You can file this under: how the terrorist are winning.

Robert Cox claims to be a lawyer for bloggers. He says he represents individual bloggers that seek his council. But, now that I find out he has connections to Olbermann Watch, we know he is just a shill.

How does he explain watermelons? They are pretty damn awkward to carry and you need a knife to get to the fruit. I guess god did not intended for us to eat them.

An for his day job, he is a patent troll. http://d6.allthingsd.com/20080528/video-nathan-myrhvold-highlight-reel
I am kind of upset they you guys are featuring him.

I am imagining a bunch of Digg kids panning their retaliation right now. Go get 'em!!!

Let's sent this fucker to The Hague!!!

Here in LA on Spanish TV there is some show where they still do pie-in-the-face. There are midget clowns and audience members that come up and participate. There are also girls in bikinis standing around but unfortunately there are not part of the pie-in-the-face fun.

This also reminds me of this 70's musical movie Bugsy Malone where are all of the the actors were kids playing adult mobsters during the 20's prohibition. Instead of getting killed they get a pie-in-the-face. Maybe this element of the movie inspired this game or vice-versa.

We love you, Dodd!

Warren, you are part of the Andrew Keen fan club, I take it?

It seems Ford is saying it is fine to make and sell the calendar, show pictures of the cars, as long as the Ford logo is not used. This would have to mean that it is ok for the logo to appear on the cars in the photos. But to put a big Ford logo on the calendar would imply that the calendar is endorsed or made by Ford when it is not. This is where trademark law comes in. The club cannot appearer possibly/maybe represent themselves as Ford.

It seems all this would take is a disclaimer (We are not affiliated, enforced or licensed by Ford). But, it would need to have such a presence as to interfere with the aesthetics of the calendar.

Failure to protect the trademark would encourage others to produce non-licensed Ford accessories and shwag. It could be possible for Ford to make exceptions, to reach out to all of the clubs and come up with some sort of license agreement with non-profits, but then they might disenfranchise their licensees.

But, would it be better to disenfranchise existing licensees or disenfranchise your most passionate customers? Trademark law should probably be revisited as well.

You should also link to Chris Anderson's post outing people who pitch to his blog for coverage in Wired.
http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2007/10/sorry-pr-people.html

I work in the CE industry. This is especially troubling since major manufacturer are opting out of exhibiting at CES for this first time this year because products, information, and sales can be made via the internet. It costs millions of dollars to exhibit, and it is just not worth it anymore. Las Vegas in during CES is a place for salespeople and vendors to meet, but they save money by not having to pay CES millions to have a boot. It is only new Chinese OEMs that want to be seen for the first time that are going to exhibit from this point on. There is no need for the established players to show-off anymore. This move "no photos" move makes CES even more irrelevant to the industry.

I can still remember the distinct scent these produced (it must be 25 years since I have seen/smelled one).

Miller has videos all over YouTube. Someone should make a response video to one of them to out him on this. This video appears on Miller's home page.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY5c-u3J9Ag

It sounds like it is time for YouTube to allow users to display licensing like Flickr does: copyright, or one of the many CC licenses.