If the school paid money for the design, they should go after their designer - and get that person to pay their costs for the redesign/repainting etc. It would have been fraud.
And if the design was contributed by a student or employee who didn't know better; well, you get what you pay for.
Either way, Dodge could have made this a win/win and didn't.
Is the olympics happening again? I hadn't noticed.
OK, seriously - I know the olympics are happening, but I can't say I care. I don't think I've watched much of any olympics in 12 or 16 years. It's not that I'm not a sports fan: I check football, basketball, and hockey scores online most every night - and watch a game or two on TV each week.
But I lost interest in the olympics around the time the US broadcasters went US only in their coverage of it. The absurd trademark police don't help, but truthfully I'd put up with that absurdity if the sports they broadcast interested me.
I had high hopes a decade ago that cable and internet would open up many channels to allow me to pick and choose sports to watch. Alas, no.
Keep us posted here. I'd contribute to a Kevin Smith film.
If jurors are permitted to do their own research, then won't we have a cottage industry emerge with the specific purpose of putting information in front of jurors to lobby them toward a particular conclusion?
I strongly suspect that outcome would take about 15 minutes to develop. Then the question becomes: do we police that cottage industry in some way (to, for example, prevent interested parties from lying to jurors), or do we simply consider that part of the eco-system of justice and everything is fair play?
Not sure what you are getting at with DP and Fox. Am in Chicago too and have been following the case. I know about the current proceedings about use of hearsay - but what did Fox do.
And for others: as of yet there is no jury in this case.
So, when I go to an ATM, am I supposed to determine whether it is connected via the Internet to know whether I have to be licensed to use it? And if I am not licensed, am I breaking the law?
I am proposing to my girlfriend's LLC.
Third, did they confirm that the students became fans of the page AFTER the actionable offending material was added to it?
After all, I can create a benign page on Facebook, garner lots of friends, and then alter page content to make it malignant. It would be unfair to punish friends of the page who hadn't realized the content changed.
Without knowing the cost structure for the different formats (hard cover, soft cover, e-books), I can't evaluate what the logical pricing model should be.
But it seems to me that once variable costs are figured in, the publisher should know what the contribution margin is for any given book in every possible format. And--this is the key point--shouldn't the publisher be indifferent to format if it is receiving the same contribution margin?
For some reason publishers don't seem to be--and I can't figure out why.
I have no idea the legality, but I do know that Tempur-Pedic sets the retail pricing of its mattresses. Dealers are not permitted to either discount or surcharge the list price (though they find fancy ways to get around this vendor restriction).
That's nobody's business but the Turks'
Newsday makes no sense.
I am not a Cablevision subscriber.
Newsday says they aren't interested in a paywall to get people to pay.
I go to the Newsday site, but can't read their product as I haven't paid.
Don't they want me to read their product (and see the ads on those pages?)
QUICK!
Trademark "iPed" before Apple gets into the bicycle computer business.
"Here is a guy who has written a book which he expects people to pay for before reading, and you're suggesting that people shouldn't ridicule him for the views in his book?"
Exactly! That is what I am saying.
Ridicule the views, don't ridicule the person.
I emailed Wikileaks this morning about making a donation and inquired about a conduit other than PayPal. Received an email back from the wikileaks address this afternoon telling me that "Paypal has unfrozen our account as of this afternoon."
They also said CC donation can be made at https://tipit.to/wikileaks.org
They do not currently have US 501c3 status, but are working on it.
I spent much of the 1990s debating online with Holocaust deniers (alt.revisionism was ground zero.) Lanier's debating style reminds me of the class of denier who was a follower rather than a leader.
Lanier sounds to me as though he is someone who has a deep emotional connection to the argument he is making, but is parroting someone else's logic rather than having constructed his own. He lacks a deep understanding of the argument so, when pressed, he has to fall back on phrases he internalized during his own learning; or he waffles because he really doesn't know.
When one is debating someone like this it is unlikely one changes the debaters mind--unless one is table to tap into the emotional place that brought him to his original position. Rather one is debating more to sway the audience.
To that end, it is important to do what Paley did: treat Lanier with respect even if as his logic is being shredded. An audience member new to the topic can be persuaded by this approach. If the debate against Lanier becomes nasty or ad hominem, the naive listener may become sympathetic to the victim.
For that reason, the nasty ad hominems here are not helpful.
"Imagine buying what you thought was a legitimate DVD and then being dragged to court for it."
Or worse, receiving one as a gift!
Perhaps the Times is on to something big here. Maybe they should adjust their hard copy newsstand price to maximize revenue.
They could charge less on slow news days and more whenever a plane crashes into the Hudson.
They could charge less at the end of the day when the news is more stale (like bakeries sell donuts at half price before closing.)
With networked computerized paper boxes, they could even do this without a human vendor involved.
This way, you will never know what you are going to pay for the hard copy paper until you go to pay it.
That ought to help them sell more papers!
I came to comments to say exactly what Sneeje said. And if we both thought of it right away, so will many of the paying subscribers.
My subscription is worth more if it gets me into content I can't get into for free. If they keep tinkering with the dial, they keep tinkering with the value of my subscription.
Escaping persecution? So that's why they call them "Mayflower" vans.
My reading of the legislation suggests that the Republican Party in South Carolina, if they intend to support a 2012 candidate for President other than Barack Obama, is planning to advocate, teach, advise and practice the act of seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States.
It's what we do every four years.
So, now they have to register or be in violation of the law. Or move out of South Carolina.