> If the ads are genuinely so important to those putting those ads on their sites, then they shouldn't have abused it, nor allowed the advertisers to abuse it so badly that everyone was universally forced into blocking ads
Karma Blocker for Firefox lets some ads through to support the publishers while blocking annoying ads.
At $1M/yr in extortion for Foursquare alone, wouldn't it make sense for companies to publish, perhaps anonymously, the patent threats made against them, then contribute to a pool to defend one of the pool's members, and have the patent invalidated? This would be a band-aid of course since the source of the problem is the patent office.
Glyn wrote: > According to the proposal, as soon as a new regulation is in the pipeline, businesses should be informed through an annual report, and be involved.
But the proposal says: "Each Party shall make publicly available at least once a year a list of planned regulatory acts ...providing information on their respective scope and objectives."
Isn't "make publicly available" what TAFTA/TTIP opponents have been asking for? Wouldn't TAFTA/TTIP be made public under this proposal?
The proposal also says: "...the regulating Party shall offer a reasonable opportunity for any domestic or foreign natural or legal person that may be potentially affected by a planned regulatory act to provide input through a public consultation process, and shall take into account the contributions received in the finalisation of their regulatory acts."
Isn't a public consultation process also a welcome improvement over the current process?
Meanwhile in Massachusetts, where teen camp counselors and college interns have been required to sign 1-year noncompetes for summer jobs (NYT: http://goo.gl/hFBgIq), a legislative conference committee killed reform for 2014 in closed session: http://goo.gl/nP9OQd. This was despite the Governor's support, 32-7 Senate support, and anticipated House support.
No need for anti-poaching agreements if you can keep employees from changing jobs with noncompetes.
> There's a committee hearing on July 1, 11am at the MA State House...
Written testimony is welcome from MA residents who can't attend the hearing as well as those who can. Email written testimony to Gale.Candaras and Thomas.McGee, both @masenate.gov; and to Joseph.Wagner and Ann-Margaret.Ferrante, both @mahouse.gov. Be sure to cc your state legislators who can be found via the NEVCA's page at http://nononcompete.co .
Twitter search: #noncompete OR #killnoncompetes OR #noncompetes OR #nononcompetes OR #keepnoncompetes
Massachusetts Gov. Patrick has proposed banning noncompetes in MA as discussed in the NY Times at http://goo.gl/hFBgIq .
Unfortunately large MA companies like EMC ( http://goo.gl/KnF8yc ) have so far held the upper hand in the MA Legislature over the concerns of employees, groups like IEEE, and the venture capiltal community. Without mentioning employees, the House Chair of the joint committee that cut the noncompete ban from the Gov's economic development bill told the Globe, "...he has heard from more companies that want to keep noncompete agreements in place than those that favor eliminating them." ( http://goo.gl/GGdbCd )
There's a committee hearing on July 1, 11am at the MA State House where residents can speak for 3 mins. each about the impact of noncompetes. See http://goo.gl/0n1V40 .
Besides California, noncompetes are unenforceable in India, and they require "reasonable compensation" in China.
Can Amex legally donate the patent, take a deduction, then terminate the organization's nonprofit status?
From faqs.org at http://ow.ly/24RRmZ :
Employer Identification Number (EIN): 320085922
Name of Organization Consumer And Merchant Awareness Foundation
In Care of Name: American Express Company
Deductibility: Contributions are deductible
Exempt Organization Status: Organization terminating its private foundation status under section 507(b)(1)(B) of the Code
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by KJ.