<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;mcdonald's&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Breakfast of Champions...</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10440213109/dailydirt-breakfast-champions.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10440213109/dailydirt-breakfast-champions.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Breakfast is supposedly the more important meal of the day. But does it matter what you eat for breakfast? There are plenty of incredibly unhealthy-sounding breakfast menus, but people are always coming up with even more outrageous breakfast items. Here are just a few examples of how kids can start their day.

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/02/12/how-about-some-soda-with-your-cereal-mountain-dew-rolls-out-juice-like-breakfast-drink/" href="http://ti.me/100FYS9">PepsiCo has a breakfast soda called Kickstart -- a Mountain Dew-flavored beverage with caffeine and some fruit juice and added vitamins.</a> Are you a backer for 92 milligrams of caffeine in a 16oz can? [<a href="http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/02/12/how-about-some-soda-with-your-cereal-mountain-dew-rolls-out-juice-like-breakfast-drink/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://laughingsquid.com/deep-fried-breakfast-cereal-debuted-at-san-diego-county-fair/" href="http://bit.ly/100Ga3W">All kinds of deep fried foods can be found at county fairs, and deep fried breakfast cereals are no exception.</a> Last year, the San Diego County Fair offered several kinds of breakfast cereals in a hot, crispy slightly chewy and delicious form (if you like fried stuff, and who doesn't). [<a href="http://laughingsquid.com/deep-fried-breakfast-cereal-debuted-at-san-diego-county-fair/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=251018" href="http://on.wtsp.com/100G24z">If there's an important state-wide standardized test, students should eat a good breakfast before they take it -- and they can get a free meal from McDonald's for taking the FCAT (in Florida) in 3rd to 11th grade.</a> And if anyone can correlate higher test scores with the students who ate at McDonald's.... [<a href="http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=251018">url</a>]</li>

</ul>

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a> via StumbleUpon.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10440213109/dailydirt-breakfast-champions.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10440213109/dailydirt-breakfast-champions.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10440213109/dailydirt-breakfast-champions.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110215/10440213109</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 19:39:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Court Forces Activist Objecting To Questionable Class Action Settlement To Shut Up And Promote The Settlement</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130222/17250522074/court-forces-activist-objecting-to-questionable-class-action-settlement-to-shut-up-promote-settlement.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130222/17250522074/court-forces-activist-objecting-to-questionable-class-action-settlement-to-shut-up-promote-settlement.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Here is a rather egregious violation of basic free speech rights.  For years, we've talked about how the class action process is quite frequently <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100324/0358238689.shtml">abused</a>, such that it makes lawyers quite wealthy, while doing next to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120730/01264019871/yet-again-netflix-class-action-shows-that-class-action-lawsuits-are-mostly-about-making-lawyers-rich.shtml">nothing</a> for the "class" they're representing.  In extreme cases, we've seen "settlements" that actually make the defendants in class actions <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20051102/1020224_F.shtml">better off</a>, while still making the lawyers (of course) quite wealthy.  The stories of companies being forced to pay up millions of dollars, with none of it going to actual "victims," are more common than you would imagine.
<br /><br />
So, when  Majed Moughni in Dearborn Michigan heard about such a class action settlement concerning McDonald's having sold non-halal Chicken McNuggets that were advertised as halal, he decided to protest the settlement and try to get others to do so.  The settlement was what is known as a cy pres settlement, in which the lawyers get paid and the defendant agrees to give a chunk of money to charity, rather than to the class (about $700,000 in this case).  There are, at times, good reasons for doing a cy pres award, but it can also be open to abuse.  Settlement agreements, by law, have a period of time in which people are free to object to a settlement before it is approved, and Moughni was doing exactly that, if at times crudely, with a Facebook page that may have gone a bit far in its claims.  Moughni was upset with the cy pres nature of the award, but also with the fact that there was no injunction that would block McDonald's from doing the same thing again.
<br /><br />
However, as Paul Levy, who is now representing Moughni, makes clear in a blog post about the motion he filed in the case, <a href="http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2013/02/injunction-against-facebook-poster-for-criticizing-mcdonalds-non-halal-meat-settlement.html" target="_blank">the court deciding to issue a broad injunction against Moughni</a>, barring him from talking about the case, while also <i>forcing</i> him to post the lawyers' view of the case, would appear to be a pretty blatant First Amendment violation:
<blockquote><i>
The lawyers for the plaintiff class <a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/DefamationDemandandResponse.pdf" target="_blank">threatened Moughni</a> with both a defamation suit and disciplinary charges (Moughni is a lawyer, although not by any means a specialist in class actions). Moughni would not back down, so the plaintiff&#8217;s lawyers <a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/MotionforInjunction.pdf" target="_blank">asked the judge</a> to shut down the page &#8212; or, more precisely, they asked that Moughni be required to take everything <strong>he </strong>had said about the case down, and to post on his Facebook page instead what <strong>they </strong>said (and what the Court had said) (That is why I am not linking to my client&#8217;s Facebook page &#8211; it isn&#8217;t really HIS page any more. Let the parties do their own publicity.) And, they asked that Moughni be forbidden to make any statements that class members might see or hear, such as by talking about the litigation to the press which, in turn, might print stories from which class members might learn Moughni&#8217;s views.<br /><br />
The lawyers continued their claim that they had been defamed, but really, they said, this isn&#8217;t about us, this is about protecting the poor class members against having their confidence in the lawyers undermined, protecting public confidence in the court system, and preventing class members from being confused about whether they should object to having their claims for damages extinguished so that settlement funds could go to the charities (and the lawyers). The judge held a hearing a few days later; plaintiff&#8217;s counsel spoke his piece, McDonald&#8217;s lawyers chimed in with their agreement, but Moughni&#8217;s attempt to speak was rebuffed with a peremptory &#8220;Don&#8217;t you even&#8221; from the judge. And the judge ruled, <a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/Injunction.pdf" target="_blank">granting the injunction</a> almost exactly as requested.
</i></blockquote>
As Levy notes, with class action settlements there is strong incentive for the lawyers from both sides and the judge to get the settlement approved.  It gets a case off the docket and gets the lawyers paid.  So this is a situation where all three of those parties have the incentive to team up against anyone who dares to raise questions about the settlement.  In fact, Levy noted that when he contacted the lawyers, noting his own intention to represent Moughni, they threatened <i>him</i> with sanction too.  Levy notes that Moughni's original Facebook post may not have been as carefully worded as one would hope, but in no way should that ever lead to a broad injunction, along with compelling speech one disagrees with, in response.  From <a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/MotiontoVacate.pdf" target="_blank">the filing</a>:
<blockquote><i>
Giving Moughni only a few days&#8217; notice, the Court convened an emergency hearing; then, without hearing from Moughni, issued a prior restraint of unparallelled breadth, barring Moughni from making <b>any</b> public statements about an entire subject matter, even statements that were entirely truthful and not at all misleading.  It further compelled him to place speech with which he fervently disagreed on his own web page; and it forbade him from dissemination, circulation or publication of any opt-out  form or objection during the crucial ten-day period before the deadline for members of the class to decide whether to opt out or object.  On a literal reading of the injunction, Moughni was barred even from speaking to his own wife and children about the settlement, and even from submitting an objection to the settlement on his own behalf.  
<br /><br />
While he was pro se, Moughni acknowledged that he is not an expert in class action procedure; as his counsel, we readily concede that some of his statements could have been worded more felicitously.  But Moughni was not counsel for a named party; he spoke only as a member of the affected community, and the Court&#8217;s order holding him to standards that would have been inappropriate even for a lawyer in the case violated black-letter law against prior restraints of speech. The injunction should, therefore, be vacated immediately.  In addition, during the crucial ten-day period before the opt-out or objection deadline, the order deprived the class of the opportunity to hear dissenting views about whether to go along with a settlement that potentially deprives them of valuable rights.  The Court should, therefore, reopen the period for the class to respond to the notice, and should defer any decision about approval of the settlement until that time has expired.
</i></blockquote>
Even if you agree that Moughni may have gone too far with some of his Facebook postings, completely denying his right to talk about and object to the settlement, while then forcing him to post information he disagreed with, seems like an egregious violation of his rights.  As Levy notes back in his blog post, whether or not the actual settlement is a good one is somewhat besides the point:
<blockquote><i>
Moughni has his own view, but our motion takes no position on the merits of the settlement: our only point is that Moughni ought to have the right to say what he thinks about the settlement, and that the remedy for speech claimed to be false is not less speech but more speech.  In my own mind, I have come to no conclusion about the merits of the proposed settlement.
<br /><br />
But that just leaves me wondering, if the settlement is so wonderful, why the lawyers felt they had to resort to suppressing critical speech instead of just putting their own replies into the marketplace of ideas.  At the hearing for an injunction, they had reminded the Court of how attentive the national media press had been to their publicity about the settlement (115 national media outlets, and a hundred million viewers, they claimed); surely the media would continue to give them a platform.
</i></blockquote>
Hopefully the court is willing to recognize its mistake and vacate the injunction quickly.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130222/17250522074/court-forces-activist-objecting-to-questionable-class-action-settlement-to-shut-up-promote-settlement.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130222/17250522074/court-forces-activist-objecting-to-questionable-class-action-settlement-to-shut-up-promote-settlement.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130222/17250522074/court-forces-activist-objecting-to-questionable-class-action-settlement-to-shut-up-promote-settlement.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>wow</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130222/17250522074</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 1 Feb 2013 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Fast Food, Faster!</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101101/17472511675/dailydirt-fast-food-faster.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101101/17472511675/dailydirt-fast-food-faster.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The fast food industry is always trying to be more efficient about its services. There have been lots of different ways to accomplish quicker fast food, and adding technology to the restaurant recipe sometimes works, but oftentimes doesn't (eg. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UWink">uWink Bistros</a>). Here are just a few examples for getting your hamburger orders filled faster.

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://momentummachines.com/#product" href="http://bit.ly/WTD3vh">Momentum Machines has a hamburger-making robot that can churn out about 360 burgers in an hour, each custom made to order.</a> This hamburger chef can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever... until you are full. [<a href="http://momentummachines.com/#product">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://web.archive.org/web/20030814101439/http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/08/01/leisure.mcdonalds.reut/index.html" href="http://bit.ly/119Y5wc">In 2003, McDonald's tested some automation equipment for grilling its burgers and cooking its french fries.</a> We <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030801/1345236.shtml">covered</a> this story about a decade ago, but we don't seem to be living in an all-robot McD's future now. Oh well. [<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20030814101439/http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/08/01/leisure.mcdonalds.reut/index.html">url</a>]</li>
 
<li> <a title="http://thenextweb.com/apps/2012/08/06/live-in-san-francisco-taskrabbit-will-deliver-an-in-n-out-burger-to-you-through-this-simple-site/" href="http://tnw.co/12bKXWu">If you're in San Francisco, you can get <s>an In&#038;Out</s> Super Duper burger delivered to you for just $10, fulfilled by TaskRabbit via a simple web-based order form.</a> It's not available any time, so there's no option to get french fries during the Renaissance. [<a href="http://thenextweb.com/apps/2012/08/06/live-in-san-francisco-taskrabbit-will-deliver-an-in-n-out-burger-to-you-through-this-simple-site/">url</a>]</li>


</ul>


If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101101/17472511675/dailydirt-fast-food-faster.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101101/17472511675/dailydirt-fast-food-faster.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101101/17472511675/dailydirt-fast-food-faster.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101101/17472511675</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:51:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Olympics Can't Hire Enough Actual Security, But Fully Staffed With 'Brand Police'</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120716/11465719713/olympics-cant-hire-enough-actual-security-fully-staffed-with-brand-police.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120716/11465719713/olympics-cant-hire-enough-actual-security-fully-staffed-with-brand-police.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've talked about how the Olympics are so focused on hiding any non-sponsor brand that they had officials in Beijing during the last Olympics <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080818/1248442014.shtml">tape over bathroom fixtures</a> from non-sponsoring companies.  And it was clear that this same sort of activity was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/07562718563/london-2012-olympics-win-gold-medal-cluelessness-banning-video-photo-uploads-to-social-media-during-games.shtml">set to continue</a> this time around in London, including a specific law against <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111019/08145216413/london-2012-olympics-go-gold-extreme-ambush-marketing-law-event-guilty-until-proven-innocent-no-streaking-allowed.shtml">"ambush marketing."</a>
<br /><br />
You may have heard the reports in London about the <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-33747_162-57473130/olympic-security-shortfall-called-absolute-chaos/" target="_blank">terrible security for the London Olympics</a> that has left things in "absolute chaos," due to a failure to hire enough security personnel.  In fact, there's talk of soldiers having to be called in to help.  Given all that, it's interesting to find out that the Olympics <i>do</i> have <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-flooded-with-brand-police-to-protect-sponsors-7945436.html" target="_blank">a fully-staffed "brand police" force</a>, which is heading around the city to carefully block any non-sponsor brands, and try to track down and kill off any kind of unpaid-for marketing.
<blockquote><i>
Almost 300 enforcement officers will be seen across the country checking firms to ensure they are not staging "ambush marketing" or illegally associating themselves with the Games at the expense of official sponsors such as Adidas, McDonald's, Coca-Cola and BP....
<br /><br />
Wearing purple caps and tops, the experts in trading and advertising working for the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) are heading the biggest brand protection operation staged in the UK. Under legislation specially introduced for the London Games, they have the right to enter shops and offices and bring court action with fines of up to &pound;20,000.
</i></blockquote>
So, if a terrorist attack happens to hit London over the next few weeks, at least we'll know that it wasn't sponsored by some non-paying brand.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120716/11465719713/olympics-cant-hire-enough-actual-security-fully-staffed-with-brand-police.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120716/11465719713/olympics-cant-hire-enough-actual-security-fully-staffed-with-brand-police.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120716/11465719713/olympics-cant-hire-enough-actual-security-fully-staffed-with-brand-police.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>that'll-work</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120716/11465719713</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2012 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Meaty Metrics</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120504/19304018792/dailydirt-meaty-metrics.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120504/19304018792/dailydirt-meaty-metrics.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Analyzing baseball statistics turned into a huge field called sabermetrics. A long time ago, geeks were weird people who performed strange stunts like biting the heads off chickens. But geeks nowadays are gathering stats on just about everything, so here are just a few meaty figures to chew on. 

<ul>
<li> <a title="http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/big-maconomics-how-mcdonalds-explains-the-world/256431/" href="http://bit.ly/IXgwZs">The Big Mac serves as an interesting economic tool -- providing a global standard for comparing national currencies and economic activity.</a> Analyzing the Big Mac consumption per country can show interesting trends in wages and how economies reacted to the Great Recession -- although not every country sells Big Macs. [<a href="http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/big-maconomics-how-mcdonalds-explains-the-world/256431/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/06/13/big_mac_prices_soar_26_in_argentina.html" href="http://slate.me/NWxzhT">The price of a Big Mac jumped 26% in Argentina because the government of Argentina was playing around with its national inflation numbers -- and pressuring McD's to keep its prices low.</a> If Big Macs didn't lose their freshness, there might have been an arbitrage opportunity.... [<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/06/13/big_mac_prices_soar_26_in_argentina.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://m.gawker.com/5895081/wendys-overthrows-burger-king-rivers-run-red-with-the-blood-of-burger-nobles" href="http://bit.ly/JbM2lG">The number two burger chain in the US (for 2011) goes to Wendy's -- as Wendy's US sales topped $8.5 billion and Burger King trailed at $8.4 billion.</a> McDonald's crushed both of them with $34 billion in sales last year. [<a href="http://m.gawker.com/5895081/wendys-overthrows-burger-king-rivers-run-red-with-the-blood-of-burger-nobles">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/04/daily-chart-17" href="http://econ.st/JT101u">The US consumed almost 38 million tons of meat in 2007 (at 125.4 kg per person), but Luxembourg is the country with the highest meat consumption per capita (136.5 kg per person).</a> Obviously, population figures into <a href="http://www.scribd.com/EconomistDailychart/d/91840616-Meat-Consumption-Per-Person">Luxembourg's bragging rights</a> -- and likewise China's population makes its consumption of 54.1kg of meat per person an impressive total of around 77 million tons. [<a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/04/daily-chart-17">url</a>]</li>

<li><b>To discover more food-related links, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102" href="http://bit.ly/iaJVJd">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120504/19304018792/dailydirt-meaty-metrics.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120504/19304018792/dailydirt-meaty-metrics.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120504/19304018792/dailydirt-meaty-metrics.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120504/19304018792</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Food By The Numbers...</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101122/05015411966/dailydirt-food-numbers.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101122/05015411966/dailydirt-food-numbers.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Some folks are obsessed with numbers. Others are obsessed with food. Combine these two tastes that taste great together and you get: <s>Reese's peanut butter cups</s> infographics about food. Here are just a few random sets of data on food consumption in the US.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://m.wired.com/magazine/2011/08/st_datagirlscoutcookies/" href="http://bit.ly/riVSq0">Just as you probably already knew: Thin Mints are the most popular Girl Scout cookies, raking in about 25% of Girl Scout cookie sales.</a> Samoas (aka Caramel deLites) come in at #2 with 19% of sales. [<a href="http://m.wired.com/magazine/2011/08/st_datagirlscoutcookies/">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/09/chart-this-is-what-you-eat-in-a-year-including-42-pounds-of-corn-syrup/244870/" href="http://bit.ly/nuXZq9">What does the average American consume in a year?</a> Hmm: 110 lbs of red meat vs 415 lbs of vegetables? Do those numbers sound right to you? [<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/09/chart-this-is-what-you-eat-in-a-year-including-42-pounds-of-corn-syrup/244870/">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://mashable.com/2011/06/04/fast-food-infographic/" href="http://on.mash.to/pjye4h">In a survey of 500 "dudes" (ages 18-35), 90% of them had visited a McDonald's in the last 3 months.</a> It's gotta be the fries -- a surprisingly high percentage of guys just get a drink or fries. [<a href="http://mashable.com/2011/06/04/fast-food-infographic/">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more food-related links, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102" href="http://bit.ly/iaJVJd">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101122/05015411966/dailydirt-food-numbers.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101122/05015411966/dailydirt-food-numbers.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101122/05015411966/dailydirt-food-numbers.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101122/05015411966</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Studying Advertising As A Science...?</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18433715644/dailydirt-studying-advertising-as-science.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18433715644/dailydirt-studying-advertising-as-science.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There's a quote attributed to John Wanamaker that goes: "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half." Marketing analytics is getting better all the time, but it's still pretty hard to pin down what really works. (At least the traveling salesman problem has a brute force approach!) Here are just a few interesting links about advertising.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20618-the-first-advertising-campaign-for-nonhuman-primates.html" href="http://bit.ly/ojxxVc">Sex sells. Here's a project that aims to prove it by advertising to monkeys.</a> Photoshopping the ideal female monkey form must be a pretty weird job... [<a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20618-the-first-advertising-campaign-for-nonhuman-primates.html">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-08-fine-art-advertising-backfire.html" href="http://bit.ly/rapMjn">There's some research that suggests that the special status of fine art could be lost if used in advertising carelessly.</a> Yah, like when I first heard The Beatles' Revolution in a Nike commercial. [<a href="http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-08-fine-art-advertising-backfire.html">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_bloom_the_origins_of_pleasure.html" href="http://bit.ly/pcy5TW">Authenticity is important -- even to a Nazi.</a> Psychologist Paul Bloom talks about how we're all essentialists at TED and mentions how kids could think veggies are tastier if they're included in a Happy Meal. [<a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_bloom_the_origins_of_pleasure.html">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more interesting advertising-related content, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:448" href="http://bit.ly/osqk34">check out what's floating around on StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:481">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 


By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18433715644/dailydirt-studying-advertising-as-science.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18433715644/dailydirt-studying-advertising-as-science.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18433715644/dailydirt-studying-advertising-as-science.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110823/18433715644</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Happier Meals on The Way</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175115270/dailydirt-happier-meals-way.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175115270/dailydirt-happier-meals-way.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Eating healthier has a lot of benefits. And all sorts of food distributors are trying to figure out ways to incorporate healthy snacks into people's meals... while still keeping profits as high as the usual not-so-healthy snacks. Here are just a few examples.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/07/26/138702964/bowing-to-pressure-mcdonalds-makes-happy-meals-more-healthful" href="http://n.pr/o2ICZh">McD's is about to change their Happy Meals by adding some healthier snacks to them.</a> Hmm. Does adding fries to a Healthy Meal make it a Happy Meal? [<a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/07/26/138702964/bowing-to-pressure-mcdonalds-makes-happy-meals-more-healthful">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://online.wsj.com/video/a-better-bag-of-salad/DB22A458-E930-4310-BF15-3280EFD8DCF9.html" href="http://on.wsj.com/nbTUiD">Healthier salads are on the way -- replacing romaine lettuce with other varieties of greens.</a> Not just healthier, but also more amenable to machine processing, too... [<a href="http://online.wsj.com/video/a-better-bag-of-salad/DB22A458-E930-4310-BF15-3280EFD8DCF9.html">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/154/the-new-junk-food.html" href="http://bit.ly/mM6sKW">Folks seem to like baby carrots a lot more than regular carrots... but not carrots cut up into little balls.</a> And don't advertise carrots as healthy anymore. [<a href="http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/154/the-new-junk-food.html">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more food-related links, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102" href="http://bit.ly/iaJVJd">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175115270/dailydirt-happier-meals-way.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175115270/dailydirt-happier-meals-way.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175115270/dailydirt-happier-meals-way.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110726/18175115270</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 10:40:32 PST</pubDate>
<title>Forget Hot Coffee, Now Disney Is Sued For Severe Burns From Nacho Cheese</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Perhaps no legal liability lawsuit brings out passionate arguments (on all sides) like the infamous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants" target="_blank">McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit</a>, in which McDonald's was sued and lost for providing a woman with coffee that was too hot (on appeal the case was eventually settled).  Some feel that the case is the quintessential example of bogus lawsuits, while others suggest that the case <a href="http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm" target="_blank">actually had merits</a>.  Of course, given its high profile nature, there have been attempts here or there to replicate it in some form or another, and up next, we've apparently <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/the-daily-disney/os-disney-lawsuit-child-burned-cheese20110210,0,2488936.story" target="_blank">got a lawsuit against Disney for serving nacho cheese at Disney World that was too darn hot</a>.
<br /><br />
A San Diego couple, Michael and Maria Harris claim that their 4-year-old son Isaiah had his face burned from "scalding hot" nacho cheese served to them at Disney World.  They appear to be claiming that Disney was negligent in making "no effort" to keep the nacho cheese at a reasonable temperature, and are claiming "permanent scarring, pain and suffering" to Isaiah from the burns, while the parents have suffered "emotional distress."  Perhaps there's more to the case than is in the article linked above, but shouldn't parents be at least somewhat responsible for keeping things that are scalding hot from their children's faces?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>keep-it-cool,-yo</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110211/12372613059</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Feb 2011 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: How Long Can Food Last?</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101109/21483811782/dailydirt-how-long-can-food-last.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101109/21483811782/dailydirt-how-long-can-food-last.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Preserving food in various ways has been a pretty important part of developing stable societies.  Without a reliable food supply, it's kind of hard to move forward and to do anything other than creating a stable food chain.  But with modern food processing, food can last indefinitely... though it may have gone a bit too far.  Here are just a few quick links on a how a few foods stand up to somewhat extreme conditions.

<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2004-08-13-twinkie_x.htm" href="http://bit.ly/hwGgUg">There's at least one Twinkie that lasted about 30 years with only a slight bit of mold growth.</a>  It's been a few more years since the last story on it, so maybe the mold finally finished it off.... Anyone have an update? [<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2004-08-13-twinkie_x.htm">url</a>]
</li><li> <a title="http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39656461/ns/today-foodwine/" href="http://bit.ly/hNRcPV">Happy Meals seem to be happy for a pretty long time, too.</a>  It's not like people *want* fast food to get moldy really quickly, but it'd be nice to find out which burger out there goes bad the fastest. (No cheating by humidifying them!) [<a href="http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39656461/ns/today-foodwine/">url</a>]
</li><li> <a title="http://gizmodo.com/5735026/humble-radish-survives-30-minutes-in-the-vacuum-of-space" href="http://bit.ly/hFo01Z">A 20-day-old radish will last about 30 minutes in the vacuum of space -- and still grow after returning to normal Earth conditions.</a>  Unprocessed foods seem to be pretty tough, too. [<a href="http://gizmodo.com/5735026/humble-radish-survives-30-minutes-in-the-vacuum-of-space">url</a>]
</li><li> <a title="http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/food/2010/08/warm-beer-and-cold-tomatoes-how-temperature-affects-flavor" href="http://bit.ly/hIhF7s">For best results, though, food flavors are usually fairly sensitive to temperature.</a>  Cold tomatoes and skunked beer are just a couple examples. [<a href="http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/food/2010/08/warm-beer-and-cold-tomatoes-how-temperature-affects-flavor">url</a>]
</li><li><b>To discover more food-related links, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102" href="http://bit.ly/iaJVJd">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101109/21483811782/dailydirt-how-long-can-food-last.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101109/21483811782/dailydirt-how-long-can-food-last.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101109/21483811782/dailydirt-how-long-can-food-last.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101109/21483811782</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:19:49 PST</pubDate>
<title>Film Your Kid Dancing To A McDonald's Happy Meal CD... Get A Takedown Notice From Google</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091230/0252517545.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091230/0252517545.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ One of the more famous examples of abuses of the YouTube video takedown process was the case of Lenz vs. Universal Music, which involved Universal Music issuing a YouTube DMCA takedown to a woman who posted a very short clip of her baby dancing to a Prince song that was playing in the background.  It was a clear case of fair use, and while after the woman filed a counternotice Universal chose not to sue, the EFF <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20070725/224422">filed a lawsuit</a> against Universal Music, saying that the DMCA notice was fraudulent, since it was such an obvious case of fair use.  While Universal Music argued that since fair use is just a "defense" and not a "right" it need not consider fair use in sending a takedown, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080821/0251282050.shtml">the court disagreed</a>.
<br /><br />
You would think, then, that any takedown notices on similar short videos of kids dancing to music would avoid a similar scenario.  <a href="http://twitter.com/copycense/statuses/7189321369" target="_blank">Copycense</a> points us to the news that a guy has <a href="http://www.tribbleagency.com/?p=6433" target="_blank">received a notice from Google of potential infringement for his short clip of his kid dancing along</a> to what appears to be a version (not the original) of the Kool &#038; The Gang song "Celebration."  As in the Lenz case, this video is a kid dancing to somewhere around 30 seconds of a song:
<center>
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MmqZQqdpxFE&#038;rel=0&#038;color1=0xb1b1b1&#038;color2=0xcfcfcf&#038;hl=en_US&#038;feature=player_embedded&#038;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MmqZQqdpxFE&#038;rel=0&#038;color1=0xb1b1b1&#038;color2=0xcfcfcf&#038;hl=en_US&#038;feature=player_embedded&#038;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
</center>
The <a href="http://www.tribbleagency.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Screenshot-22.png" target="_blank">notice</a> claims that the video contains content for which the copyright is held by record label Razor &#038; Tie.  The guy who got the takedown seems a bit confused, in that he appears to be blaming McDonald's for the mess, when it appears McDonald's had nothing at all to do with the takedown.  In fact, the record label Razor &#038; Tie may not have anything to do with it either... as I'll explain below.  The song used in the video was from a CD that came with a McDonald's Happy Meal.  Looking around, it appears that in April, McDonald's announced a promotion with record label Kidz Bop to issue <a href="http://www.moresay.com/2009/04/15/mcdonalds-happy-meal-kidz-bop-muisc-cd-may-2009/" target="_blank">music CDs</a>.  Razor &#038; Tie is the parent company of Kidz Bop.  The problem here is clearly not McDonald's.  All it did was include the CD in Happy Meals.  It's got nothing to do with the takedown, and the guy's anger at McDonald's is misplaced (though, you could make the argument -- and it's a stretch -- that McDonald's should tell its partners to avoid these sorts of ridiculous copyright claims that scare people away from buying Happy Meals).
<br /><br />
The next assumption, then, would be that Razor &#038; Tie is guilty of sending the takedown, but I don't think that's true.  If Razor &#038; Tie had sent a DMCA takedown, the video would be down.  When Google receives a DMCA takedown, it almost always (or perhaps always) pulls down the content immediately in order to retain its DMCA safe harbors.  The user would then need to file a counternotice to start the process of potentially getting the video back up.  The fact that the video is up and the notice the guy received simply tells him to review the videos suggests that no DMCA takedown was sent.
<br /><br />
Instead, the blame almost certainly lies with Google's content recognition engine/filters that the record labels pushed them to use to try to catch copyright infringement ahead of time.  Now, Razor &#038; Tie is somewhat complicit here, in that it appears to have uploaded its catalog to train Google's filters (if I remember correctly -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- Google needs the copyright holder to submit copies for its filter to work).  So, Google had this particular song on file, and noticed the similarity.  Google's filter algorithms don't appear to consider fair use (or, perhaps more likely, they do a bad job of it in many cases) and the guy then is sent the automated notification, even though it makes everyone -- McDonald's, Razor &#038; Tie <i>and</i> Google -- look bad, though the blame from the recipient appears to be in almost reverse order of culpability.
<br /><br />
Unfortunately, the guy who received the notice also appears to be confused concerning his own rights.  He says he is going to take down the video, though he clearly has a strong fair use case in asking for the video to be left alone.  It seems likely that Google would allow the video to stay up, and I highly doubt that Razor &#038; Tie would do anything else (it would be ridiculous to try to claim that this was not fair use).
<br /><br />
Either way, this highlights a variety of interesting things.  First, despite all the publicity of the Lenz case, these types of "takedowns" (even if it's not a DMCA takedown) still happen.  Second, people on the receiving end of these notices assume that there is no recourse that would allow the video to stay up.  People get official sounding notices and they assume they need to jump.  Third, Google's content match filter isn't particularly good on fair use issues.  Fourth, when these sorts of bogus notices are sent, it reflects very poorly on a variety of companies.  In this case, McDonald's is getting most of the blame, despite being almost entirely blameless (well, it did decide to put out these silly music CDs, but that's a separate issue).  Even Razor &#038; Tie may be getting misplaced blame (though it may depend on the "rules" it set for Google's filter).  Amusingly, it may be Google that deserves the most blame, and it appears to be getting the least.
<br /><br />
Still, no matter what the situation, it's simply ridiculous that a guy filming 30 seconds of his kid dancing should have to worry about <i>any</i> of this.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091230/0252517545.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091230/0252517545.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091230/0252517545.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>prince-redux</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091230/0252517545</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 7 Jul 2009 12:55:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>McDonald's Not Dismissed From Nude Photo Case... But It Can Sue Its Own Employee Too</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090706/0347385458.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090706/0347385458.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Last month, we wrote about McDonald's <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/1902015303.shtml">attempt</a> to get dismissed from a lawsuit involving a McDonald's employee who is <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081124/1611372937.shtml">accused</a> of uploading naked photos found on a phone that was left at the fast food joint.  Apparently, the company hasn't been dismissed from the lawsuit, but <a href="http://twitter.com/PrivacyLaw/statuses/2457276179" target="_new">Michael Scott</a> points out that the court has said that <a href="http://www.pogowasright.org/?p=1044" target="_new">McDonald's can sue the employee in question</a> over the matter for any damages.  The court appears to have said that because a McDonald's employee promised to safeguard the phone, it became the company's responsibility -- but the fact that the employee was then negligent allows McDonald's to separately sue the employee for any damages.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090706/0347385458.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090706/0347385458.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090706/0347385458.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>everybody-pile-on-now</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090706/0347385458</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:34:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>McDonald's: If An Employee Uploaded Nude Photos From Found Cameraphone, Sue The Employee, Not Us</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/1902015303.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/1902015303.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Late last year, we wrote about the odd case where a guy <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081124/1611372937.shtml">sued McDonald's</a> over the fact that naked photos of his wife appeared online.  Apparently, he had left his phone at a local McD's, and now claims that an employee uploaded the photos.  As we pointed out in the original post, we had a lot of trouble believing that McDonald's, the company, should in any way be liable.  What if the phone had been found by a random other customer?  The situation could have been exactly the same, but would the restaurant have been liable?  It appears McDonald's is making exactly that argument.  <a href="http://twitter.com/PrivacyLaw/statuses/2270816390" target="_new">Michael Scott</a> points out that the company has made it clear that, if anything was done wrong here, and it was done by the employee, <a href="http://www.pogowasright.org/?p=416" target="_new">it was done well outside the scope of employment</a> and it makes no sense for the company to be responsible for it.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/1902015303.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/1902015303.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/1902015303.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>would-you-like-fries-with-that</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090621/1902015303</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>