|
spwrozek posted:I realllllllllllllllllly hope you are not serious. See this? This is my serious typeface.
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:21 |
|
|
Midjack posted:See this? This is my serious typeface. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
r/Treelaw: Boy's invasive species of frog destroys 147 million hectares of native forest in my country - my lawyer says I am owed $4.7 quintillion dollars
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
R/legaladvice: Is it legal to resell sugar salvaged from a public roadway?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
You can take this thread to the bank. The money bank.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
Midjack posted:Does Australia not warn you that you’re about to accept a collect call? That's not how this scam works. There are high rate call prefixes. They are usually scammers, etc that are big enough to have their own rate center. Most carrier block these calls by default if they are especially egregious, but not all. Telecom is a really weird business. Ever wonder why things like eFax were free? Or lots of other VoIP numbers? It's because they need to drive traffic to their numbers because they are the underlying operator (or are getting a cut) on high rate center calls. Some do it in bulk by simply charging 2 to 5x as much for settlement between the carriers. Some gouge way more. Your particular carrier just might not consider one of those rate centers to be part of your "free calling" or whatever beyond a certain point, but they have 't met the regulatory threshold for "1-900" type calls. Motronic fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Mar 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:I thought Australia used the "Dollarydoo"? It's "Buckaroos."
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
No, you’re wrong. Buckaroos are cowboys. Dolleydoos are Australian currency.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
Murderball posted:You can take this thread to the bank. The money bank. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jji78uEW14
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
gently caress, I came here to post that, because Hard to Kill is amazing. Glad I scrolled all the way to the bottom, Senator Trent. The blood bottom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 04:23
|
|
|
Frank Dillinger posted:No, you’re wrong. Buckaroos are cowboys. Dolleydoos are Australian currency. It's dollarydoos but yeah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 05:43
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:I live in Australia and got a collect call from the International Drainage Commission in the states. It cost me nine hundred dollars. I really wish you had to pay  to make that joke.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 05:49
|
|
|
"buckaroo" is an anglicized bastardization of vaquero, the spanish tradition of horseback livestock herding techniques. those techniques came to mesoamerica and mexico via spanish colonialism, and mexican horsemen and rancheros were the earliest cowboys in california 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 05:53
|
|
|
BonerGhost posted:I really wish you had to pay isnt that the usual cost of a namechange
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 05:54
|
|
|
All this talk about Tree Law being fake has got me worried about the Tree That Owns Itself. I'm not looking any further into that one, because I must believe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 06:27
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:I live in Australia and got a collect call from the International Drainage Commission in the states. It cost me nine hundred dollars. That's a bloody outrage, that is!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 06:33
|
|
|
ChickenOfTomorrow posted:"buckaroo" is an anglicized bastardization of vaquero, the spanish tradition of horseback livestock herding techniques. those techniques came to mesoamerica and mexico via spanish colonialism, and mexican horsemen and rancheros were the earliest cowboys in california This is super sweet; I'm tossing this onto the trivia pile in my head. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
BonerGhost posted:I really wish you had to pay I will make a donation in your name to the Human Fund.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:I will make a donation in your name to the Human Fund. You should, it's money for people!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
Simpsons Reference posted:I will make a donation in your name to the Human Fund. Huh. Human fund.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
Chin Strap posted:In regards to the bathroom posted earlier https://motherboard.vice.com/amp/en...From%20%251%24s Holy poo poo! I hope every other room in their house still looks mundane as gently caress and it becomes known as the regular house with the one cursed bathroom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:All this talk about Tree Law being fake has got me worried about the Tree That Owns Itself. I'm not looking any further into that one, because I must believe. The tree is on public right-of-way and is managed by the city. It doesn't have its own plot on qpublic or anything. We'd murder the commissioners if they ever let anything happen to it though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
I think you'll find the current tree is the Son of The Tree That Owns Itself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
For a small fee, I will mail you some of its acorns so that you too can raise a tree with legal personhood.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
As a flesh and blood sovereign citizen, I am under no contract. You have instead contracted with my treeman
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:For a small fee, I will mail you some of its acorns so that you too can raise a tree with legal personhood. A treeman on the land.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
When you think about it, Weeping Willow trees are covered in fringe. The Admiralty of the Forest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
But what of maritime tree law?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
At what height does a tree fall under bird law? Or is it a matter of bird population density?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
The distinctions between plant, wildlife, and bird law are pretty interesting and largely based on how well/far the organism can move. You own a tree if it's on your land. You only have certain rights to an animal if it's on your land. Birds are literally governed by an international treaty because they frequently cross national borders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
what if the bird is nesting in my tree
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:what if the bird is nesting in my tree
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:16
|
|
|
It's true though if an RCW nests in your tree your pine plantation is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
no I mean, if tree law says that someone hacking down my tree means I get triple damages etc., but there is a bird nesting in that tree, do I get damages for loss-of-bird, or does the bird get damages based on its status, or is it piracy of some kind for stealing the bird's property in international also what if the bird made its nest out of materials stolen from the property of the neighbor who cut down my tree that had the bird's nest in it
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
You are not entitled to loss-of-bird damages, but the bird suitability of the tree would be calculated into the tree's value. The person who cut down the tree may be liable for violating the migratory bird treaty act or ESA. The bird cannot be prosecuted for stealing nesting materials. IANAL
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
This mashing up of sitcom references is making me thirsty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
Did you know if a tree is on the property line and part of it resides in each property, neither party can cut the tree down without permission from the other? Kallis v. Sonnes Crazy thing is the tree likely started off on just one property, but then grew and ended up on the other property too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:43
|
|
|
What about the sovereignty of anchor eggs?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
Does tree law contemplate the taxonomic ambiguity of the word "tree"? E.g, there are plants that are colloquially called "trees" but which are taxonomically not considered trees, and vice-versa.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 21:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:21 |
|
|
The Supreme Court once had to look at a similar case where there was a tariff in place on vegetables, but not fruit, and they decided that a tomato was legally a vegetable because it is commonly considered to be one, even though scientifically speaking it is a fruit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:04
|
|
