Slashdot Mirror
Green Bay Packers and Microsoft Win Domain Name Fight After Family Sought Cash, Tickets and Tablets (geekwire.com)
theodp writes: Last fall, Microsoft and the Green Bay Packers announced a $10 million partnership to build TitletownTech, "an innovation center focused on developing and advancing scalable, technology-enabled ventures," which aims to bring an economic boost to the area near Lambeau Field (Microsoft President Brad Smith hails from the region). Unfortunately for them, they failed to secure their venture's namesake domain name ahead of time. GeekWire reports on the fate of a Wisconsin family that was sitting on the coveted titletowntech.com domain name and offered to give it up in exchange for $750,000 cash, 8 lifetime Packers season tickets, 2 parking passes, and 8 Microsoft Surface Pro tablets (with lifetime MS-Office licenses). The family said the admittedly-ridiculous demand wasn't meant to be taken seriously but was intended to send a message after they received a suspicious $5,000 buyout offer from an anonymous "service" that the Packers engaged to try to recover the fumbled domain. Not amused, Green Bay Packers, Inc. flexed its legal muscle, filing a domain dispute complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which ordered the disputed domain name to be transferred to the team shortly after the USPTO issued a Notice of Allowance to the NFL team for a trademark on TitletownTech, leaving the Wisconsin family with zilch. And so the old titletowntech.com ("TitleTown Tech Solutions") was just a bad memory by the time Microsoft returned to Green Bay last week to give an update on the joint venture, including the news that Microsoft will play a key role in the leadership team at TitletownTech, which will also house its TEALS program employees. [...] And as for the domain name, the NFL franchise with more titles than any other team ultimately did what it has done for years -- win.
You misinterpreted the results. The real meaning of the committee's vote is to confirm that accusation is still NOT the same as guilt. You wouldn't want to be accused of doing something you didn't do and get kangarooed by the media, would you? Consider what happened to 10 Duke Lacrosse players who were accused of rape by a stripper. They were ejected from the team, expelled from the college and labeled as "sexual predators" before they had even a single day in court. Read about it:
https://thefederalist.com/2016...
and how much it hurts 10 years later, even though the three players were exonerated by an honest DA, not the scumbag DA who withheld exculpatory evidence to win a conviction and further his political career.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
"The media’s coverage of the case inflamed race, gender and class divisions locally and nationally. But upon further investigation by North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, Mangum’s allegations were deemed false. Cooper exonerated the students, saying in April 2007, “We have no credible evidence that an attack occurred.”
So, considering how unfair equating accusation with guilt is, wouldn't we all be better off if we let the judicial system work without putting a wrench into the gears? In Kavanaugh's case, he been the subject of SIX previous FBI investigations in the past yet some people believe that a SEVENTH would somehow, someway, uncover what six previous teams did not find. Only if one believes the FBI is totally incompetent, biased, or is part of the "Deep State".
But, did you notice the report released today that Dr Ford is NOT a licensed psychologist and in calling herself a psychologist has violated California law?
"Just one sentence into her sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford may have told a lie.
After thanking members of the committee on Thursday, and while under oath, Ford opened her testimony saying, “My name is Christine Blasey Ford, I am a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine.”
The issue lies with the word “psychologist,” and Ford potentially misrepresenting herself and her credentials, an infraction that is taken very seriously in the psychology field as well as under California law.
Under California law, as with almost every other state, in order for a person to identify publicly as a psychologist they must be licensed by the California Board of Psychology, a process that includes 3,000 hours of post-doctoral professional experience and passing two rigorous exams. To call oneself a psychologist without being licensed by a state board is the equivalent of a law school graduate calling herself a lawyer without ever taking the bar exam.
According to records, Ford is not licensed in the state of California. A recent search through the Department of Consumer Affairs License Bureau, which provides a state-run database of all licensed psychologists in California, produced no results for any variation of spelling on Ford’s name. If Ford at one time had a license but it is now inactive, she would legally still be allowed to call herself a “psychologist” but forbidden from practicing psychology on patients until it was renewed. However, the database would have shown any past licenses granted to Ford, even if they were inactive.
Ford also does not appear to have been licensed in any other states outside California. Since graduating with a PhD in educational psychology from the University of Southern California in 1996 it
Running with Linux for over 20 years!