Saying it's you're blog and you can do what you want is a bit of a straw-man fallacy. I haven't seen anyone suggest legal penalties for your behavior. It's you're blog, you can do what you want.

People are saying they don't like it.

People have made the claim that you are stifling free speak, which appears to support your straw-man. But free speak is both a legal concept and also vernacular english. You have clearly stifled free speak in the vernacular sense and clearly have not in the legal sense.

Hilary Rosen worked to pass the DMCA. That means she either:
1) doesn't support the US Constitution;
2) doesn't support international treaty law;
3) is ignorant of the constitution or treaty law; or
4) knows she is a criminal.

Given the background, position and resources of Hilary Rosen in particular, I think we can rule out #3.

I'm pretty sure they can be sued for this. It's not like they don't have deep pockets.

In the case of Haiti bio-ethanol is a possible solution, not the cause of the hunger. The pig slaughter mentioned above is not an unusual event. It is standard agricultural policy in almost all industrial nations. Third world hunger comes from poverty and inequity, not an absolute shortage of food. But Haiti has sugar cane. Biofuel is a possible way to turn that sugarcane into fuel and/or money. See:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/06/opinion/edsimoes.php
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/07/17/haiti.sugarenergy/index.html

A product placement in an article, in this case for Windows Mobile, inherently effects content. It is part of the content by the very fact of being a product placement rather than an ad.

The way this discussion jumped to the subject of transparency and secrecy seems a bit odd and knee-jerk. The article wasn't about the government keeping secrets. It was about the government prohibiting the photographing and discussion of things going on in plain public view. The whole point of the article was that these things are not secret in the first place and yet Britain is prohibiting the photographing and discussion of them.

I couldn't find anything about "tarnishment" in those court papers. Yoko seems to be claiming she has a prior trademark on the phrase "John Lennon" for use in selling sunglasses and hand bags; and that this invalidates Lennon Murphy's more recent trademark on the word "Lennon" for use in music and music videos. There's also no mention of requiring Lennon Murphy to change the name of her band. It's just contesting her attempt to trademark "Lennon" which would mean she Lennon Murphy would have the sole right to use the word "Lennon" in the sale of music.

So according to that PDF, what Yoko wants is quite reasonable, but legally doomed since trademarks are by field of business and Yoko's trademark is in eyewear and accessories.

Sort of like how the printing press made books worthless and cassette tapes made music worthless, and of course, the way VHS made TV and movies worthless.

You have to wonder if Boing Boing and its readers are in touch with reality sometimes. The Clinton campaign does NOT use this as a campaign song. At one campaign stop, the local staff in Cedar Falls put it on 8 songs before the song they played before the candidate came out. That is the entire extent of the connection between this song and the Clinton campaign. The rest is pure drivel.

NELSON.C, the issue is that the labels are letting only certain stores sell music without DRM (it's specific to the store not the song). They'll let Amazon sell without DRM to make Apple look bad, until Amazon gains significant market share, then they'll tell Amazon that DRM free music was just an experiment and now they need to use DRM.

What we need is a strategy that gets them to sell without DRM in the popular venues, and that needs to include Apple or it's not a big fraction of the market.

This article is strangely optimistic about the state of DRM in the US, claiming that all major labels now allow DRM free music. But in fact, the labels are only letting SOME stores sell DRM free music. Specifically they are wielding this as a cudgel against Apple as part of their retaliation for Apple suggesting that all music should be free of DRM. If Amazon becomes a significant part of the market, just watch how fast Sony stops letting them sell music without DRM. The only way out of this is for Apple, or a group that includes Apple, to win the fight against the labels.

There's a good life+70 list here:
http://www.copyrightwatch.ca/?p=49
But it has the similar problem of not saying that MOST published works in US are life+70 with the exceptions being works for hire and sound recordings. There seems to be a meme going around that most published works are not life+70 in the US, possibly because it is hard to be sure what was for hire. However it is hard to give up your copyright to a hiring entity. So it is generally only employee's who are "for hire". This makes film and advertising areas with a lot of for hire work, but novels and fine art are generally life+70 in the US. [I am not a lawyer].

This article gives inaccurate information on the duration of copyright in the United States. Most works not made for hire do expire in the US 70 years after the death of the author whether they were published or not. Sound Recordings and Works for Hire have longer terms. This makes it hard to know when a work has passed into the public domain. Someone aught to me making a list of authors who died 70 years ago and made works not for hire.

This article gives inaccurate information on the duration of copyright in the United States. Most works not made for hire do expire in the US 70 years after the death of the author whether they were published or not. Sound Recordings and Works for Hire have longer terms. This makes it hard to know when a work has passed into the public domain. Someone aught to me making a list of authors who died 70 years ago and made works not for hire.

This article meets a ridiculously low standard for its debunking claims.

Shaving doesn't make hair darker or courser it just feels course and looks darker because it hasn't been exposed to the sun and isn't tapered. That's practically a confirmation not a debunking.

Cell phones only cause serious medical harm in 1% of cases and this is supposed to mean they're OK? The value of cell phones for doctors can be separated from the general prohibition. For non-doctors. So I'd call that confirmed not debunked.

And then there's that ridiculous sentence about to much water killing you. Do they think too little water doesn't kill more people than too much water?

This whole article is silly.

If YouTube complies with Viacom's demand, they will loose Common Carrier status and be in a terrible position legally. Surely YouTube/Google is not THAT stupid. They would get sued and prosecuted by small minded people in small towns all over the US, and possibly all over the world.

Apparently Boing Boing has the first automated filtering bot. It just disallowed my previous post on the grounds that it was "Wrong".

Some posters here seem to be assuming the brothels were legally shut down. However, prostitution is legal in Bolivia and the brothels where illegally shut down in support of mob violence. Notice in the linked article that the restaurant and bar owners are protesting is support of the prostitutes not against them. So by their extreme actions, the prostitutes are trying to get enough attention to force the legal authorities to enforce their legal rights. I wonder if the opponents of prostitution have tried to get it outlawed or if they are only using mob tactics. The article doesn't say.

The staff in the secure area of an international airport and three police officers couldn't subdue a man without a Taser? That has to mean something is very wrong with airport security AND police training or procedures. Unless this guy is some sort of combat expert or had a weapon, there's no reason 3 officers couldn't subdue him by hand.

We don't need a new Turing Machine for design, automation and manufacturing; just like we don't need one Turing Machine for Word Processing and another for Spreadsheets. This is a very weak analogy.

We don't need a breakthrough in the automation of design. We need a management culture that values design and quality, and doesn't rely so heavily on quality-independent marketing.