae077/sc/38/l/0L0Swashingtonpost0N0Cnews0Cvolokh0Econspiracy0Cwp0C20A160C0A40C0A70Cwarning0Eto0Estudent0Ejournalists0Easking0Ehostile0Equestions0Eand0Evideotaping0Emay0Ebe0Etreated0Eas0Ethreatening0Eor0Eendangering0Ehealth0Eor0Esafety0C/story01.htm
Wonder if the 2nd and 3rd circuits would have come out the same way, or if the "objective reasonableness" standard can change from coast to coast, depending on what level of (passive)aggressiveness is the norm?
Video: Genius Shower Thoughts with Nick Offerman (Part 2)
Things to think about while the clock ticks down to the deadline for your paper...
When someone starts talking back to the judge
I’m like…
Or when the witness calls out the cross-examining attorney for a mistake... 😳
Top Ten Rules of Law School
A professor at my school, who’s sole job is to make sure students succeed, made this list and I thought I’d share.
Treat law school like a job, then have a life. Make a schedule and plan to study for at least 8 hours a day (this includes classes).
Prepare for exams, not for class. Who cares if you look stupid in class?
Read ALL of the assigned material.
“Brief cases”, whether it is a traditional brief or book briefing, and know where the case fits into the big picture.
Ask questions. Don’t hesitate. Again, who cares if you look stupid in class?
During class listen carefully to what the professor says, especially if they’re standing in front of their notes. Don’t worry about what your classmates say unless the professor says its good or repeats it.
Review class notes everyday.
Use study groups, especially for practice exams.
Make your own outlines. You can use upperclassmen’s outlines as a guide.
Start outlining early.
Listen up kiddos cause this is actually great advice
I’ve seen a couple of the reblogs talk about how this doesn’t address triaging when you fall behind, or preparing for classes that you have participation marks in, which are both fair points, but I think both of those can and do fit into the general theme of what’s being talked about here (especially when you take into consideration that this advice was given by a professor talking to students in an attempt to motivate them to succeed).
1) Treat law school like a job, then have a life.
Maybe 8 hours a day doesn’t work for you. Maybe you’re the type who instead of spending 40 hours a week on law school over 5 days likes to spend 10 hours a day on law school for 4 days. Or you want to spread it out and spend 6 hours a day for 7 days.
Just like a job, sometimes you work overtime, and sometimes you take holidays off. But if you don’t treat law school with the respect of a job (even a job you hate) you are going to fall more than just behind.
2) Prepare for exams, not for class.
I think part of this comes down to know the materials for exams. Have a general knowledge of what you’re going to talk about in class. Even if you have seminar classes where you’re expected to participate, you aren’t expected to know the material yourself, perfectly, the first time around. Like, jesus, if I could do that what the hell am I paying all this money for a professor?
3) Read ALL of the assigned materials.
This is probably the one we all fail at. This is probably the one we all triage. I’ll be honest - I never fucking read for classes where I had an amazing professor who explained everything to me. I still bought the book (except for that one time in 3L…) and I still referenced it in my exams. But if I had one of those shitty professors who went all over the map with their lectures, damn right I was reading everything.
4) “Brief” all cases.
This has nothing to do with when you do this, only that you should do it. Brief them for your outlines for 100% finals. Brief them before class for participation classes/seminars. But for the love of god make yourself a little case cheat sheet. Nobody cases how you do it (IRAC, CIRAC, or some other unholy acronym), but future-you will thank you.
5) Ask Questions.
I don’t think anyone’s arguing with this.
6) Listen to what your professor says.
They are paid for this shit. They are marking your exams. If they say something twice, bold that shit in your notes.
7) Review class notes everyday
This is a strength of understanding thing. Good students do this. Lazy students (aka me) don’t. I would have absolutely have spent less time outlining for finals and studying had I done more work during the beginning of the semester, by reviewing my notes regularly.
8) Use study groups. Especially for practice exams.
Listen, you don’t have to be a weekly “everybody bring muffins” study group, but having friends in law school is a good thing. Got a shitload of reading to do for an open book exam? Split that shit between four people and create a reading study group. Everybody briefs ¼ of the book. Done.
Practice exams and your group of friends are a godsend. You go through and you issue spot. You talk about relevant cases. You talk about what the professor has highlighted about those cases. These, honestly, were some of the best study experiences I had.
9) Make your own outlines
For the love of god do this. No one’s brain works quite the same. Make an outline that works as a point of reference for you
The worst grades some of my smartest friends got were from classes where they just said “screw it, I’m using this person’s outline instead”
10) Start outlining early
Also great advice. Because you’re making your own, it takes time. In semesters where I had 5 finals, I was starting to outline in the end of October. Why? Because it gave me the time to do it at a steady pace and make outlines the way I liked them to look.
Look, the reality is, sometimes you aim to do this, and you don’t always hit the mark. Sometimes you have classes or commitments that demand different things from you. But for our 1L and 2L lawblr brethren (3Ls don’t count because we all know you’re set in your ways!) these can be great starting points to commit yourself to better law-school oriented study habits
Totally agree with points 1 (mostly), 2, 5, 6, 8 and 9. In my experience though, instead of killing yourself trying to study 8 hours per day (on top of the 6 hours you've already spent in class and the 20 hours per week you are working in an internship) and trying to read every page and brief every case, it's more efficient (and sanity-preserving) to:
1) Focus on going to class and taking thoughtful notes. Attend as many of your classes as possible. Even if you didn't do the reading, you'll pick up the gist of it by being in class and listening to what's being said instead of surfing Facebook.
2) Find 2Ls and 3Ls who have done what you want to do and learn from them This was one of the biggest factors to my success 1L year. It wasn't just finding students who had previously done well in my classes and getting their outlines and the scoop on the professor, it was also finding 2Ls and 3Ls that had the kinds of jobs lined up that I wanted to have and asking them how they got there. Grades aren't the only important thing; you need to know what kinds of experiences on your resume will tick the right boxes for the kind of prospective employer you want. The earlier you start building those experiences, the more boxes you can tick.
3) Try to get the "big picture" When you are outlining, instead of just re-writing all your class notes, try to organize the issues in a way that flows. Usually courses are structured so that the ideas build on one another as you go along. For example, my contracts professor suggested making a flow chart: do we have a contract? If so, what are the terms? Is there any reason the terms wouldn't be enforced? If there is a breach, what are possible remedies?