<?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 filed under &quot;failures&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 6 May 2013 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Ads Gone Wrong</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110222/02530313202/dailydirt-ads-gone-wrong.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110222/02530313202/dailydirt-ads-gone-wrong.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Commercials are always trying to get people's attention -- sometimes by being controversial and sometimes by being shocking. But even when a company tries to broadcast only sensitive and feel-good messages, there will always be some folks pointing out that companies <a href="http://bellejarblog.wordpress.com/2013/04/22/dove-does-not-give-a-shit-about-whether-or-not-you-feel-beautiful/">don't really care</a> about people as much as profits. Here are just a few advertisements that might have <i>just</i> missed getting their message across.

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/03/22/ford_india_should_probably_fire_its_ad_execs_for_depicting_bound_and_gagged.html" href="http://slate.me/18iS4hm">Why is it that car companies seem to have a hard time NOT making offensive ads? Ford India recently apologized for some terrible ads depicting bound and gagged women in the spacious hatchback trunk of a Ford Figo.</a> But Ford wasn't the only example, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130503/07291422934/hyundai-tries-fails-to-make-its-awful-suicide-ad-disappear-internet.shtml">Hyundai</a> and <a href="http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-MM4LWO1A74E901-62QJI53CLS35K5JJL3U98HUR3O">GM</a> also had some horrible commercials to retract recently. [<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/03/22/ford_india_should_probably_fire_its_ad_execs_for_depicting_bound_and_gagged.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://mashable.com/2012/09/13/dr-pepper-facebook-controversy/" href="http://on.mash.to/18bfPYB">Dr Pepper posted an ad on Facebook with a common geeky joke, showing the evolution of humans -- starting with a chimp-like ancestor and ending with a modern upright person holding a can of his favorite beverage.</a> Poking the beehive of anti-evolution religious folks might be a fairly safe way of creating some controversy, but it probably doesn't sell that much more sugar water. [<a href="http://mashable.com/2012/09/13/dr-pepper-facebook-controversy/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.good.is/posts/why-should-women-read-the-economist/" href="http://bit.ly/18bdwEW">The Economist once ran an ad for itself, asking "Why should women read The Economist?"</a> Maybe publications written by -- and read by -- mostly men should be a bit more careful when trying to step away from being a "Maxim for nerds"..? [<a href="http://www.good.is/posts/why-should-women-read-the-economist/">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/20110222/02530313202/dailydirt-ads-gone-wrong.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110222/02530313202/dailydirt-ads-gone-wrong.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110222/02530313202/dailydirt-ads-gone-wrong.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=20110222/02530313202</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 05:45:56 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Ubisoft uPlay Launcher Exploit Strips DRM From All Publisher's Games</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130409/13010922637/ubisoft-uplay-launcher-exploit-strips-drm-all-publishers-games.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130409/13010922637/ubisoft-uplay-launcher-exploit-strips-drm-all-publishers-games.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>
<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?company=ubisoft">Ubisoft's</a> history of DRM use has been...interesting. One could nearly write an entire book on how to fail at DRM using nothing but examples from the company. DRM that allows hackers to take <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120730/04291119876/ubisoft-drm-fiasco-allows-any-website-to-take-control-your-computer.shtml">control</a> of gamers' machines. DRM <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120203/07550617650/ubisoft-cuts-off-legit-players-with-drm-server-migration-pirates-play.shtml">punishing</a> only paying customers when Ubisoft decides to move their servers. DRM that is, seriously, comprised of f$#%ing <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101203/09510612115/ubisofts-new-drm-vuvuzelas.shtml">vuvuzelas</a>. What you'll notice as a trend in these examples, however, is that at least Ubisoft was content to punish only their own customers or themselves, depending on the situation.
<br /><br />
Not so, any longer. Their uPlay client for PCs was built so poorly that a simple tool developed by hackers can fool the client into thinking users already own copies of games, allowing for completely <a href="http://paritynews.com/security/item/950-ubisoft-uplay-launcher-hack-leads-to-far-car-3-blood-dragon-leak">DRM-free versions of games from <i>other</i> publishers</a> to be downloaded for free from their platform. As an apparent sign of solidarity by Ubisoft, they also managed to offer up their own unreleased game via the exploit as well.
<blockquote>
<i>The vulnerability is allegedly present in the uPlay launcher, which when exploited gives DRM free access to gaming titles from almost all game publishers including the likes of EA Games and Square Nix. Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, which hasn&rsquo;t been released yet, is lying on Ubisoft servers which hackers have downloaded. As a proof of the exploit, hackers even posted an 1 hour 30 mins <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xyv493_far-cry-3-blood-dragon-leaked_videogames">long footage of the game</a>.</i>
</blockquote>
Typically, when one does something over a long period of time, one gets better at it. Ubisoft appears to be an anomaly in this respect, going so far backwards on the practice of DRM that even their own client software can strip it out with but a little assistance from hackers. Nevermind how stupid and useless DRM is to begin with; now publishers can't even trust the software that is supposed to deliver it. With enemies of DRM hidden everywhere, even in inanimate software, perhaps it's time to give it up entirely.
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130409/13010922637/ubisoft-uplay-launcher-exploit-strips-drm-all-publishers-games.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130409/13010922637/ubisoft-uplay-launcher-exploit-strips-drm-all-publishers-games.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130409/13010922637/ubisoft-uplay-launcher-exploit-strips-drm-all-publishers-games.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>oopsie</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130409/13010922637</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:59:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Maybe E*Trade Should Stop Giving Four-Year Contracts To Its CEOs</title>
<dc:creator>Dealbreaker</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130404/00394122569/maybe-etrade-should-stop-giving-four-year-contracts-to-its-ceos.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130404/00394122569/maybe-etrade-should-stop-giving-four-year-contracts-to-its-ceos.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <div style="text-align:center;padding:7px 7px 3px 7px;margin:0 0 7px 15px;border:2px solid #bbb;float:right;line-height:1.2;">
<i style="font-weight:bold;color:#666;font-size:90%;">Cross-posted from</i><br />
<a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/04/maybe-etrade-should-stop-giving-four-year-contracts-to-its-ceos/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/vrrj9mY.png" width="120" title="Dealbreaker" style="margin:0;" alt="Dealbreaker" /></a></div>

Like the four who held the job before him since its, er, difficulties began five-and-a-half years ago, Steve Freiberg did not do a particularly good job running E*Trade. But he&#8217;s been <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390301633918728.html">compensated handsomely</a> for facing the wrath of an <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390540829139244.html">angry Ken Griffin</a> before getting a pink slip in August.<span id="more-100782"></span>
<blockquote><i>
<p>
E*Trade Financial Corp. said it paid its former Chief Executive Steven Freiberg $10.7 million in 2012, including a severance payment, according to a regulatory filing early Friday.
</p>
<p>
In its proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the online brokerage said Mr. Freiberg received $3 million in stock awards, $630,769 in salary and a $7 million lump sum cash severance payment.
</p>
<p>
E*Trade also said Mr. Freiberg collected a prorated bonus of $1.6 million paid in February and outstanding equity awards, which were valued at $3.3 million under an accelerated vesting schedule.
</p>
</i></blockquote>
<p>
E*Trade also handed over $2.5 million to its chairman, Frank Petrilli, including $2.2 million for doing Freiberg&#8217;s old job during the waning days of 2012. And E*Trade wasn&#8217;t the only <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390593646157614.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">good place to be a former or soon-to-be-former CEO</a> last year.
</p>
<blockquote><i>
<p>
Marsh &#038; McLennan Cos. gave outgoing chief executive Brian Duperreault a $17 million pay package last year, a 17% increase from 2011, according to the company&#8217;s annual proxy released Friday.
</p>
<p>
Mr. Duperreault&#8217;s compensation included a $1 million salary, stock and option awards of $10 million, and a $5 million bonus. It also included the personal use of the company&#8217;s corporate jet, valued at $441,875.
</p>
<p>
Mr. Duperreault, a longtime insurance executive who ran Marsh &#038; McLennan for five years, stepped down at the end of 2012. The proxy said his pay increase was based in part on the company&#8217;s financial performance for the year, his work in positioning the company for future growth, and the &#8220;successful transition of CEO responsibilities&#8221; to Mr. Glaser.
</p>
</i>
</blockquote>
<p>
Good Friday compensation disclosures were less kind to the poor schmucks who still have to run their companies. Charles Schwab CEO Walt Bettinger <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324000704578390603277877168.html">hasn&#8217;t gotten a raise in four years</a>, and the IntercontinentalExchange gave CEO Jeffrey Sprecher a <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390540829139244.html">15% pay cut</a> for the year in which he bought the fucking New York Stock Exchange.
</p>
<blockquote><i>
<p>
Mr. Sprecher, who has led ICE since its formation in 2000, in 2011 was the second-highest-paid exchange CEO after Duncan Niederauer, CEO of NYSE. Under terms of NYSE&#8217;s deal with ICE, Mr. Niederauer will become president of the combined company, while Mr. Sprecher will remain chairman and CEO.
</p>
</i></blockquote>
<p>
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390301633918728.html">Former E*Trade CEO Paid $10.7 Million in 2012</a> [WSJ]<br />
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390593646157614.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">Marsh &#038; McLennan&#8217;s Outgoing CEO Got $17 Million</a> [WSJ]<br />
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324000704578390603277877168.html">Schwab CEO Pay Stays Around $10.2 Million</a> [WSJ]<br />
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501004578390540829139244.html">InterncontinentalExchange Chief&#8217;s Pay Down 15%</a> [WSJ]
</p>
<b>Other posts from <a href="http://dealbreaker.com/" target="_blank">Dealbreaker</a>:</b>
<ul><li><a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/04/sp-cries-conspiracy/" target="_blank">S&#038;P Cries &#8220;Conspiracy!&#8221;</a>
</li><li><a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/04/half-of-hedge-fund-employees-pretty-sure-their-competitors-are-up-to-no-good/" target="_blank">Half Of Hedge Fund Employees Pretty Sure Their Competitors Are Up To No Good</a>
</li><li><a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2013/04/ma-bankers-developing-serious-jealousy-of-ipo-guys/" target="_blank">M&#038;A Bankers Developing Serious Jealousy Of IPO Guys</a>
</li></ul><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130404/00394122569/maybe-etrade-should-stop-giving-four-year-contracts-to-its-ceos.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130404/00394122569/maybe-etrade-should-stop-giving-four-year-contracts-to-its-ceos.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130404/00394122569/maybe-etrade-should-stop-giving-four-year-contracts-to-its-ceos.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>just-saying</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130404/00394122569</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 05:37:16 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Maxis GM: Our Vision Is More Important Than Our Customers &amp; Lots Of People Love Our Crappy DRM</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130316/04473722350/maxis-gm-our-vision-is-more-important-than-our-customers-lots-people-love-our-crappy-drm.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130316/04473722350/maxis-gm-our-vision-is-more-important-than-our-customers-lots-people-love-our-crappy-drm.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Well, it's been several hours, so obviously someone must have done something stupid over at the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=simcity">SimCity franchise</a>. I could run through a long list of links from our coverage of this debacle, but I'll make it easy on you. The key links are the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130305/14551022206/launch-day-punishment-simcitys-online-only-drm-locking-purchasers-out-servers-purchases.shtml">launch</a> debacle, the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130307/14574822243/simcity-backlash.shtml">backlash</a>, and the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/06175522320/modder-makes-simcity-capable-offline-play-which-works-flawlessly.shtml">evidence</a> that all of this is wholly unnecessary. That last one is important because during the initial stages of this muck up, EA/Maxis came out hard, saying that offline modes were logistically impossible because of all the cloud-based resources needed to run the games simulation calculations. The evidence in the link proves rather conclusively that that is absolutely not the case. In that post, I had suggested that it was time for the game's producers to finally come out with a strong mea culpa. Here is that mea culpa, from Maxis GM Lucy Bradshaw:
<blockquote><i>
So, could we have built a subset offline mode? Yes. But we rejected that idea because it didn't fit with our vision. We did not focus on the "single city in isolation" that we have delivered in past SimCities. We recognize that there are fans &ndash; people who love the original SimCity &ndash; who want that. But we're also hearing from thousands of people who are playing across regions, trading, communicating and loving the Always-Connected functionality. The SimCity we delivered captures the magic of its heritage but catches up with ever-improving technology.</i>
</blockquote>
Okay, so it isn't so much a mea culpa as a, "Hey, customers, why don't you go outside and play hide and go f@#$ yourself!" It's difficult to imagine a more tone deaf statement, given the circumstances. To essentially come out and say that you understand lots of people wanted an offline version of this game, and we already know you could have made one quite easily, but you rejected the idea of filling a customer need because it didn't match with your "vision"? I'd suggest that if this launch has been a faithful representation of your vision, it may be time to get idea-glasses.
<br /><br />
And can I ask the other obvious question? Where the hell are all the people clamoring for online only mode? I have no doubt that there are folks who wanted and still want online components to the game, but who the hell is asking for a blatant limitation on their game?  There's a major difference between offering <i>online components</i> and <i>requiring</i> it be online all the time. Personally, I think Bradshaw is reticulating our splines on that one.
<br /><br />
On the other hand, when discussing the need for the servers in Bradshaw's blog post, there was one glaring omission: server resources/calculations. It appears the game's designers have finally decided to stop lying about <i>why</i> the servers in the cloud are needed and instead moved on to suggest that it's just a big part of their customers that are unnecessary instead.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130316/04473722350/maxis-gm-our-vision-is-more-important-than-our-customers-lots-people-love-our-crappy-drm.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130316/04473722350/maxis-gm-our-vision-is-more-important-than-our-customers-lots-people-love-our-crappy-drm.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130316/04473722350/maxis-gm-our-vision-is-more-important-than-our-customers-lots-people-love-our-crappy-drm.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>so,-so-much-wrong</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130316/04473722350</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:01:28 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Go Ahead and Short Your 'InTrade Will Come Back' Contract</title>
<dc:creator>Above The Law</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/17124422331/go-ahead-short-your-intrade-will-come-back-contract.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/17124422331/go-ahead-short-your-intrade-will-come-back-contract.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <div style="text-align:center;padding:8px;margin:0 0 7px 15px;border:2px solid #bbb;float:right;line-height:1.2;">
<i style="font-weight:bold;color:#666;font-size:90%;">Cross-posted from</i><br />
<a href="http://abovethelaw.com/2013/03/go-ahead-and-short-your-intrade-will-come-back-contract/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/RvpZD0T.jpg" width="110" title="Above The Law" style="margin:6px 0 0 0;" /></a></div>
While most of you are busily reading about the latest effort from U.S. News to <a href="http://fear-and-trembling.tumblr.com/post/10225369076/for-derrida-justice-is-outside-or-beyond-the-law">calculate with the incalculable</a>, applying its formula to tease out razor-thin distinctions between law schools, you&#8217;re missing the demise of the once lauded Internet prediction site, InTrade. What were the odds?
<p>
Over the weekend, the Irish-based website shuttered itself completely, noting in a statement to customers that there may be &#8220;financial irregularities.&#8221; Uh-oh.
</p>
<p>
All this comes at the worst possible time for InTrade customers, who were looking to cash in on that sweet, sweet Conclave action&#8230;
</p>
<p>
<span id="more-230296"></span>
</p>
<p>
Customers in the U.S. already lost access to InTrade <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveschaefer/2012/11/27/cftc-takes-aim-at-intrade-files-suit-going-after-prediction-market/">back in November</a>, when the CFTC waved around a 2005 cease and desist. The CFTC&#8217;s beef  with InTrade revolved around the website selling contracts that looked an awful lot <a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2012/11/now-you-cant-buy-your-crude-oil-futures-in-10-increments-on-intrade/">like commodity futures</a>. The CFTC does not like commodity futures traded from outside their regulatory framework. And even though InTrade specifically asked the CFTC to step in and regulate their trading, the CFTC opted to functionally shut them down (once the Presidential election contracts were all paid out, of course). The CFTC didn&#8217;t give a very clear explanation for this decision, but the CFTC apparently felt that allowing micro-level trading on commodity futures constituted a societal ill they could not accept &#8212; while institutional investors tossing around trillions seems perfectly harmless. Or the CFTC was just lazy. Never underestimate &#8220;just lazy.&#8221;
</p>
<p>
InTrade&#8217;s closure over the weekend was not related to trading commodity futures, but some vague suggestion of &#8220;<a href="http://www.intrade.com/v4/home/">financial irregularities</a>.&#8221; Details remain sketchy, but the best guess out there alleges that InTrade <a href="http://rajivsethi.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-prediction-market-mystery.html">failed to maintain duly segregated accounts</a>.
</p>
<blockquote><i>
<p>
What on earth is going on? My best guess is that the margin posted by traders was not held, as it should be, in segregated accounts separate from company funds. When bets are made on this market, both parties must post margin equal to their worst-case loss, so that neither is subject to counterparty risk. In effect, each party is taking a position against the exchange, but these positions are exactly offsetting so the exchange bears no risk. To ensure that all promised payments can be made, these funds must be held in the form of cash, insured deposits, or safe dollar-denominated securities such as Treasury bills. They cannot be invested in risky assets, and cannot be used for the payment of salaries or expenses.
</p>
</i>
</blockquote>
<p>
The latter point about the &#8220;payment of salaries or expenses&#8221; is in line with the recent announcement that auditors had <a href="http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/intrade-auditors-flagged-unusual-payments-last-month-to-exchief-29123278.html">flagged payments to InTrade&#8217;s former CEO</a>, the late John Delaney.
</p>
<p>
The loss of InTrade will spark glowing eulogies from multiple sectors, but losing the political prediction market will be the toughest loss. The political reporting class openly crowed about InTrade&#8217;s predictive power for years. The Washington Post already published its lament over the passing of InTrade as the loss of the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/11/rip-intrade-the-last-best-hope-for-pundit-accountability/">last, best hope for pundit accountability</a>:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>
It&#8217;s a shame, and this is why. We live in a world of punditry in which there are large amounts of, to put it nicely, horse manure. Those of us who write and talk about what will happen inevitably rely on vague predictions, full of qualifications. I&#8217;m guilty of it myself, and often find myself writing things like &#8220;this ought to be an OK year for the economy, if fiscal austerity isn&#8217;t too severe and there isn&#8217;t a return of the European crisis.&#8221;
</i>
</p>
<p>
On Intrade, by contrast, the traders who participate and collectively set market prices, are forced to choose&#8212;and put money where their mouths are. Will the United States enter a recession in 2013? Before it shut down, the prices for that contract on Intrade implied a 16.9 percent chance that the answer was &#8220;yes.&#8221; In a world in which people hold their pundits to a higher standard, people spouting off on the economy (or politics, or foreign affairs, or the selection of the pope) would be forced to make specific, testable predictions, and attach probabilities to those guesses.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
I actually thought the best hope for pundit accountability would be a media willing to confront their own pundits with past flawed predictions, rather than sweeping the past under the rug every day, but what do I know?
</p>
<p>
But the legal fallout from the end of InTrade, for the U.S., will be the inevitable rise of the next online predictive market. With InTrade out of the way, some other online gambling site &#8212; anyone from PaddyPower to Betfair &#8212; will grow into the hole created by InTrade, subtly open itself to U.S. customers, and likely reignite the legal battles with the CFTC all over again. Hopefully, next time around, cooler heads will prevail at the CFTC and welcome these predictive markets to the regulatory regime.
</p>
<p>
But I&#8217;m not buying that contract.
</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.intrade.com/v4/home/">To Our Customers</a> [InTrade]<br />
<a href="http://rajivsethi.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-prediction-market-mystery.html">A Prediction Market Mystery</a> [Rajiv Sethi]<br />
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/11/rip-intrade-the-last-best-hope-for-pundit-accountability/">RIP Intrade: The Last, Best Hope for Pundit Accountability</a> [Washington Post]<br />
<a href="http://dealbreaker.com/2012/11/now-you-cant-buy-your-crude-oil-futures-in-10-increments-on-intrade/">Now You Can&#8217;t Buy Your Crude Oil Futures In $10 Increments On Intrade</a> [DealBreaker]
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/17124422331/go-ahead-short-your-intrade-will-come-back-contract.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/17124422331/go-ahead-short-your-intrade-will-come-back-contract.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/17124422331/go-ahead-short-your-intrade-will-come-back-contract.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>betting-the-house</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130314/17124422331</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 10:03:06 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Michigan Bets The State Pension Fund On Hollywood Success, Ends Up Stuck With The Tab</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130310/18115822273/michigan-bets-state-pension-fund-hollywood-success-ends-up-stuck-with-tab.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130310/18115822273/michigan-bets-state-pension-fund-hollywood-success-ends-up-stuck-with-tab.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>
We've written before about cities and states luring Hollywood studios with multimillion dollar subsidies in the hopes of giving their local economies a bit of a bump. In nearly every case, this has been a money loser for the locale involved. A 2010 <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121205/09153021240/state-subsidies-to-hollywood-almost-every-program-has-been-dismal-failure-costing-taxpayers.shtml" target="_blank">Tax Foundation study</a> found that most states were lucky to see $0.20 in revenue from every dollar handed out. And yet, this surefire money loser remains incredibly popular.
<br /><br />
The latest case of self-victimization belongs to the state of Michigan, <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/08/oz-the-great-and-subsidized" target="_blank">which lured the production of "Oz The Great and Powerful" to the state with a $40 million subsidy</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>Michigan has <a href="http://www.michigan.gov/documents/treasury/IIT_2010_393395_7.pdf" target="_blank">4.5 million</a> individual taxpayers, and the state gave the film studio $39.7 million to shoot the movie in Pontiac. That works out to a subsidy of $8.82 per taxpayer while average ticket prices nationwide are <a href="http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/slight-increase-in-average-movie-ticket-price/" target="_blank">$7.96</a>.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>The subsidy was granted in 2010 when the program refunded up to 42 percent of Michigan expenses to film makers &mdash; essentially a check from the treasury to Hollywood studios. The program expired, but the Legislature, dominated by Republicans, <a href="http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16182" target="_blank">overwhelmingly decided to keep it around</a>.</i></blockquote>
As the article points out, the studio basically received paid admission from every taxpayer in the state. But that $40 million was apparently just a "good start," because the state soon found the studio knocking at its door again, cap in hand.
<blockquote>
<i>As part of the financing process, the filmmakers wanted to borrow about about $18 million in municipal bonds. In order order to do that, they needed a backer. So the state stepped in, and agreed to use its state worker pension funds as a guarantee. "If the investors failed to pay," the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/us/when-hollywood-comes-to-town.html?pagewanted=all" target="_blank">reported</a> in a piece on the deal last December, "the retirees would be on the hook."</i></blockquote>
One would expect a Disney-backed venture to be able to scrounge up payments on an $18 million loan simply by digging around in the couch cushions. But one would be mistaken.
<blockquote>
<i>Michigan Motion Pictures Studios, which is being celebrated in the local media for having made the movie, "Oz The Great and Powerful," <a href="http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/18379" target="_blank">in Pontiac</a>, has missed its last three payments on $18 million in bond obligations...</i>
<br /><br />
<i>According to state officials, the state retirement system has made three payments since February of last year totaling $1.68 million. </i></blockquote>
This isn't good news for the state's pension fund, which is already underfunded by several billion dollars. It's pretty much guaranteed that the state will never recover the entire $58 million given to Michigan Motion Pictures Studio, either in the form of added revenue or even loan payments, for that matter. And Michigan should know better. According to the study mentioned in the first paragraph, Michigan's return-on-investment sits at $0.11 per subsidy dollar.
<br /><br />
But Michigan Motion Picture Studios (formerly Raleigh Studios) can explain. You see, it was doing just fine... <a href="http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/18384?utm_source=Mackinac+Center+Publications&#038;utm_campaign=dd8146ef0b-MichCapCon_12_28_2011&#038;utm_medium=email" target="_blank">until the state decided to cut its allowance</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>In March 2012, Raleigh Studio's then-chief financial officer Steve Lemberg blamed the studio&rsquo;s financial struggles on the film tax credit being reduced.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>The state reduced the tax credit from $100 million when the studio was being built in 2011 to $50 million last year. Gov. Rick Snyder has $25 million budgeted for tax credits this year.</i></blockquote>
There's something inherently flawed with a business model that relies heavily on being handed free money in exchange for the vague promise that a small percentage of it will be pumped back into the local economy. But I suppose it could be worse. <a href="http://www.mackinac.org/16977" target="_blank">Much, much worse</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>The city of Allen Park recently <a href="http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16734" target="_blank">requested an emergency manager</a> after losing what will turn out to be tens of millions of dollars on a failed movie studio project that promised to create 3,000 jobs. It created none and left the town nearly bankrupt.</i></blockquote>
That's the sort of thing that happens when politicians get stars in their eyes and roll out a red carpet made of constituents' money. The best case scenario is still a money loser, as any economic effects are brief and underwhelming. The worst case scenario is taxpayers are on the hook to bail out their own pension funds or, in the case of Allen Park, their hometown.
<br /><br />
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130310/18115822273/michigan-bets-state-pension-fund-hollywood-success-ends-up-stuck-with-tab.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130310/18115822273/michigan-bets-state-pension-fund-hollywood-success-ends-up-stuck-with-tab.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130310/18115822273/michigan-bets-state-pension-fund-hollywood-success-ends-up-stuck-with-tab.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>you-can-only-take-my-money-for-so-long,-before-you-take-it-all!</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130310/18115822273</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Mar 2013 05:21:46 PST</pubDate>
<title>SimCity: The Backlash</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130307/14574822243/simcity-backlash.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130307/14574822243/simcity-backlash.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>
It's not as if EA couldn't have seen this coming. Pretty much everything that <i>could</i> go wrong with <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130305/14551022206/launch-day-punishment-simcitys-online-only-drm-locking-purchasers-out-servers-purchases.shtml" target="_blank">SimCity's launch</a> <i>has</i> gone wrong. But EA was warned. A <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121214/16262621391/simcity-developers-reddit-ama-swiftly-turns-into-wtf-with-online-only-drm.shtml" target="_blank">Reddit AMA</a> with the SimCity developers made it perfectly clear how unhappy people were with the online-only requirements. SimCity's closed beta had its own issues, mainly server access (<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130127/19023721799/redditor-points-out-flaws-simcitys-online-only-drm-gets-banned-ea-his-troubles.shtml" target="_blank">not enough of it</a>).
<br /><br />
But EA didn't seem too concerned and went ahead with the launch. Shortly thereafter, everything fell apart. The servers couldn't handle the demand, something which would have been less damaging if there had been any sort of offline option. Much of the processing is handled server-side (along with storage of all saved games) and if customers couldn't find a free slot on a server then they just didn't get to enjoy their $60 purchase.
<br /><br />
The backlash was immediate. And immense. Polygon (the Verge's gaming site) <a href="http://www.polygon.com/game/simcity-2013/2630" target="_blank">lowered its original 9.5 rating to 8.0 because of the online issues</a>. Giant Bomb <a href="http://www.giantbomb.com/reviews/simcity-review/1900-563/" target="_blank">gave it a rather low 3 out of 5</a>, largely due to the fact that EA made a single player game multiplayer-only to justify its online-only DRM/"social" features. Reviewer Jonathan Cresswell <a href="http://www.jonathancresswell.co.uk/2013/03/review-simcity/" target="_blank">handed in quite possibly the most succinct (but most telling) review of all</a>.
<br />
<center><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/KYYYXq1.png" style="width: 501px; height: 171px;" /></center>
<br />
Elsewhere, paying customers have expressed their displeasure. Metacritic's critic score sits at 82. <a href="http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/simcity" target="_blank">The user score</a>? <b>1.8</b>. Things are nearly as bad at Amazon, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007FTE2VW/ref=as_li_ss_til?tag=withwind0b-20&#038;camp=0&#038;creative=0&#038;linkCode=as4&#038;creativeASIN=B007FTE2VW&#038;adid=120YM9CCSXSBN1ZKRAZA" target="_blank">where SimCity currently holds a <b>1.5 star rating</b></a>. (<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Electronic-Arts-41018ted-Edition2-SimCity/product-reviews/B007VTVRFA/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&#038;showViewpoints=1" target="_blank">The digital version is faring even worse</a> - <b>1.0</b>.) In a rather unprecedented move, Amazon has pulled the PC Download version completely, citing EA's server issues. When will it be back? Amazon says: "We don't know when or if this item will be available again."
<br /><br />
Other game retailers have pounced on the opportunity provided by EA's colossal blunder. <a href="https://twitter.com/GOGcom/status/309328842345050112" target="_blank">GOG tweaked EA with a tweet</a> pointing out that DRM-free SimCity 2000 doesn't require an internet connection (and is only $5.99), <a href="http://www.gog.com/" target="_blank">resulting in a sales bump that has sent SimCity 2000 to #3 on the "Top Sellers" chart</a>. Another Redditor <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/19tskq/do_it_steam_twist_the_knife/" target="_blank">suggested Steam follow suit</a> and kick off an "offline-capable city sim sale," featuring non-online-only city sims with new deals arriving each day "until SimCity is playable."
<br />
<center><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/rUvSn7L.jpg" style="width: 499px; height: 320px;" /></center>
<br />
EA, for its part, is working hard to add capacity, but much of the effort seems a bit too late. The damage has already been done, and EA has destroyed a lot of gamer goodwill, something it really doesn't have in excess. As part of the effort to extinguish these self-inflicted fires, EA is now shutting off "non-essential features" to ease the server load. One of the first to go is "cheetah speed," the fastest simulation setting. This may do exactly what EA hopes it does (free up servers), <a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/03/ea-disables-non-critical-gameplay-features-to-relieve-simcity-servers/" target="_blank">but it is going to piss off even more customers, as Kyle Orland at Ars Technica points out</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>Presumably this is to give the servers more time to process the thousands of simultaneous city simulations that are all feeding into its global and regional networks. In any case, this is a core piece of the gameplay that's now being hampered by EA's continuing server problems; in my 16 or so hours playing the game, I'd estimate 15 or so have been spent running at Cheetah. Slowing things down, even temporarily, is likely to impact a whole lot of players negatively.</i>
</blockquote>
Whether or not this backlash/implosion will hurt EA in the long run remains to be seen. It has made no secret of the fact that it wants all of its games to eventually have some sort of "online component," if for no other reason than to (slightly) impede piracy and eliminate second-hand game sales. The odds are that EA will continue to push the online requirement, passing the costs of any outages along to the customers in the form of useless purchases and higher game prices.
<br /><br />
Some gamers are attempting to push back. <a href="https://www.change.org/petitions/electronic-arts-inc-remove-always-online-drm-from-simcity-and-future-games" target="_blank">A petition has been started at change.org</a> requesting EA remove "online only" requirements from SimCity (most likely impossible, but...) and future games. It's well on its way to hitting 25,000 signatures in less than 24 hours (and should be well past that by the time this hits the front page), which should give EA some idea how many people are displeased with the SimCity debacle.
<br /><br />
It's not completely unheard of for AAA developers to reverse course on onerous DRM (<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111125/22241716899/ubisoft-director-backtracks-piracy-complaints-after-public-lashing.shtml" target="_blank">Ubisoft, for one</a>), but EA didn't become one of the <a href="http://consumerist.com/2012/04/04/congratulations-ea-you-are-the-worst-company-in-america-for-2012/" target="_blank">most hated companies in America</a> by catering to the whims of its customers. If nothing else, gamers can take heart in the fact that other developers will view this as a cautionary tale, rather than a blueprint for success.
<br /><br />
Now, if you're still waiting for an open server slot, why don't you kill a little time with the <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/19uvnz/got_bored_while_downloading_simcity_xpost_from/" target="_blank">included Solitaire game</a>? (Image by Redditor <a href="http://www.reddit.com/user/PainLing" target="_blank">PainLing</a>)
<br /><br />
<center><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/WUVQujm.png" style="width: 500px; height: 375px;" /></center>
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130307/14574822243/simcity-backlash.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130307/14574822243/simcity-backlash.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130307/14574822243/simcity-backlash.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>still-plenty-of-'online-only'-hate-available!</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130307/14574822243</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Feb 2013 02:12:19 PST</pubDate>
<title>HOA President Receives Public Criticism; Responds With Baseless Claims And Empty Legal Threats</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130114/16245921669/hoa-president-receives-public-criticism-responds-with-baseless-claims-empty-legal-threats.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130114/16245921669/hoa-president-receives-public-criticism-responds-with-baseless-claims-empty-legal-threats.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ If there's one thing our judicial system has taught the layman, it's this: when faced with public criticism, your first reaction should be to craft angry letters/emails full of baseless legal threats. (Of course, the internet teaches exactly <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect" target="_blank">the <i>opposite</i> lesson</a>, one that many have<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=streisand+effect" target="_blank"> failed to learn</a>...) Today's angry email writer (and phone caller) is the <a href="http://consumerist.com/2013/01/14/hoa-president-threatens-to-sue-newspaper-for-using-neighborhoods-name-in-article/" target="_blank">president (and treasurer) [and legal agent] of the Stonecreek Arbor Homeowner's Association</a>, located in Indiana's Vandenburgh County.
<blockquote>
<i>The <a href="http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/jan/12/whos-king-of-your-castle-homeowners-associations/?partner=popular" target="_blank">Evansville Courier &#038; Press recently wrote</a> a lengthy piece about HOAs and how they can range wildly in quality, from being so laissez-faire that you wonder where your money is going to providing the services your area needs to micro-dictatorships that leave residents unhappy.</i><br />
<br />
<i>The HOA at the center of this story is called Stonecreek Arbors, in Indiana&rsquo;s Vandenburgh County. According to the paper, the Stonecreek HOA was responsible for more than half of all the liens filed in the county last year. Many of these liens were for unpaid HOA dues worth a little more than $200.</i><br />
<br />
<i>The 49 liens filed by the HOA translates to slightly less than 1/6 of all the homes in the subdivision.</i></blockquote>
Anyone who's even slightly familiar with HOAs knows it's going to be nearly impossible to find a flattering article written about these <a href="http://capitalistliontamer.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/homeowners-association-vs-capitalist-lion-tamer-the-correspondence/" target="_blank">overweening middlemen/micromanagers</a> who have inserted themselves between homeowners and their own property. (At least one that's not written by association board members...) Why so many of these associations exist is a mystery, given that most people resent having arbitrary rules and limitations placed on something they purchased. It's like DRM for houses.<br />
<br />
That being said, Stonecreek Arbor was like any other homeowners association that makes the news. Excessive fees. Sudden bans on a previously parkable driveway, which instead became a HOA board member's private road to and from the lake. Demanding pets be microchipped, even when the existing "rules" carried no language to that effect. And so on.<br />
<br />
The Evansville Courier article detailed these offenses, leading off with a photo of the subdivision's entrance which handily sported the Stonecreek name, lest anyone be confused about <i>which</i> HOA was currently abusing its members. Shortly after publication (and following a brief interview with the HOA president Stephen Hess -- captured "on tape" over at the Consumerist), the Evansville Courier &#038; Press received this email from Hess.
<blockquote>
<i>&ldquo;[T]his notice also requires you not to at any measure mention anything regarding my name, any resident of Stonecreek, NOR will we ALLOW any of your printing in any article regarding Stonecreek at any time in any publication&hellip; You will be held liable for any violations of this letter and notice/request in this email. If we find/discover you have mentioned Stonecreek in any legal matter their (sic) will be action toward yourself as well as any print paper you represent in the media article.</i><br />
<br />
<i>&ldquo;You may contact any HOA in the County of Vanderburgh, the State of Indiana, but Stonecreek will not PERMIT OR ALLOW YOU our legal name in any future article.&rdquo;</i></blockquote>
There are a lot of claims being made here that the HOA president can't hope to back up. Exactly how he was hoping to prevent mention "in any publication," much less the one with which he's currently tangling, is unclear. Maybe he was hoping a few CAPITALIZED WORDS would strike fear in their tiny journalistic souls. The double threat of "being held liable" and having "action toward" the paper doesn't seem to have prevented publication of this article on the internet, or in "any print paper."<br />
<br />
The HOA president didn't even throw out handy, but un-actionable, terms like "libel" or "defamation," but he did follow up with one more vocal threat:
<blockquote>
<i>That obviously didn&rsquo;t work, nor did the phone call to the Courier &#038; Press, which demanded the paper &ldquo;stop this article immediately, because I will sue you just like I sue the people who don&rsquo;t pay their dues.&rdquo; he said.</i></blockquote>
While Hess certainly seems to know his way around legal matters like lien filing (he filed more than 47 liens against his neighbors<i> in one day</i>), he seems to have a little trouble parsing the grayer area of public criticism. His response has just dropped Stonecreek's reputation from "bad" to "worse," and he will probably find himself on the outside staring in come the next board election. Now, he's also "internet (in)famous" as well, having successfully portrayed himself as the sort of person who comes out suing at the drop of a hat. Not much fun to deal with at a phone line's length, much less as a neighbor.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130114/16245921669/hoa-president-receives-public-criticism-responds-with-baseless-claims-empty-legal-threats.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130114/16245921669/hoa-president-receives-public-criticism-responds-with-baseless-claims-empty-legal-threats.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130114/16245921669/hoa-president-receives-public-criticism-responds-with-baseless-claims-empty-legal-threats.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>ALL-CAPS---that'll-show-'em</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130114/16245921669</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 05:44:14 PST</pubDate>
<title>Just How Dumb Is It For CBS To Block CNET From Giving Dish An Award?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/00145421637/just-how-dumb-is-it-cbs-to-block-cnet-giving-dish-award.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/00145421637/just-how-dumb-is-it-cbs-to-block-cnet-giving-dish-award.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ As you may or may not recall, last year, pretty much all the TV networks <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120525/04185919074/tv-networks-file-legal-claims-saying-skipping-commercials-is-copyright-infringement.shtml">sued Dish Networks</a> over a new feature it had launched, PrimeTime Any Time (PTAT), with its Autohopper technology on its DVRs.  PTAT is where it would automatically record all the major networks' prime time programming and hold onto it for a bit.  Autohopper would then automatically skip over the commercials.  It's important to recognize that these features, on their own, have been considered legal.  VCRs had auto commercial skip ages ago and DVR technology (time shifting) has been called fair use plenty of times.  Given that, the lawsuits <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121113/02171921026/details-ruling-over-dishs-autohopper-show-fox-lost-nearly-all-important-issues.shtml">aren't going well</a> so far.
<br /><br />
But, in a moment of pure stupidity, some very short-sighted suits at CBS made a really silly decision.  As you may or may not have heard, CES -- the massive consumer electronics show -- has been going on all this week in Las Vegas.  I just got back from there myself.  At the show, Dish announced another merging of some of its products, adding its Slingbox (who they bought years back) to the same basic setup.  Slingbox, of course, is for "place shifting" what the DVR is for "time shifting."  You hook it up to your TV and it lets you access what's playing on your TV via the internet (so, via your computer, phone or tablet).  It's hardly surprising that this is where Dish was heading.
<br /><br />
And... the early reviews and buzz were definitely strong.  For example, CNET wrote a <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-video-recorders-dvrs/dish-hopper-with-sling/4505-6474_7-35566943.html" target="_blank">glowing review</a> in which executive editor David Carnoy suggested it may be the best DVR out there these days.  The CNET crew liked the thing so much that they <a href="https://twitter.com/CNET/statuses/289090800011313152" target="_blank">nominated it for their "Best of CES" award.
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/YBeo6"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/YBeo6.png" width=560 /></a>
</center>
And... then the suits at CNET parent company CBS noticed.  And suddenly they told CNET that it </a><a href="http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2013-01-10-cbs-to-dish-no-ces-award-for-you/" target="_blank">had to remove the Dish Hopper with Sling from consideration</a> for the Best of CES award <i>and</i> that it was no longer allowed to review any Dish products.  CNET editors appended the following note to their review:
<blockquote><i>
Editors' note: The Dish Hopper with Sling was removed from consideration for the Best of CES 2013 awards due to active litigation involving our parent company CBS Corp. We will no longer be reviewing products manufactured by companies with which we are in litigation with respect to such product.
</i></blockquote>
This is <i>monumentally</i> stupid, for a variety of reasons.  Let's see how many we can come up with.
<ol>
<li> Hello <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect">Streisand Effect</a>.  There were approximately one gazillion articles this week about products coming out of CES, and the place was wall to wall with journalists -- probably half of whom were coming up with their own "best of" lists.  Most people were completely saturated with CES stories and would barely glance at such a story.  Except... now, tons of people are suddenly finding out about this <i>awesome</i> Dish DVR, the Hopper with Slingbox.  In fact, they're hearing that the damn thing is so good that CBS is trying to block any news of it from getting out.  Talking about increasing the awareness...  I have no clue whatsoever what product CNET -- or any other publication -- awarded "best of CES" to.  But I sure as hell am well aware of Dish's new DVR.
</li><li> Goodbye to the wall that separates the suits from the journalists at CBS/CNET.  CBS execs have just confirmed that they don't want their journalists and reviewers to cover things based on the merits, but rather on what it means for their corporate masters.
</li><li> Hello slippery slope.  Is it really that hard to see where this heads next?  Is CNET still allowed to <i>report on the lawsuit</i> if CBS loses?  If they can't talk about the products, what about the legal issues themselves?
</li><li> Goodbye journalists with credibility.  Frankly, CNET has always had some of the strongest tech reporters in the business.  For many years I've considered it one of the top tech news sites out there.  I have tremendous respect for many of the reporters there.  But, now I have to wonder how much the suits are interfering with their ability to report things accurately.
</li><li> Goodbye to principled journalists who want to work for CBS.  If I'm a journalist at CNET right now, I'd be seriously considering quitting in protest.  This move seriously harms the brand and reputation of the site, and this is the kind of thing that journalists should stand up against.  Having the suits interfere with what they can write about is generally seen as a massive offense to journalists.  I would bet this leads to some of the best, most principled CNET reporters jumping ship to elsewhere.
</li><li> Good luck to CNET hiring new journalists.  Who wants to jump into that toxic situation?
</li></ol>
CBS's suits should have kept quiet and not interfered with the news side of the business.  They had to know that this would backfire in a big bad way.  And, if they didn't know that, they deserve to lose their jobs for being pretty clueless about things that matter.
<br /><br />
Of course, they were probably thinking that Dish would likely use the reviews from CNET as evidence in the lawsuit, which very well may be true (and could still happen since the review did go out).  But it's not hard to get around that, since the legal impact of a single review is near zilch.  In the end, they didn't stifle the review, they made it more well known.  They didn't do anything that helps them in their lawsuit.  And they're left with an undoubtedly pissed off set of journalists who may now question how free they are to actually report the news.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/00145421637/just-how-dumb-is-it-cbs-to-block-cnet-giving-dish-award.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/00145421637/just-how-dumb-is-it-cbs-to-block-cnet-giving-dish-award.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/00145421637/just-how-dumb-is-it-cbs-to-block-cnet-giving-dish-award.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>count-the-ways</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130111/00145421637</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:55:56 PST</pubDate>
<title>Child With Brittle Bone Disease Detained By TSA For An Hour</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121217/04242321402/child-with-brittle-bone-disease-detained-tsa-hour.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121217/04242321402/child-with-brittle-bone-disease-detained-tsa-hour.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It&#39;s no secret that I don&#39;t think much of the TSA. In addition to a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/search.php?q=TSA">long list of</a> pieces we&#39;ve done on what I consider one of the most useless government agencies, there&#39;s also the more recent story I covered discussing whether or not the agency&#39;s operations have resulted in <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121120/05540921099/tsaairport-security-killing-us-christmas.shtml">more deaths</a> in the past decade than all the terrorism against American&#39;s combined. Still, there is some discussion over whether all of this freedom-taking and death is worth the fuzzy feeling we all suposedly get when boarding a plane, knowing that at least all of this asshat-ery is making us safer.<br />
<br />
But then you hear the story of someone like Shelbi Walser, a twelve year old girl from Texas who suffers brittle bone disease and <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/wheelchair-bound-preteen-held-tsa-traces-explosives-found-161802927--abc-news-travel.html;_ylt=A2KJjb2N0c5QnXMAMDjQtDMD">also apparently has to suffer with over-zealous federal employees</a> that don&#39;t have enough common sense to fill a thimble.
<blockquote>
<i>Shelbi Walser, 12, has brittle bone disease, and was flying to Tampa, Fla., to receive treatment on Sunday when she was randomly selected for an explosives screening on her way through security. Tammy Daniels, Walser&#39;s mother, said that her daughter tested positive for explosives when a screener swabbed Walser&#39;s palms and fingers.</i><br />
<br />
<i>Speaking with ABC affiliate WFAA, Walser said that she has no idea how the traces of explosive got on her. "It could have come off fertilizer, because we have chickens. I could have run through something from them," she said. "It could have just come off the ground, because I roll through everything."</i></blockquote>
Here&#39;s the thing. Even if you believe that the threat of terrorism via explosives on airplanes is everything that the government would have you believe (and I don&#39;t), and even if you think that the methods used by the TSA can help make us safer (and I don&#39;t), we&#39;re&nbsp;<i>still</i> left with a federal agency that is given so much leeway in curtailing our liberty that they&nbsp;<i>at least</i> should get their damned jobs right. There can be such a thing as common sense in airport security, where you understand that the 12 year old Texan with brittle bone disease probably isn&#39;t going &#39;splode a jetliner. Certainly it seems unlikely that it would take an hour for the TSA to come to this determination.
<blockquote>
<i>"I am by no means undermining our safety in the air. After 9/11, by no means am I doing that," Daniels told WFAA. "But when it comes to children, common sense is not in a textbook."</i></blockquote>
This has always been the problem with the TSA: in the absence of common sense there is such a thing as the paralysis of bureaucracy, and when that paralysis comes to the people in the form of handbook-style security, then that&#39;s a win for the very people we&#39;re supposed to be protected against.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121217/04242321402/child-with-brittle-bone-disease-detained-tsa-hour.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121217/04242321402/child-with-brittle-bone-disease-detained-tsa-hour.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121217/04242321402/child-with-brittle-bone-disease-detained-tsa-hour.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>if-you're-going-to-be-oppressive-at-least-do-your-job-right</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121217/04242321402</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:59:23 PST</pubDate>
<title>It's Important To Learn From Business Model Failures As Well</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121120/23010321107/its-important-to-learn-business-model-failures-as-well.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121120/23010321107/its-important-to-learn-business-model-failures-as-well.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ When we held our <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121017/03210820728/bringing-artists-entrepreneurs-together-to-help-each-other.shtml">artists &#038; entrepreneurs working group</a> meeting in October, one of things that was discussed was how little discussion there is about what <i>doesn't work</i>.  And that's kind of important, since so much is bound to fail.  Some of the entrepreneurs noted that it's not unheard of (though still not exactly <i>common</i>) for failed entrepreneurs to write up a postmortem about their experience.  However, with artists, it was almost entirely unheard of for an artist to delve into a failed experiment to say what happened (and what <i>didn't</i> happen!).  This isn't a huge surprise.  It's tough to talk about the failures -- but with entrepreneurs, they can wipe their hands clean of the startup and move on to the next thing.  For a musician, they can't just walk away from themselves.  So I can completely understand why artists would be hesitant to talk too much about what didn't work, because they fear it will reflect poorly on themselves.
<br /><br />
So it's great to see that <a href="https://www.insightcommunity.com/step2/user/kyle_clements">Kyle Clements</a> has decided to post the details (over at Step2) of <a href="https://www.insightcommunity.com/step2/1061/when-experiment-fails-wrong-approach-just-giving-too-early?qa-rewrite=1061/when-experiment-fails-wrong-approach-just-giving-too-early" target="_blank">an experiment he helped set up with a musician that failed</a> and to discuss where he thinks it went wrong.  You should check out the full story, but, the short version is that he helped set up a plan for a musician to record a quick "improv" song each week and a more "full" song once a month, and release them all on YouTube.  There was one part of the plan that immediately struck me when I was reading it.  A plan to <i>not</i> promote this:
<blockquote><i>
The first 3 months are Operation: Stay quiet.  Produce and publish content, but don't advertise it.  leave it for people to randomly stumble across. You don't want to advertise, have people love it, want to see more, and realize there is no backlog of content. No one wants to be the first to arrive at a party.  Let the backlog build up while no one is watching.
</i></blockquote>
My first reaction was that I wasn't sure the assumptions here necessarily held.  While I do think that there's an "empty" room problem, where people don't necessarily want to be the first on the dance floor, I'm not sure that applies to not promoting videos for 3 months.  Especially when it comes to music, there are a number of taste-makers who absolutely <i>do</i> want to get there first and think they found something early.  So there were a number of ways I could see this part of the plan backfiring.  In fact, it seemed to me like the "first to arrive" part actually is made <i>worse</i> after three months, because when people come in at that point, they see that no one else has watched the 3 months of videos and might assume that they're likely worthless.  It seems like those three months could be used more wisely trying to bring the artist's audience to the videos and building connections around them.
<br /><br />
And, in fact, it seems that this "don't tell anyone" aspect to the project really did hurt:
<blockquote><i>
First month: Everything went as planned. 4 improved songs, 1 developed song, a few odd hits, nothing unusual.
 <br /><br />
Second Month: artist grows impatient. Is discouraged that no one is watching.  Writes more songs.  No developed, proper song is released this month. slightly more hits than last month, but nothing unusual.
 <br /><br />
Third Month: Artist grows impatient, begins posting new songs to facebook.  A much lower than expected number of friends follow through and watch the videos (they will drive an hour and pay $10 to watch him play live, but they wont click a button in facebook?!?!) Artist is discouraged.  No proper, developed song this month.
 <br /><br />
Fourth Month: only 2 improvised songs see the light of day this month. viewership drops. Artist gets discouraged.
</i></blockquote>
It only goes on for a bit more before the artist gives up entirely -- and eventually blocks the videos.  There are definitely lessons here -- and even though the plan was not to promote the songs, that alone led to frustration, which is reasonable.  That said, almost any artistic endeavor tends to take much longer than people expect.  The overnight sensations rarely are overnight sensations at all.  Kyle wonders if there was just too much competition and they didn't do enough to stand out.  That's entirely possible too, though I'd be curious what other people think as well.
<br /><br />
Either way, kudos to Kyle for sharing the story, and hopefully it's something that others can learn from.  Personally, my takeaway would be that you should never <i>wait</i> to connect with fans. That should be built in from the beginning.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121120/23010321107/its-important-to-learn-business-model-failures-as-well.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121120/23010321107/its-important-to-learn-business-model-failures-as-well.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121120/23010321107/its-important-to-learn-business-model-failures-as-well.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>lessons-learned</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121120/23010321107</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2012 11:42:52 PST</pubDate>
<title>Barnes &#038; Noble Decides That Purchased Ebooks Are Only Yours Until Your Credit Card Expires</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/18084721154/barnes-noble-decides-that-purchased-ebooks-are-only-yours-until-your-credit-card-expires.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/18084721154/barnes-noble-decides-that-purchased-ebooks-are-only-yours-until-your-credit-card-expires.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ DRM rears its <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/07461118999/crysis-3-studio-reminds-you-it-still-owns-your-copy-original-crysis.shtml" target="_blank">ugly</a>, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120203/07550617650/ubisoft-cuts-off-legit-players-with-drm-server-migration-pirates-play.shtml" target="_blank">malformed</a>, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121115/09115121063/app-developer-hijacks-customer-twitter-accounts-attempt-to-shame-pirates.shtml" target="_blank">malignant</a>, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121006/15375020630/xbox-drm-punishes-more-paying-customers-actually-restricts-purchasing-options.shtml" target="_blank">cross-eyed</a> head again. Despite the fact that, as Cory Doctorow <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/06084420017/hachette-tells-authors-tor-to-use-drm-because-it-is-awesome-something.shtml" target="_blank">so aptly put it</a>, no one has ever purchased anything <i>because</i> it came with DRM, an ever-slimming number of content providers <i>insist</i> on punishing paying customers with idiotic "anti-piracy" schemes.<br />
<br />
Combine this "malware" with digital distribution that sticks the end user with an unfavorable license rather than, say, an actual book, and you&#39;ve got another ready-made disaster. The Consumerist <a href="http://consumerist.com/2012/11/26/heres-why-digital-rights-management-is-stupid-and-anti-consumer/" target="_blank">has the details on yet another paying customer dealing with DRM stupidity</a>. It starts off with this physical analogy.
<blockquote>
<i>[I]f reader Synimatik had bought a paperback book a few months ago and picked it up to read now, the book&rsquo;s pages wouldn&rsquo;t magically glue shut just because the credit card she normally uses at the bookstore has expired.</i></blockquote>
Obviously, no one would expect a physical book to be subject to the whims of the publisher or the store it was purchased from. A sale is a sale, even if many rights holders would rather it wasn&#39;t. But, Barnes &#038; Noble doesn&#39;t see it that way. Sure, you can <i>buy</i> an ebook from them, but you&#39;d better keep everything in your profile up to date if you plan on accessing your purchases at some undetermined point in the future.
<blockquote>
<i>Yesterday, I tried to download an ebook I paid for, and previously put on my Nook, a few months ago. When I tried, I got an error message stating I could not download the book because the credit card on file had expired. But, I already paid for it. Who cares if the credit card is expired? It has long since been paid for, so the status of the card on file has nothing to do with my ability to download said book. I didn&rsquo;t see anything in the terms of service about this either, but it&rsquo;s possible I missed it.</i><br />
<br />
<i>This is just one more reason to either not buy ebooks, or strip the drm off of the ones you purchase so you can you the book you BUY on all your devices without having to purchase multiple copies for no reason and have access to something you already bought when you want it.</i></blockquote>
Nice work, B&#038;N. Driving another person away from your offerings with your amnesiac point-of-purchase system. No one&#39;s <i>purchase</i> should be invalidated once the payment has cleared. Barnes &#038; Noble got <i>its</i> money but its customer is out both money <i>and</i> a book. Does B&#038;N really wish for its customers to root their devices and strip the DRM out of their purchases <i>just so they can enjoy them at their own pace</i>? Shouldn&#39;t the company be catering to its customers rather than treating them like thieves who can&#39;t be trusted even though they've already paid?<br />
<br />
If this was a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121022/07340420786/amazon-wipes-customers-account-locks-all-ebooks-says-find-new-retailer-when-she-asks-why.shtml" target="_blank">one-of-a-kind</a> experience, we could chalk it up to "live and learn." But a whole lot of living has gone on and the only lesson anyone&#39;s learning is the most efficient way to remove pesky DRM idiocy from their purchased "licenses" in order to turn them into actual, useful goods.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/18084721154/barnes-noble-decides-that-purchased-ebooks-are-only-yours-until-your-credit-card-expires.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/18084721154/barnes-noble-decides-that-purchased-ebooks-are-only-yours-until-your-credit-card-expires.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/18084721154/barnes-noble-decides-that-purchased-ebooks-are-only-yours-until-your-credit-card-expires.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>ebooks:-where-'buying'-means-'renting-for-an-indefinite-period'</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121126/18084721154</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2012 03:11:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>The Inevitable Crowdfunding Backlash When People Realize Projects Fail &amp; Change</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120828/01200720176/inevitable-crowdfunding-backlash-when-people-realize-projects-fail-change.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120828/01200720176/inevitable-crowdfunding-backlash-when-people-realize-projects-fail-change.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've been unabashed champions of crowdfunding and platforms like Kickstarter for quite some time now, though we've also tried to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120723/00455919791/no-99-all-filmmakers-shouldnt-crowdfund-awful-lot-should-be-testing-it-out.shtml">temper</a> some of the hype.  A little over two years ago, for example, we used the story of the open social network Diaspora as a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/entrepreneurs/articles/20100621/0153299884.shtml">possible warning</a> for some of the initial excitement about projects.  Much of that comes from just knowing what entrepreneurs go through: the initial idea is exciting, but <i>things change over time</i>, and expectations change... and some projects fail.  When you're dealing with investors, that's one thing -- they're sort of designed to expect such a thing.  But crowdfunding had a different vibe.  Because people got so excited in <i>the idea</i> and really (quite literally) bought into it, we worried that as some projects failed, it might lead to a serious backlash.
<br /><br />
It may be a coincidence that we highlighted this risk with Diaspora (one of the first Kickstarter projects to go really "big") a couple years ago... but it's possible that our worries are coming true.  Last week, I saw a report from Liz Gannes at AllThingsD, which suggested that the Diaspora team was focusing on <a href="http://allthingsd.com/20120816/diasporas-next-act-social-remixing-site-makr-io/" target="_blank">something completely different</a>, a "collaborative web remixing tool" called <a href="https://makr.io/" target="_blank">Makr.io</a>.  The team definitely went through some <a href="http://allthingsd.com/20111114/public-memorials-for-diaspora-co-founder-ilya-zhitomirskiy-to-be-held-this-weekend/" target="_blank">significant hardships</a> so it's not that surprising that they've shifted gears.  Given that story, it's hardly a surprise that they're now officially <a href="http://blog.diasporafoundation.org/2012/08/27/announcement-diaspora-will-now-be-a-community-project.html" target="_blank">"handing control of the project over to the community."</a>  They claim they'll still be playing an important role, but it seems pretty clear this is an effective withdrawal from the project, which never really caught on the way some people hoped.
<br /><br />
And, of course, this isn't just limited to Diaspora.  Bloomberg recently had a (well-timed) story highlighting how an awful lot of successful Kickstarter projects, at the very least, <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-21/kickstarter-s-funded-projects-see-some-stumbles.html" target="_blank">don't meet their deadlines</a> to actually make or ship a product.  This has turned at least some people off to the service, which (again) is unfortunate.
<br /><br />
Of course, these kinds of platforms are only a few years old, and of course they're going to go through growing pains.  I hope that, as they continue to grow and find success, at least there's some greater recognition -- and public admission -- of the potential risks involved, so that they don't take people by surprise, and that people understand that as much as they love an idea, execution is the truly hard part.  Investing in the idea is great, but there's a risk involved that the end result won't match the snazzy video that the team put together for Kickstarter in the first place.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120828/01200720176/inevitable-crowdfunding-backlash-when-people-realize-projects-fail-change.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120828/01200720176/inevitable-crowdfunding-backlash-when-people-realize-projects-fail-change.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120828/01200720176/inevitable-crowdfunding-backlash-when-people-realize-projects-fail-change.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>early-excitement-can-lead-to-disillusionment</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120828/01200720176</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:44:25 PDT</pubDate>
<title>MPAA Joins RIAA In Having Budgets Slashed</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120827/02295920166/mpaa-joins-riaa-having-budgets-slashed.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120827/02295920166/mpaa-joins-riaa-having-budgets-slashed.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Following the news that the RIAA's revenue was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120817/15551120085/as-label-funds-to-riaa-dry-up-top-execs-still-make-over-1-million.shtml">cut dramatically</a> in the past few years, TorrentFreak has also posted the MPAA's 2010 tax filing, showing that it, too, <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-budget-cut-in-half-are-they-dying-120825/?utm_source=dlvr.it&#038;utm_medium=twitter" target="_blank">has taken a pretty massive beating</a> in terms of revenue from its gatekeeper members.
<blockquote><i>
In just three years the revenue generated by the anti-piracy outfit reduced from $92.8 million to $49.6 million. The decreased budget is a direct result of the major Hollywood studios cutting back on their MPAA funding. In the same period membership dues dropped from $84.7 million to $41.5 million, more than a 50% decline.
</i></blockquote>
The filing (embedded below) includes some interesting tidbits.  It's not at all surprising to see that the MPAA funds the Copyright Alliance, but I had not seen before that it funds ITIF.  ITIF was the think tank who was the major "intellectual backer" of SOPA/PIPA.  They had published the first paper that more or less suggested the approach found in SOPA/PIPA, and when the MPAA was absolutely <i>desperate</i> for technology "experts" who could argue that SOPA wouldn't break DNS, the only people they rolled out were ITIF staff members.  It's not surprising that the MPAA funded them, but I don't recall that being disclosed anywhere previously.
<br /><br />
Also, as with the RIAA's salaries, it's pretty ridiculous to see the MPAA complaining about <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/17392820054/is-being-rich-arrogant-against-law-riaa-mpaa-seem-to-think-so.shtml">being rich</a> as proof that someone must be breaking the law, when its top execs are all making pretty large salaries.  Nearly every person listed in their list of key employees/highest compensated employees is clearly way far north into the 1% of most highly compensated Americans.
<br /><br />
And all that while its budget keeps getting slashed.  Perhaps the studios are recognizing that they're better off no longer throwing good money after bad.  Of course, it's noteworthy that a number of people on the list ended up leaving the MPAA.  Former CEO Dan Glickman left earlier than expected, apparently due to dissatisfaction from the studio heads, and a number of others left as well.  So it will be interesting when the 2011 report finally comes out to see if they studios fed money back into the MPAA once Chris Dodd was brought in.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120827/02295920166/mpaa-joins-riaa-having-budgets-slashed.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120827/02295920166/mpaa-joins-riaa-having-budgets-slashed.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120827/02295920166/mpaa-joins-riaa-having-budgets-slashed.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>obsolete-organizations-die-off</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120827/02295920166</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Epic Fail In Advertising</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1238548620/dailydirt-epic-fail-advertising.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1238548620/dailydirt-epic-fail-advertising.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There are numerous ways to piss off customers. Most companies make mistakes from time to time in advertising, but every so often, there are mistakes so egregious that people just can't look away. Sometimes bad publicity is still publicity, but here are some train-wreck examples.

<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/03/some-advertisers-suddenly-want-support-rush-limbaugh/49561/" href="http://bit.ly/znOuwo">Some advertisers are rushing to Rush Limbaugh, against the tide of sponsors running away from him.</a> After Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a slut, it seems that a couple escort services would like to advertise their services on Limbaugh's show (and apparently these companies are just fine with Rush's use of the word slut). [<a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/03/some-advertisers-suddenly-want-support-rush-limbaugh/49561/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/moms-and-motrin/" href="http://nyti.ms/z0DUM8">Mommy bloggers are not a group you want to offend, and it might seem cute to try to have a little fun with some motherhood observations...</a> However, the makers of Motrin found out the hard way that it needs to choose its words more carefully. [<a href="http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/moms-and-motrin/">url</a>]</li>
 
<li> <a title="http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/reddit-users-mock-woody-harrelson-after-interview-fiasco-201252" href="http://bit.ly/wxN6ok">Woody Harrelson doesn't actually mean "ask me anything" when he talks to people online.</a> Harrelson just wanted to promote his new movie, but instead enraged would-be fans in a discussion that went downhill pretty quickly. [<a href="http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/reddit-users-mock-woody-harrelson-after-interview-fiasco-201252">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:448">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/20100318/1238548620/dailydirt-epic-fail-advertising.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1238548620/dailydirt-epic-fail-advertising.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1238548620/dailydirt-epic-fail-advertising.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=20100318/1238548620</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:31:51 PDT</pubDate>
<title>TSA May Announce New Behavior Screening Plans Soon</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110729/15581015323/tsa-may-announce-new-behavior-screening-plans-soon.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110729/15581015323/tsa-may-announce-new-behavior-screening-plans-soon.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Apparently the TSA is planning to roll out <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0711/TSA_readying_new_behavior_detection_plan_for_airport_checkpoints.html" target="_blank">some changes to its screening process</a> in the coming months, including embracing at least some of the "Israeli method" of airplane security, which tends to focus much more on behavior, rather than what you have on you.
<blockquote><i>
"I'm very much interested in expanding the behavior detection program, upgrading it if you will, in a way that allows us to&hellip;.have more interaction with a passsenger just from a discussion which may be able to expedite the physical screening aspects," [TSA boss John] Pistole said during an appearance at the Aspen Security Forum  in Colorado. "So, we've looked at what works around the world, some outstanding examples and we are planning to do some new things in the near future here."
<br /><br />
Pistole declined to elaborate on the enhanced behavior detection program but said it would "probably" be announced in August. During an on-stage interview with CNN's Jeanne Meserve, Pistole acknowledged that the Israeli techniques have been carefully examined.
<br /><br />
"There's a lot--under that Israeli model--a lot that is done that is obviously very effective," he said. 
</i></blockquote>
Of course, the devil is always in the details, but it would be nice if the security practices were more focused on stuff that actually works, rather than pure security theater.  Pistole also appears to have reiterated <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110623/06410014825/tsa-chief-pistole-maybe-we-can-stop-petting-your-children.shtml">earlier comments</a> about how the TSA may change its procedures so that <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110414/02544013890/tsa-gropes-6-year-old-girl-says-its-okay-since-it-followed-standard-operating-procedure.shtml">little kids</a> don't need to be groped so much, saying that it would have parents "more involved in the process of helping TSA personnel figure out why a child is setting off alarms."   
<br /><br />
Tough luck for <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110627/02353514872/tsa-says-groping-dying-95-year-old-woman-forcing-her-to-remove-diaper-is-ok-because-it-followed-standard-procedure.shtml">the elderly</a>, however, since apparently many of the people on the terrorist watch list are old, so you still need to get groped.  Seems like a logical fallacy of course.  Just because many terrorists are old, that doesn't mean many old people are terrorists.  A bit strange that the TSA doesn't seem to recognize this.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110729/15581015323/tsa-may-announce-new-behavior-screening-plans-soon.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110729/15581015323/tsa-may-announce-new-behavior-screening-plans-soon.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110729/15581015323/tsa-may-announce-new-behavior-screening-plans-soon.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>wait-and-see</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110729/15581015323</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:32:08 PDT</pubDate>
<title>TSA Can Grope Dying Old Ladies; But Can't Catch Guy Boarding Flight Illegally?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01460214949/tsa-can-grope-dying-old-ladies-cant-catch-guy-boarding-flight-illegally.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01460214949/tsa-can-grope-dying-old-ladies-cant-catch-guy-boarding-flight-illegally.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Apparently the TSA's Security Theater is a comedy.  <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=pjerky">Pjerky</a> was the first of a whole bunch of you to alert us last week about the TSA's massive failure to <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/06/30/flight.stowaway/index.html?iref=obnetwork" target="_blank">catch a Nigerian man who boarded a flight</a> without a valid boarding pass.  The man successfully flew from New York to Los Angeles.  Apparently, the flight crew discovered they had a stowaway after people complained about the man's smell (even though he was seated in a seat).  I'm not quite sure how complaining about someone's smell leads to them being found out as a stowaway, but what I do know is that the guy was not arrested when the flight landed.  Instead, he was taken into custody a few days later when he tried to <i>do it again</i> by getting on a Delta flight from LA to Atlanta without a boarding pass.  This time, the FBI took him in, but later released him.  Meanwhile, the TSA was busy <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110627/02353514872/tsa-says-groping-dying-95-year-old-woman-forcing-her-to-remove-diaper-is-ok-because-it-followed-standard-procedure.shtml">groping 95-year-old cancer patients</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01460214949/tsa-can-grope-dying-old-ladies-cant-catch-guy-boarding-flight-illegally.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01460214949/tsa-can-grope-dying-old-ladies-cant-catch-guy-boarding-flight-illegally.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/01460214949/tsa-can-grope-dying-old-ladies-cant-catch-guy-boarding-flight-illegally.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>security-theater</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110702/01460214949</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:33:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>While TSA Sexually Assaults Miss USA... It's Letting Other Passengers Through Without Clearance</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110428/11331714068/while-tsa-sexually-assaults-miss-usa-its-letting-other-passengers-through-without-clearance.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110428/11331714068/while-tsa-sexually-assaults-miss-usa-its-letting-other-passengers-through-without-clearance.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ As the TSA is busy <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110427/15195914059/tsa-molests-miss-usa-makes-her-cry-your-safety.shtml">sexually assaulting Miss USA</a>, apparently it's not paying very close attention to everyone else.  The TSA has confirmed that in the past five days alone, it has had to <a href="http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/04/tsa_confirms_3_screening_misha.html" target="_blank">shut down security screenings three separate times, at Newark airport</a>, after screeners accidentally let passengers go through without being "fully" screened.  These aren't cases of people sneaking through either.  Apparently, it involved people designated for further screening who were then ignored and went about their businesses of heading to their gates and boarding their flights.  I wonder if those people were able to get <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110427/01531214053/weve-trained-tsa-to-search-liquid-instead-bombs.shtml">liquid</a> through to the gate area!<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110428/11331714068/while-tsa-sexually-assaults-miss-usa-its-letting-other-passengers-through-without-clearance.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110428/11331714068/while-tsa-sexually-assaults-miss-usa-its-letting-other-passengers-through-without-clearance.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110428/11331714068/while-tsa-sexually-assaults-miss-usa-its-letting-other-passengers-through-without-clearance.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>feeling-safer?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110428/11331714068</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Mar 2011 04:37:58 PST</pubDate>
<title>Lazy TSA Agents Let Thousands Of Bags Through Unscreened (But They Gotta See Us Naked)</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110304/01454313360/lazy-tsa-agents-let-thousands-bags-through-unscreened-they-gotta-see-us-naked.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110304/01454313360/lazy-tsa-agents-let-thousands-bags-through-unscreened-they-gotta-see-us-naked.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ While the TSA and the US government continue to insist that it's absolutely necessary to see passengers naked before they can get on a plane, it appears that not everyone in the TSA is so committed to such thorough searches.  Apparently, the feds are investigating a group of 27 TSA agents in Hawaii who <a href="http://consumerist.com/2011/03/feds-investigating-hawaii-tsa-agents-who-allegedly-failed-to-screen-luggage.html" target="_blank">apparently just skipped over the part of their jobs where they were supposed to screen luggage</a>.  Instead, they just tagged the luggage, saying it was screened and let it go on planes.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110304/01454313360/lazy-tsa-agents-let-thousands-bags-through-unscreened-they-gotta-see-us-naked.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110304/01454313360/lazy-tsa-agents-let-thousands-bags-through-unscreened-they-gotta-see-us-naked.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110304/01454313360/lazy-tsa-agents-let-thousands-bags-through-unscreened-they-gotta-see-us-naked.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>feeling-safer?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110304/01454313360</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 9 Feb 2011 11:07:07 PST</pubDate>
<title>Recording Industry Persecution Complex: Claiming EMI's Plight Is Due To File Sharing</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110209/01314213018/recording-industry-persecution-complex-claiming-emis-plight-is-due-to-file-sharing.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110209/01314213018/recording-industry-persecution-complex-claiming-emis-plight-is-due-to-file-sharing.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/user/bas">Bas</a> points us to a bizarre opinion piece for NME (which is usually a <i>bit</i> better than this) in which recording industry insider Alan McGee <a href="http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=146&title=emi_s_plight_proves_it_downloading_has_m&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1" target="_blank">posts a near factless diatribe</a> claiming that EMI's recent takeover by Citigroup <i>proves</i> that "downloading has murdered the music business."  There's almost nothing accurate in McGee's piece.  It's fantasy-world writing where people just make up stuff.  Let's dig in a bit:
<blockquote><i>
First things first: EMI is still a great British label. I mean, it owns the Beatles back catalogue! So why is it in the hands of a bank? It&rsquo;s just economics. Guy Hands bought it in 2007, at the height of the market, when people were paying stupid prices for everything, not just labels. 
</i></blockquote>
Ok.  So we agree.  Guy Hands (well, really his firm Terra Firma) paid <i>way</i> too much for EMI in 2007.  Frankly, that's the reason for EMI's plight today.  Terra Firma got infatuated with the names on EMI's roster, didn't understand the recording industry at all, and got suckered into paying way over a reasonable price, and then couldn't handle the debt load.  It had nothing to do with people paying stupid prices in 2007.  People weren't paying stupid prices for record labels -- just Terra Firma.  And that's because they didn't really understand what they were buying. 
<blockquote><i>
The trouble is, now everyone has woken up to the reality, which is that illegal downloading is murdering the music business. 
</i></blockquote>
So much incorrect in such a short sentence.  First, I don't think anyone views the industry's situation much different in 2011 as they did in 2007.  File sharing was rampant then as it is now.  The struggles the recording industry were facing were already quite clear in 2007 (hell, they were clear in 1997 to people paying attention).  Second, the only part of the "music business" struggling is the record labels.  Nearly every other part of the music business has grown massively over the last decade.  Third, there is little to no evidence that "illegal downloading" is the cause of any serious problems.  Yes, it does act as a substitution in some cases, but as we've seen over and over again, when musical acts embrace file sharing in conjunction with a smart business model, they end up making more money.  So, no, "illegal downloading" is not the cause of EMI's problems.  EMI's inability to adapt to a changing market, combined with a massive debt overload was the issue.
<blockquote><i>
I actually think Guy Hands didn&rsquo;t do a bad job. He was just personally unfortunate. He came along at the wrong time. Shit happens. It was a time of affluence of abundance. Then the world economy turned upside down, Lehman Brothers went broke, and the world changed. The market crashed.
</i></blockquote>
Huh?  The market crash had nothing to do with the troubles facing EMI.  Nor does McGee show how the two are connected.  As with his earlier claims, he just insists it's true with no proof.
<blockquote><i>
EMI's problems should be a wake-up call. How did they get into this mess? It all comes back to the impact of illegal downloading. We have to change the legislation in this country and come down much harder on piracy. 
</i></blockquote>
First up, we've already discussed why the impact of unauthorized file sharing was not the problem, but more importantly, countries around the world have been changing legislation plenty over the last decade to come down much harder on "piracy" and it's done nothing to improve the lot of the record labels.  Is McGee totally unaware of the Digital Economy Act in the UK?  Rather than recognize that such laws have been passed and have not helped the record labels, McGee just wants more protectionism.  That old line about the definition of insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results may apply...
<blockquote><i>
Otherwise guys in little bands starting out now are never going to be the next Rolling Stones.
</i></blockquote>
Wait, so the only options are failure or the Rolling Stones?  And that statement is a ridiculous one either way.  What we've seen (and been documenting for years) is that things are much <i>better</i> for bands starting out today than in the past because they don't need to win over the gatekeepers.  They can find their own audience.  They can create their own business models and make a living -- unlike under the old system, where you either hit it big or you gave up and went back to your day job.  As for who will be the next Rolling Stones, I have little fear that the general nature of human psyche will continue to find new acts to turn into superstars.
<br><br>
And, should we even mention just how much money the Rolling Stones make from <i>touring</i>, which is an industry that has actually been <i>helped</i> by unauthorized downloads in building up larger fanbases of various bands?
<blockquote><i>
When you download an album illegally, it's not the record company guys that get fucked -- those people are still on massive salaries -- it's 19-year-old kids, it's guys in bands making &pound;100 a gig.
</i></blockquote>
Wait, what?  In this <i>very same paragraph</i> you claimed the totality of EMI's problems were due to unauthorized file sharing, but then just a few sentences later you claim the record labels aren't impacted.  Keep it together, McGee.  As for the impact on the 19-year-old kids making &pound;100 per gig, they can actually be massively <i>helped</i> by file sharing, because the more people who know and like their music, the more people will be willing to come out to their gigs, so maybe they'll start making more than that &pound;100.
<blockquote><i>
When I came along in the 80s and 90s, I was lucky to be in a market where people bought music. Now If I wanted an album, I could just go on some torrent site and download it. You've got to give bands a chance, let them develop. In the 80s, bands started dodgy, then they got good. The bands I worked with &ndash; Primal Scream, My Bloody Valentine, even Oasis -- it took them a few years to go from being OK to being good. These days bands don't get the chance, they just get dropped.
</i></blockquote>
Again these are statements that appear to imply some sort of causal relationship, but fail to show any.  What does the fact that people bought CDs have to do with letting a band develop?  I mean, if it really takes so much time for a band to develop, then doesn't that mean people shouldn't be buying their early music <i>anyway</i>?  And the final line highlights the crux of the problem: it assumes that the only way to succeed today is by signing to some big label.  So if that label drops you, you're screwed.  And yet, we're seeing over and over again that musical acts are being amazingly successful without a label (since they don't need to make nearly as much money as they have to on a label to make a damn good living).  In fact, we're seeing bands <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100524/2348409556.shtml"><i>celebrate being dropped from their labels</i></a>, because it means more freedom to develop and the ability to make more money.
<blockquote><i>
There's only one independent label, post-Creation, that's really been phenomenal, and that's Domino. Laurence (Bell, owner) is a genius. He's touched with gold dust. Whether it sells or not, he's got the magic touch. 
</i></blockquote>
This is a total non sequitur.  What does the fact that there's been a good indie label have to do with file sharing or EMI?!?  Furthermore, "whether it sells or not," seemed to be the whole point earlier in the article.  Now it doesn't matter? Finally, to say that there's only been one good indie record label suggests a level of ignorance to what's actually going on in the music world today.  There are a bunch of fantastic indie labels out there.  Perhaps McGee should get out more.
<blockquote><i>
As for me, if I ran EMI, I'd get legislation changed and make a profit by stopping piracy. 
</i></blockquote>
Can someone -- anyone -- explain how getting people to stop downloading creates a profit anywhere?  Getting people to stop downloading doesn't magically make them start buying.  And it's not like EMI hasn't been among the efforts by all the major record labels to get legislation changed for years, and all of that has done <i>absolutely nothing</i> to stop file sharing.  It's pure folly to suggest that there's some sort of magical legislative move that will stop unauthorized file sharing and create "profits" at the same time.
<br><Br>
What <i>will</i> do that, however, is smarter business models -- something that McGee never even seems to consider.  Thankfully, reading through the comments on that article, nearly everyone is pointing out all of these points to McGee, though I doubt he'll ever read any of them.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110209/01314213018/recording-industry-persecution-complex-claiming-emis-plight-is-due-to-file-sharing.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110209/01314213018/recording-industry-persecution-complex-claiming-emis-plight-is-due-to-file-sharing.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110209/01314213018/recording-industry-persecution-complex-claiming-emis-plight-is-due-to-file-sharing.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>um,-no</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110209/01314213018</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:52:13 PST</pubDate>
<title>Are IT Failures Costing $6.2 Trillion Per Year?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20091231/0349527560.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20091231/0349527560.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I'm always quite skeptical about huge numbers that come out of studies, such as the "losses" claimed by the entertainment industry due to piracy.  So I was pretty skeptical of a story (found via <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/12/28/0617206" target="_blank">Slashdot</a>) claiming that <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=7627&#038;utm_source=feedburner&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=Feed%3A zdnet%2Fprojectfailures (ZDNet Project Failures)" target="_blank">IT failures cost $6.2 trillion per year worldwide</a>.  If true, that would be a staggering figure.  I have no doubt that IT "failures" are costly, but that number seems extreme.  Just glancing over the report itself, it's definitely not based on any kind of stringent methodology, and seems to count any IT project failure as a <i>total loss</i>, and then adds in "indirect costs" which sound suspiciously like "ripple effects" which, as we've demonstrated before are actually ways to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071003/101456.shtml">double- or triple-count</a> the same dollars over and over again.  It seems that many others see huge problems with the original report as well, even to the point of suggesting that its <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=7695" target="_blank">orders of magnitude off</a>.
<br /><br />
While the debate rages on over how to properly count the "cost" of such failures, I'm beginning to wonder how useful such a number is.  Isn't a more useful discussion on how to <i>prevent</i> or <i>minimize</i> the impact of any such failures?  The aggregate number may look good in being able to see some big number, but aggregate numbers can hide important details inside.  For example, back in the early (and even late) 90s there were lots of reports about how computerizing your business was not shown to have added any productivity.  A poor conclusion from this was that computering your business was not a smart idea.  But the problem was that this was aggregate data.  It failed to realize that many, many businesses had boosted productivity through the use of computers, and many of the large failures that wiped out the aggregate "gains" were from a few big businesses that did a really poor implementation.  It didn't mean that computerizing was necessarily a bad idea, but that some of the biggest early players just did a bad job of it.
<br /><br />
So, if we're going to be discussing IT failures, why not step away from that aggregate info and try to focus in on ways to actually minimize the impact of whatever IT failures might occur?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20091231/0349527560.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20091231/0349527560.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20091231/0349527560.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>um,-no</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091231/0349527560</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:01:02 PDT</pubDate>
<title>AOL To Nuke Users' Content On Halloween</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/0206432604.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/0206432604.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <b>theodp</b> writes <i>&quot;Blaming an unquantified decline in usage, AOL has notified users it's decided the best thing to do is <a href="http://www.peopleconnectionblog.com/2008/09/30/were-closing-our-doors/">delete all of their blogs and files on October 31st</a>. Want to save that precious blog of yours? <a href="http://www.peopleconnectionblog.com/2008/09/30/how-to-save-your-info-australia/">AOL not-so-helpfully suggests</a>: 'The quickest and easiest way to do this is by copying and pasting your content into a word processing document such as Microsoft Word, Notepad or even into an email and mailing it back to yourself. If you have any images we suggest you save them separately by right clicking on the image, choosing "Save Picture As" and allocate the drive on your PC where you would like to save them to.' Gee, thanks. And don't get too smug, Google users - the search giant has put its users on notice that <a href="http://pages.google.com/-/about.html">Google Page Creator will be a thing of the past by year-end</a>, although details of the transition have yet to be provided.&quot;</i>
<br /><br />
These are just a few more in a long line of attempts by big companies to enable user generated content without much of a plan.  With so much attention in the space, plenty of large companies (including Yahoo and Microsoft, in addition to Google and AOL mentioned here) rushed out various tools for users, but forgot to explain to them why they might want to use them.  For the most part, they just launched them and figured users would show up willingly.  It turns out that, even if you're a big company, it's not so easy to get user adoption if you don't offer anything particularly special compared to what's already out there.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/0206432604.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/0206432604.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/0206432604.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bye-bye</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081021/0206432604</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:13:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>JP Morgan Buys Bear Stearns For Pennies On The Dollar; What's It Mean For Tech?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080316/205248556.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080316/205248556.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ While not strictly a technology story, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/business/16cnd-bear.html?_r=1&#038;ex=1363406400&#038;en=fa281a3d92db11ae&#038;ei=5088&#038;partner=rssnyt&#038;emc=rss&#038;oref=slogin" target="_new">JPMorgan's buyout of Bear Stearns on Sunday is worth looking at</a> in the larger context of the tech industry.  As you hopefully know by now, JPMorgan picked up Bear Stearns for $2/share, a total of $236 million, which is (quite literally) pennies on the dollar for a firm that not so long ago was valued at $170/share and on Friday alone had tumbled from about $55/share to $30/share.  On Friday, of course, the Fed stepped in to keep Bear Stearns alive (through JPMorgan) and the weekend was spent trying to figure out options before the Asian markets could open late Sunday night (US time).  There will be plenty of Monday-morning quarterbacking on this deal (so it's fitting that it all played out on a Sunday), but the discussions about the impact on the tech world has been mixed if anything.  It would be great to get the perspective of some readers on how this is likely to play out for tech companies (both big and small).  While many may be somewhat isolated from a meltdown on Wall Street, there certainly are some important indirect connections.  From what I've seen, it doesn't seem like there will be much short-term impact, but the longer-term issues could be worth watching out for.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080316/205248556.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080316/205248556.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080316/205248556.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bubble-bursting-or-economic-collapse?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080316/205248556</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>