As for why they are suing where the home offices of Verizon, etc., are located, its because they are only doing this to get the subpoenas. Once they've issued the subpoenas, and got their info, then they'll probably dismiss these lawsuits and refile wherever the accused lives.
Yeah, well, I'm sitting here in my Aeron chair, in my private office, working on a computer with a 400mz Pentium II processor and a 5-year-old CRT monitor which is running Windows 98. I think I've got it worse.
But this doesn't have anything at all to do with what results are returned by the search engine. The problem in this case was that, in addition to your results, up popped a banner ad for a competing product. To use your example, if you type in 'igloo,' a Thermos add popped up. Not saying that it may not be effective advertising, but it's not exactly playing fair either. That's what this case is about.
Actually, the way Google does it isn't addressed in the case at issue. Not saying that they won't be sued next, but I think they have a lot stronger argument that what they are doing is okay.
The specific problem here (although who knows what the court's will eventually stretch it to include) is that typing in "windows" or "carpet" or "match" didn't just bring up related but competing sites (even if prominently displayed like Google does), but actually showed a banner ad for a competing product. For example, if you typed in 'match,' you got your results plus a banner ad for personals that took you to, say, www.americansingles.com if you clicked through. Whether or not you think that trademark law ought to have anything to do with that, it's a pretty sleazy way of doing business.
I think you may have missed a critical distinction here -- this is not about blocking search results that may contain the trademarked term. What Excite was doing here was bringing up a paid-for banner advertisement alongside (or above, or whereever) the search results. When a user searched for 'playboy,' up popped a banner ad for an adult site not affiliated with Playboy, while presumably the search results were unaffected.
Thus the search engine was and will be completely separate and is not at issue. All that would have to stop would be a rather questionable marketing gimmick.
It's more like when a marketer uses a computer-generated list to target BMW owners in order to sell them expensive car products.
Using your analogy, it's actually more like using such a list to target BMW owners in order to sell expensive cars, not just car products. You may not agree that is a bad thing, but it needs to be clear that this is a case of direct competition, not just somebody selling complementary products.
How often do you open or close a 'window' on your computer? For how long, and how generally, is that term used in conjuction with GUIs?
In comparison, how often do you use the term 'playboy' or 'playmate' in the context of adult material (pr0n), and NOT mean it in the capitalized (Playboy), trade-marked sense?
That's the difference between this case and the gripes people have about Windows as a trademark: the usage of the terms in context.
I believe that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, which governs discovery disputes, only allows a single smite. Rule 11, on the other hand -- which deals with frivolous filings -- does allow smiting "repeatedly, and with extreme prejudice."
So I believe the answer to your question would be "please sir (or ma'am), may I have some more?"
Ah, yes. I see your dilema. But that's why you have these as all your windows. If the living room window/TV gets busted, just go sit on the toilet and watch the game (just becareful not to let your legs fall asleep).
Birds and baseballs can fly into my computer screen
It's called homeowner's insurance. I highly recommend it.
gas-filled triple-pane windows
I'm ashamed to admit it, but I actually R'ed TFA, and it seems to say that these are manufactured by applying a film that contains the LCD to glass -- so therefore could probably be applied to any type of window.
So, uh, are you trying to say something about lawyers there? guttersnipe - n - a person of the lowest moral or economic station
I was going to comment that you had it all wrong, but that was before I looked up the definition.
For more hard-hitting 'information' from the submitter of this story, visit his website: Alternative Areology and Archeology. Browse his conspiracy theories and check out his evidence of cities on Mars, spaceflight in ancient Indian Literature, and learn the secrets of the pyramids!
That's close, but not cigar -- I'm sure you were lumping it together with PACER, but CM/ECF (Case Management/Electronic Case Files)is actually the online filing service. PACER just lets you view the docket and documents. The CM/ECF site is here. And the Distric of Utah is not on their list of courts set up for CM/ECF yet, so the grandparent is probably right -- the deadlin is COB, not midnight (or 11:59).
Here's another (older) article about some of the health benefits which debunks some caffeine-related health concerns. I looked, but could not find, an article from several years ago that I know I read (not just wishful thinking - really) regarding a study of coffee drinkers and sexuality which found that men that were regular coffee drinkers continued to be sexually active later in life than their non-coffee-drinking counterparts.
First, we need to get a big-ass spotlight. Next, get a big piece of cardboard and make a cutout of Tux. Remove the cutout and place the remaining cardboard over the lens of the spotlight. Wait for a cloudy night, flip on the light, and wave it randomly around. Viola!
Slashdot Mirror
As for why they are suing where the home offices of Verizon, etc., are located, its because they are only doing this to get the subpoenas. Once they've issued the subpoenas, and got their info, then they'll probably dismiss these lawsuits and refile wherever the accused lives.
Yeah, well, I'm sitting here in my Aeron chair, in my private office, working on a computer with a 400mz Pentium II processor and a 5-year-old CRT monitor which is running Windows 98. I think I've got it worse.
.)
(Not that I'm offering to trade, mind you . .
I'll second that.
Well, okay. If you say so.
Always happy to brighten someone's day!
V Entertainment claims the love detector has demonstrated 96 percent accuracy.
Oh, good. I'm glad that they have tested this empirically and have hard numbers for us.But this doesn't have anything at all to do with what results are returned by the search engine. The problem in this case was that, in addition to your results, up popped a banner ad for a competing product. To use your example, if you type in 'igloo,' a Thermos add popped up. Not saying that it may not be effective advertising, but it's not exactly playing fair either. That's what this case is about.
The specific problem here (although who knows what the court's will eventually stretch it to include) is that typing in "windows" or "carpet" or "match" didn't just bring up related but competing sites (even if prominently displayed like Google does), but actually showed a banner ad for a competing product. For example, if you typed in 'match,' you got your results plus a banner ad for personals that took you to, say, www.americansingles.com if you clicked through. Whether or not you think that trademark law ought to have anything to do with that, it's a pretty sleazy way of doing business.
Thus the search engine was and will be completely separate and is not at issue. All that would have to stop would be a rather questionable marketing gimmick.
Using your analogy, it's actually more like using such a list to target BMW owners in order to sell expensive cars, not just car products. You may not agree that is a bad thing, but it needs to be clear that this is a case of direct competition, not just somebody selling complementary products.
I may have to do something with location (USA instead of UK), but when I ran this search all I got was search results -- no paid advertisments.
In comparison, how often do you use the term 'playboy' or 'playmate' in the context of adult material (pr0n), and NOT mean it in the capitalized (Playboy), trade-marked sense?
That's the difference between this case and the gripes people have about Windows as a trademark: the usage of the terms in context.So I believe the answer to your question would be "please sir (or ma'am), may I have some more?"
Mod parent up. It's funny!
Ah, yes. I see your dilema. But that's why you have these as all your windows. If the living room window/TV gets busted, just go sit on the toilet and watch the game (just becareful not to let your legs fall asleep).
It's called homeowner's insurance. I highly recommend it.
gas-filled triple-pane windowsI'm ashamed to admit it, but I actually R'ed TFA, and it seems to say that these are manufactured by applying a film that contains the LCD to glass -- so therefore could probably be applied to any type of window.
I see a potentially bigger problem -- do you live in the UK?
Gods and fishes! Somebody get me some aspirin!
Wait a minute - this is NETBSD we're talking about here, right?
So, uh, are you trying to say something about lawyers there?
guttersnipe - n - a person of the lowest moral or economic station
I was going to comment that you had it all wrong, but that was before I looked up the definition.
Carry on.
Careful, now -- don't confuse legality and morality. They're two entirely different things.
Way to go, Michael.
That's close, but not cigar -- I'm sure you were lumping it together with PACER, but CM/ECF (Case Management/Electronic Case Files)is actually the online filing service. PACER just lets you view the docket and documents. The CM/ECF site is here. And the Distric of Utah is not on their list of courts set up for CM/ECF yet, so the grandparent is probably right -- the deadlin is COB, not midnight (or 11:59).
So, it's good for you! Drink up!
First, we need to get a big-ass spotlight.
Next, get a big piece of cardboard and make a cutout of Tux. Remove the cutout and place the remaining cardboard over the lens of the spotlight.
Wait for a cloudy night, flip on the light, and wave it randomly around. Viola!