Perhaps an amendment should be made to this bill that would require a similar notice be posted in the workplaces of all copyright-enabled businesses (you know, like publishers, movie studios, and grocery stores) warning of the penalties associated with filing a false DMCA claim.
Just like the television show Star Trek , "This Week In Techdirt History" is a five year mission. Any longer than that, and it would necessarily be reruns, since everything from 5 to 20 years would (obviously) have already been covered.
No, it just goes recursive after that. I for one am looking forward to "This week in 'This week in Techdirt history' history" posts.
The idea of regulating free speech with a 1787 constitution is one of the craziest ideas I’ve ever heard.
Just think of the logic of using a 1787 constitution that was designed when we relied on hand-operated printing presses as the basis to regulate the most dynamic part of life in America. It’s not going to be good for consumers. It’s certainly not going to be good for innovation.
On top of the problems with her suit already mentioned, there's the question of whether publishing her real age violates her privacy or breaches any contract. I'd say her chances of any money are pretty slim.
The Radiance Foundation's speech, while wholly obnoxious[...]
While I agree with the OP about the inappropriateness of using trademark law to stifle speech, I have to say that the word "obnoxious" falls short of the mark here. Obnoxious was your little brother on a long car trip when you were ten. How about "reprehensible"?
Just peeked on Amazon, and while all of the 1.0 Keurig machines had 4 and 5 star ratings, the 2.0 machines are averaging about 2 stars. Looks like Keurig's customers aren't as loyal/stupid as Keurig thought.
Nope. The problem is that Excel converts the *value* of the cell to the numeric equivalent that represents the date, and also converts the cell format to Date. So if you format as text, you fix one problem, but not the other. "DEC1" becomes 41974, for example.
"Yeah, I was peeping through your window, and yes, I happened to see you naked, but I shouldn't be arrested for that because if I am arrested, I will have to think about what I saw (as part of my defense, of course) and you don't want me thinking about you naked, do you?"
"I think Dan Brown's books are very dangerous. The quantity of hours that people read these action novels. It becomes a reality of some sort, and that's a part of it. It really comes down to educating schools and parents. To say 'you know what, you can't read that, sorry, I'm just not going to let you do it'."
"His entire adult life has been dedicated to taking advantage of others, using his computer expertise to violate others' privacy, to embarrass others, to build his reputation on the backs of those less skilled than he,"
Funny how this quote could, with minor grammatical modifications, be applied to the "victim", AT&T...
My 2013 is so much better now that Bev has appeared in it. She never ceases to amuse me. Some of the other commenters seem to want to associate new terms with her name. However, I am confident that she would be able to do so without any outside help.
Of course the traditional publishers have more overhead. They have to protect against devaluation. That PC on the desk? They pay $2000 for it, because they wouldn't want to devalue the PC by paying less. Long distance phone calls? They pay 12 cents a minute for the same reason. What's that you say? They don't do that? Then why do they think consumers would want to do it?
This article is just crazy talk. Of course you should squeeze every last bit of value from something you create! A bunch of movie studios are missing out on this. You know those previews that take up the first 15 minutes of every cinema experience? They should be charging viewers for those. Let's face it, if it is a comedy, that's usually where the best jokes are anyway.
Having a charitable component is kinda cool. Yes, in this case it's after-the-f cool.
To me, that it is after the fact makes it even cooler. It means that he's giving to charity because he wants to, not to drive sales. That's pretty high up there on the mermaldad heirarchy of commercial charitable giving:
From lowest to highest esteem
For every purchase you make, we'll make a gonation to the Central Ypsilanti Network for Infants, Children and Lepers (CYNICAL), up to $100,000.
My reaction: That's nice, but if you really wanted to give, you wouldn't put a cap on the amount. This is more about sales than a desire to give.
Help us raise money for CYNICAL by donating at the cash register.
My reaction: I'm glad that you are supporting this cause, but when you present the oversized check, will you remember to mention that the money was donated by your customers?
We are donating $100,000 to CYNICAL.
My reaction: that is nice. No gimmicks, just a nice gift to a worthy cause.