This model would work just fine and is already in use! How to keep the price related to the screen size? Simply offer the movie at different resolutions! For a mobile device, the movie can be set at a resolution of 640x400 and it would look good on your mobile phone but bad on a moviescreen. Make the resolution bigger and it would look great on a television-sized screen. And offer it at 4K resolution and there's your movie theater quality. It is already possible to buy movies at SD or HD formats, at DVD or Bluray, where BluRay is supposed to have a better quality image. No one will watch a 4K movie on a mobile phone either, since it takes a huge amount of disk space and processing power. Just as no one would use a movie at SD format on a 4K-able monitor. It would look just pixelated. Don't think it will never happen since it's already happening today. It even happened yesterday, the day before that, and even further in the past. Jeffrey Katzenberg is correct that price would vary based on resolution. He just refers to this as screen size.
That depends on the size. As you know, some women have special implants to make their boobs bigger. What if a suicide terrorist gives herself a couple of fake tits by using a dangerous explosive? Then all she has to do is to shake the milkmachines and BOOM! Everyone goes tits-up in the area...
Aren't women allowed to walk topless in NY in any location where men can walk topless? If so, let's go all to ESB and make a whole gallery of bare breasts! Both male and female and everything in-between! (Is someone prepared to pay for my ticket from Europe to NY, btw? :-) )
Yelp has a very good reason. If they win or lose, it doesn't matter. This company is now out in the open for creating fake identities which hurts their reputation and all kinds of forums and blogs (like Techdirt) can report about the bad behaviour of this company.
It also sets an example for other companies telling them Yelp might name and shame them too.
And of course the value of Yelp would decrease if they did nothing... They make a business out of true reviews so overflooding it with fake ones is bad for business. Especially such clueless ones...
Google: "Applications can offer almost always late fee when life payday loans"
I've Googled the part of their spam links and noticed that GWC fills the first 15 to 25 entries with this exact text.
But the explanation is simple. The spam has a "nemonn" class name, which has been identified as a hack. At WordPress support (see URL) they have mentioned it and basically it seems to be an additional PHP file that's included in their website which will insert the spam in this specific paragraph.
The purpose of this all is a bit unclear to me, although I suspect the hacker wants to get a higher ranking in search engines for these specific websites. I don't think the hacker would like to draw much attention to it...
This girl isn't stupid. She just wanted to get caught. After a marriage gone wrong, I guess something just snapped in her mind and she wanted to end her current lifestyle, do something crazy and then spend some time in jail. Some people are just nutcases who want to be locked up...
Drones could also be used for medical purposes on the battlefield. Provide some basic medical knowledge to 20% of the battlefield soldiers and then they can call in a medicbot with proper medical equipment for specific wounds. Since the Meditbot would have plenty of testing in the civilian world, it would also be very helpful to save the lives of soldiers shot or otherwise harmed in the line of duty.
But then again, a bad example. It could also be used to move interrogation material to the battlefield to interrogate a fallen enemy soldier, keeping then alive long enough to provide information about the enemy.
Well, the effect of this ruling could be that Apple is now forced to tell the World (okay, just the UK) that Samsung did NOT copy them. Such a confession might have some additional effects on similar cases world-wide and possibly even help with the case in the USA, which Apple won.
In the USA, Samsung could now present this advertisement/confession from Apple and turn that ruling around...
Of course, not just in the USA. It could happen everywhere, where Apple sued Samsung over the design. Apple is forced to confes they've been wrong. Such a confession can be very valuable, when other courts recognize it as such.
Actually, transferring the "original pictures" does make a lot of sense, since it would also transfer any copyrights on those images. With the originals now owned by the Royal family, they can stop any other usage of those images with an infringement claim...
Too bad the magazine wasn't the owner, and thus could not transfer the original license, just the license of what they've done to those images. Basically, they just got a license from the original photographer to create a derived work (which was already published) and then stop any further publishing of this derived work.
It's not a matter of owning the negatives or whatever. It's about owning the rights on those images.
You won't sell much when the "Buy" button is disabled.
Also, I've noticed another problem. I wanted to order a t-shirt for a friend of mine which costs $29.00 but shipping costs to the Netherlands adds another $47.95 to the price. Wow! With such expensive shipping costs, you won't sell much merchandise outside the USA.
Cancelling that order again... Way too expensive! :-)
Please keep in mind that Techdirt has plenty of international visitors. Maybe you should find a way to cut those costs?
Well, I use Google Chrome, latest version. And I'm an insider as you can see by my icon.
What I can see is this screenshot on my website which doesn't seem to contain any option to actually purchase anything.
German laws are becoming less real every day. Okay, I don't like facial recognition in facebook either, since it allows people to follow me on pictures taken by others, where I've been tagged. It could one day even result in some freak who takes a picture of my face on the street to use that picture to track my own facebook profile and all information that I share, plus what others share about me.
If this technique continues then I could end up with a bunch of stalkers who find out who I am, where I live, where I work, simply by taking a picture of me.
But having to destroy that database? That's over the top. It should stay, but each facebook member must give permission first before she can be tagged. (Yes, opt-in instead of opt-out.)