1 Comment »

Oy! On the first day of Passover, I opened Oregon’s newspaper of record to find this example of photo journalism gone wrong.

The headline reads, “Jews gather to bless the sun”. Pictured are Shmuel, Shimey, Menachem, and others engaged in prayer.  The text doesn’t mention it, but they are Lubavitchers (a sub-sect of the small Hassidic sect).  Instead, the men (no women, of course, these are Hasidim) are twice simply referred to as “Jews”. I don’t have a problem with the Hasidic. God love ‘em. But, representative of Jews in Portland? Or of Jews anywhere outside of Williamsburg, Brooklyn? Not.

But if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. And so to be helpful, I thought I’d offer this photo to the big O to run on Sunday. Christians gather to prepare for Easter:

in Idea
No Comments »
Kate:  Thanks for your great concern. I would…
ELIZA: What about your own great concern?
Kate:  Dont worry, if anything happen to the computer, I will…
ELIZA: Why do you mention computers?
Kate:   i mean laptop
ELIZA: Can you elaborate on that?

 

I just posted a laptop for sale on Craigslist and was deluged with scammers trying to get me to ship it to Nigeria.  This really intrigued me; is there a way to do something about it … that would, itself, be ethical?  Or, not unethical?  So for example, I really don’t want to steal from them; (scam the scammer.)

And then I had an AWESOME new idea for dealing with these people: I’d take whatever the scammer writes to me, and give it to ELIZA. And then, whatever ELIZA replies, I write back to the scammer.

ELIZA is a famous computer program from the 70’s — an experiment in artificial intelligence. It imitates a typical annoying therapist who never really tells you anything, but just asks questions. PERFECT.  Could I use this to waste a scammer’s time, keeping them from talking to potential victims?
I was tired of talking to “Kate” about shipping my computer to Nigeria, and so I let ELIZA take over. So far the results are impressive. ELIZA quickly tuned into the scammer’s internal angst.

I love it.  This is almost performance art.  I wonder how long it will go on.  Now it just needs to be automated, so I don’t have to copy and paste.

PS: If you need a little free therapy yourself, you can talk to ELIZA here: http://www-ai.ijs.si/eliza/eliza.html

No Comments »

All over the web and in real life, people are talking about DRM-free music and video, who’s selling it, and who isn’t.

(”DRM-free” has a mushy definition, but it basically refers to digital media files {e.g., mp3s} that don’t have copy-protection or purchase information indelibly encoded into them.  For example, anything that you record yourself, on your own computer, will be DRM-free.  In contrast, most songs purchased in the past from iTunes do have DRM, which ensure that only the purchaser can listen to them.)

But what I can’t figure out is, why do people want DRM-free so badly?

After all, in the case of iTunes’ DRM-encoded files, I find that as an owner, I have more than enough flexibility to excercise the rights that I’ve been licensed; such as viewing files on the various devices and computers I own, and making backups for myself.  Here then, are my best guesses why people want DRM-free:

  1. So that they can enjoy their media on Linux.  This is why I’d like DRM-free files, but I can’t imagine this accounts for most others.
  2. (In the case of iTunes) So that the media files can be viewed on media players besides iPods.  But this strikes me as unlikely as well; there are other sources of music besides iTunes.
  3. (Abstracting #1 and #2 together) To decouple the media from the device required to view it.  That’s a great goal, but is this what’s behind the wave of desire for DRM-free content?
  4. Something else that I’ve forgotten.  Whoops!  Waited too long to write this post.

So what is it?  Can somebody drop me a line and let me know why they prefer DRM-free media

in Idea
1 Comment »

Something that’s gnawed at me since I started blogging:  Am I being pretty bad by calling this blog, The Robb Report?

The Robb Report, of course, is “The Global Luxury Source”.  They’re a reliable destination for Rolls-Royce reviews.  We can all probably agree that my blog and the Robb Report travel in different circles.

I’ve known about the magazine for years, most likely from seeing it in doctors’ waiting rooms.  And when choosing this name for my blog, one of my reasons was the humor arising from the contrast of the two Robb Reports, for those who are familiar with the senior mark holder.

But I wonder, (1) is what I’m doing ethical? And (2) am I infringing on Robb Report’s mark?

I’ll think about these more after this never-ending final exam period is over.

1 Comment »
Six fingered Auburn War Eagles Foam HandFrom the LexisNexis trademark law podcast:  An alumni / fan of Auburn University designs and sells giant foam hands printed with university’s marks.  Auburn files suit and has won a preliminary injunction.

What stands out to me is that a college’s or team’s name on a fan article does not seem like an “indicator of source” to consumers.  This would distinguish it from Board of Regents v. KST, for example (sports fan / alumni uses alma mater’s mark in the name of his private company).

In other words, people walk around with “Ralph Lauren” printed on their shirts for entirely different reasons than, say, “Oregon State University”.

And when I (admittedly, a non-sport-fan consumer) see someone with Oregon State University on a sweatshirt, I don’t think to myself, “OSU made that great sweatshirt”, but rather, “That person supports OSU.”  In my theory, this use is essentially descriptive, and the text is short for “A fan of OSU.”  (I realize that even this longer version may not be truly descriptive, though.)

Additionally, I think that Kozinski’s arguments in Mattel v. MCA Records (a.k.a the Barbie Girl Song case, finding (1) a different type of use when in the name of an art work — this is analogous to the different use on a fan article — and (2) the broad First Amendment protection for not-purely-commercial speech) are persuasive here.

But maybe I’m the one who’s odd.  Maybe sports fans, the consumers for these products, expect that only the mark owner manufactures/licenses these products.

Links: