I second using Pimsleur language learning system. I had tried Rosetta briefly in the past and didn't find it to be very engaging or help much with retention.
Pimsleur on the other hand has been much more engaging and I have retained a high percentage without even really trying (you just have to keep pushing play).
Instead of just saying "feel free ..." why not create a torrent themselves. In full HD quality with commercials. It seems to me by tracking the torrent they would be able to give advertiser considerably more data. Specifically they could report on how many people downloaded the show, geographic region, etc.
By giving people the content they want at quality they could minimize illegal downloads and give advertisers added value by inserting their commercials into the downloaded versions.
The real meat of LV's claim is not in Trademark confusion but rather the dilution of the LV mark to stand for generic luxury rather than their line of goods.
(Dilution is the diminishing of a famous mark’s distinctiveness. It is actionable regardless of confusion or competition - see 15 USC 1125)
The problem, from the view of most Techdirt readers, is that dilution treats Trademarks as though they are the intellectual property of the owners rather than as the means of minimizing customer confusion. Thus the problem with LV's lawsuit is more of a general disagreement behind the purpose of trademark law than the lawsuit itself.
That being said I doubt there was any actual dilution here but thanks to the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 all LV needs to prove is that the basketball was likely to cause dilution.
Steven,
For an independent invention defense you would probably need to prove independent invention/lack of copying. For example the insanity defense is an affirmative defense. There the defense must prove insanity; the prosecution is under no burden to prove sanity.
Michial,
First since disclosure is not immediate on filing there should also be post invention prior disclosure.
Second, just because independent invention would be difficult to prove does not make it impossible. The standard is preponderance of evidence not absolute proof or even reasonable doubt/
I believe the economic theory behind not having an independent inventor defense is that by giving all the rewards to the first inventor there is increased incentive to invent and disclose as soon as possible. In theory this increases the speed of invention. Again in theory, the public good of earlier invention and disclosure outweighs the cost of decreased competition and increased price.
However I (and most economists I have spoken to) believe this theory fails to take into account the slowing of improvements or other future inventions due to patent infringement and legal uncertainties. As a result while the public good for the first invention may outweigh the costs, one of the first invention's costs is slowing of future inventions as patent boundaries and licenses are determined. As this increases exponentially based on the number of patents and the difficulty in making the information available to the inventor the costs begin to outweigh the benefits and the economic theory fails.
"In the meantime, it makes you wonder what the hell anyone was thinking in sending out such a bogus DMCA. Do people really not recognize the consequences?"
Apparently someone doesn't as this continues to happen. It's either poor lawyering or clients who are unwilling to heed their lawyers' advice (I'm guessing the first). To me this is a sign that I will be successful post law school even in this over crowded JD market; it is clear that too many people don't understand the legal and business implications of their decisions.
I actually researched this patent as part of my summer internship after my 1L year. It is definitely proof the USPTO needs to work on its POSITA standard.
There is another site that has been around for a 1.5 now that does something similar. Instead of a video ad before downloading content you get DRM-free content but with a advertisement at the start of the song. The ads seem to primarily be the artist introducing the song like a dj and saying brought to you by ________ advertiser.
So far the site appears to only have independent bands.
It's an interesting business model with a presumably cheaper CPM. While I expected the ads to be incredibly annoying I have found that they aren't that noticeable. It's not necessarily the answer but it is another model trying to make it work.
For a great overview of Economics and Patent law I highly recommend David D. Friedman's book Law's Order: WWhat Economics Has to Do with Law and Why It Matters
For a great overview of the concepts of Economics and Patent law I highly recommend David Friedman's Book Laws Order: What Economics Has to Do with Law and Why It Matters which he has made available online here: http://daviddfriedman.com/laws_order/index.shtml
(specifically chapter 11 on IP)
Mike,
This one could be really simple: contingency fee. Or just a gamble that the relatively low appeals cost was worth the potential multi-million dollar judgment
First PB now Mininova. Didn't aXXo leave Mininova because of some dispute? (or was that PB?)
As far as your question Mike, they are both pretty unethical. Unfortunately lawyers don't get punished enough for the lies and bogus claims they bring into courts.
Re: For just introductory learning ...
Pimsleur on the other hand has been much more engaging and I have retained a high percentage without even really trying (you just have to keep pushing play).
Re: Re: Re:
As far as contractual obligations, might be time to start re-negotiating bad contracts if they are losing you money...
Re:
By giving people the content they want at quality they could minimize illegal downloads and give advertisers added value by inserting their commercials into the downloaded versions.
Re: Re: Dilution not confusion
Dilution not confusion
Re: Re: Re: Just how could you prove it was done independently?
For an independent invention defense you would probably need to prove independent invention/lack of copying. For example the insanity defense is an affirmative defense. There the defense must prove insanity; the prosecution is under no burden to prove sanity.
Re: Just how could you prove it was done independently?
First since disclosure is not immediate on filing there should also be post invention prior disclosure.
Second, just because independent invention would be difficult to prove does not make it impossible. The standard is preponderance of evidence not absolute proof or even reasonable doubt/
(untitled comment)
However I (and most economists I have spoken to) believe this theory fails to take into account the slowing of improvements or other future inventions due to patent infringement and legal uncertainties. As a result while the public good for the first invention may outweigh the costs, one of the first invention's costs is slowing of future inventions as patent boundaries and licenses are determined. As this increases exponentially based on the number of patents and the difficulty in making the information available to the inventor the costs begin to outweigh the benefits and the economic theory fails.
(untitled comment)
Apparently someone doesn't as this continues to happen. It's either poor lawyering or clients who are unwilling to heed their lawyers' advice (I'm guessing the first). To me this is a sign that I will be successful post law school even in this over crowded JD market; it is clear that too many people don't understand the legal and business implications of their decisions.
(untitled comment)
trueanthem
So far the site appears to only have independent bands.
It's an interesting business model with a presumably cheaper CPM. While I expected the ads to be incredibly annoying I have found that they aren't that noticeable. It's not necessarily the answer but it is another model trying to make it work.
www.trueanthem.com
(untitled comment)
Law & Economy
(untitled comment)
Apple lawsuit
Isn't apple involved in an anti-trust lawsuit in Europe about its failure to allow other devices to connect to iTunes?
(untitled comment)
Sadly a lot.
Thanks for the find Mike.
(untitled comment)
This one could be really simple: contingency fee. Or just a gamble that the relatively low appeals cost was worth the potential multi-million dollar judgment
Re: Oh NO!
First PB now Mininova. Didn't aXXo leave Mininova because of some dispute? (or was that PB?)
As far as your question Mike, they are both pretty unethical. Unfortunately lawyers don't get punished enough for the lies and bogus claims they bring into courts.
Monopoly
Without immediate changes, I'd be surprised if some ambitious attorney did not try and sue over some sort of First Sale Doctrine claim of action.
Thank goodness
More comments from GregSJ >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by GregSJ.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt