I'm not going to dedicate my version to the Public Domain (don't think I can under European law), but it's freely licensed for all purposes except large scale distribution. That allows anyone to use it whilst preventing big business capitalising on it. :)
Hmm, you're right. Okay, here's my second attempt: I would hope that Warner/Chappel pays back what they charged, plus inflation, with a $150,000 penalty per incident of Public Domain violation. There, that fixes it and uses the maximalists' favourite word against them. :D
Or claiming you were raped without having any broken bones to show. So even if someone has semen dripping from their torn orifice(s), they still can't file rape charges unless they also have a fractured clavicle? That's what I thought. Idiot.
I remember once reading a gay erotic story that was written during the early days of the World Wide Web where somebody had a vibrating dildo inside him pretty much 24/7, and it was controlled by someone in the same household who was himself acting under orders he received online. I can no longer find the story, unfortunately, because the person wearing the dildo was an underage boy, and that's the type of story that search engines and erotic websites purged a few years back. :( Still, wouldn't that count as prior art?
This was fully in the city's interests, because it's unclear on why a municipality should be granted a trademark on a local landmark's image when it isn't actually using that image in commerce. Are you sure about that? Isn't taking licensing fees from the unsuspecting a form of trade?
Facebook then [...] stated they'd [...] be banning encrypted content . And that attitude is exactly why I've never had a Facebook account (with the possible exception of a shadow account). Your desire to absolutely every little thing about me doesn't trump my right to privacy and security, Suckerberk.