omgitsbrilliant:

livindavidaloki:

redhjedi:

The Hulk ain’t never lied.

I can’t even express how much respect I have for Mark Ruffalo.  The dude’s on the US terrorism watchlist for fuck’s sake.

Omg, it’s true

(via fuckyeahloldemort)



Natalie Dormer SDCC 2014 Portraits by Entertainment Weekly

Natalie Dormer SDCC 2014 Portraits by Entertainment Weekly

(via discojellyfish)


my-dads-the-king-of-hell:

so apparently an arm can sell on the black market for $885, ($500 for the shoulder plus $385 for the hand an forearm) 

and a leg can sell for $500 (at least thats the lowest price of an albino leg so im guessing here) 

So when someone says “That’ll cost an arm ad a leg” they are roughly asking for $1,335

which is less than i would have guessed. 

(via fuckyeahloldemort)




50c:

are you crying

nah i yawned 

image

(via fuckyeahloldemort)


princexposition:

when ur mom says you need to get a job but u know ur not ready

image

(via fuckyeahloldemort)


flyestfemales:

allahonmymind:

goldenveil:

x

🌴

flyestfemales  // insta: @omarsamira

flyestfemales:

allahonmymind:

goldenveil:

x

🌴

flyestfemales  // insta: @omarsamira

(via littlecicada)


flacciddickpics:

nprradiopictures:

skunkbear:

So photographer David Slater wants Wikipedia to remove a monkey selfie that was taken with his camera. As you can see from this screen shot, Wikipedia says no: the monkey pressed the shutter so it owns the copyright.

We got NPR’s in-house legal counsel, Ashley Messenger, to weigh in. She said:

Traditional interpretation of copyright law is that the person who captured the image owns the copyright. That would be the monkey. The photographer’s best argument is that the monkey took the photo at his direction and therefore it’s work for hire. But that’s not a great argument because it’s not clear the monkey had the intent to work at the direction of the photographer nor is it clear there was “consideration” (value) exchanged for the work. So… It’s definitely an interesting question! Or the photographer could argue that leaving the camera to see what would happen is his work an therefore the monkey’s capture of the image was really the photographer’s art, but that would be a novel approach, to my knowledge.

Who ever thinks copyright law is boring is clearly wrong. -Emily

favorite current news piece

(via baldbeagle)


(via littlecicada)