i can't think of a thing to add to this.

---

Except... Go. Vote. While we still can.

---

Stumble This!

privatizing the english language: when social networking gets too big for its britches

---

Or: Wherein F*c*book screws the pooch... again

In what I'm calling the "WTF of the Week", Chicago Breaking Business reports that F*c*book (you know who you are) has filed suit against a networking site for teachers and educators that goes by the name "Teachbook". The social maven of the internet claims that by adding "book" to any word the 2-employee, 20-member networking site is infringing on its trademark. Apparently half a billion subscribers isn't enough of a market share and 20 teachers in Northbrook, IL pose a grave threat to F*c*book's financial strength and stability. In it's report Chicago Breaking said

Facebook®, which was founded in 2004 and has more than 500 million users, filed its trademark infringement lawsuit in U.S. district court in San Jose last week, asserting that the "book" part of its name is "highly distinctive in the context of online communities and networking websites."

"If others could freely use 'generic plus BOOK' marks for online networking services targeted to that particular generic category of individuals, the suffix BOOK could become a generic term for 'online community/networking services' or 'social networking services'", Facebook® argued in the lawsuit. "That would dilute the distinctiveness of the Facebook® Marks." (Ed: Emphasis on "stink"?)

Okay, first: Never mind that "generic category of individuals" has got to be the biggest oxymoron this side of the movie Idiocracy. How many people do you suppose would have even known about Teachbook if F*c*book hadn't stuck their collective headbook up their assbook? Apparently Mark Zuckerberg® subscribes to the theory that "any publicity is good publicity". Mark, I'm afraid I must respectfully disagree. Based on comments left on the Chicago Breaking story, I'd guess that F*c*book just cost itself as many users as Teachbook has with this latest bit of boneheaded litigation. And that was only the reaction to one article. Hardly a representative sample, and there's no way of knowing how many of the commenters actually will terminate their accounts. But the cost in good will alone might make potential customers and advertisers think twice before getting in bed with them. I figure based on relative size, Teachbook has diluted the market by... about 0.000004% (20/500,000,000 * 100). Less than that if any of Teachbook's 20 or so users are also F*c*book users. Why the Wall Street analysts must be quaking in their Gucci's at the very idea of such a juggernaut. Three words: Get. F*c*ing. Real.

Second: According to MoreWords.com there are no fewer than 42 words ending in "book", and I came up with a few of my own to add to the list. (I thought it interesting that "facebook" was nowhere in the list.) Of the 46 unique words my minutes of research uncovered, at least 32 of them can be turned into a "live" URL by adding ".com". (This excludes the ones that only take you to a basic link page that doesn't really belong to anyone). In an incredibly ironic twist, one of these is Casebook.com a professional networking site for lawyers and legal professionals. I can't help but wonder why F*c*book didn't try tangling with these guys. What a circus that'd be, yeah? go ahead Zuck... I double-dog dare ya.

And then I wonder what the good folks at Redbook or Quickbooks, or Apple Computer -- makers of the MacBook -- think of F*c*book infringing their trademarks? Surely they must have heard about this by now. I've actually seen with my own eyes cookbooks dating back to the 19th century. And I know that I had notebooks I took to school back in the 60's. Is Mead aware of this egregious assault on their financial viability? I've found my way around with guidebooks, and -- before the computer took over the task -- kept appointments in a datebook. I had a passbook (also known as a bankbook) and a checkbook from the bank, made entries in logbooks in the army, used matchbooks (without closing cover before striking even!) when my lighter gave out, and studied playbooks when I played sports. I've been on flights that were overbooked, been taught from textbooks and had it commemorated in yearbooks. I've sung Kumbaya around the campfire from a songbook and pasted news clippings and photos in scrapbooks. And my friend Georgianne, who owns the top-ranked Appaloosa in the country has pored over studbooks trying to decide if breeding her champion mare was too rich for her pocketbook. Perhaps a class-action suit is in order here?

Or maybe F*c*book just needs to get over itself.

---

Stumble This!

Your Honor, I Object!

---

"Click To Object"

---

As I tried to digest the unfathomable ruling of the US Supreme Court in Citizens United v. FEC I wondered if Abraham Lincoln would recognize his party today. Sorry Mr. President, but government: of the people, by the people, for the people, has perished from the earth. It was sold to the highest bidder last week by the firm of Roberts, Alito & Scalia. If Gettysburg was a new birth of freedom, Citizens United was its death. In one stroke the high court overturned a century of standing law. The GOP couldn't win the popular vote in the last two elections, so the high court pimped out the next one -- and many more to follow -- not only to the monolithic corporations on Wall Street, but foreign and multinational interests as well. (I somehow think that this isn't what the economists have in mind when they speak of "globalization".) They've set us up for years' worth of choices between the best candidates money can buy on both sides of the aisle. The Golden Rule has been rewritten to read "He who has the gold makes the rules".

It would be bad enough if the Congress had passed such a law. It would take a Herculean effort, but such a law could be repealed, and its authors and proponents replaced in coming elections. But a Supreme Court ruling? Only another Supreme Court ruling can overturn that. Still, despite a reprehensible decision by the Bushisti on the bench, there are a few ways to limit the damage. Because (for the time being at least) Congress still holds the power to amend the Constitution. And there are a half dozen or so House Resolutions already under consideration that could offer some damage control. The image above is linked to a thumbnail of the more prominent ones. I won't say I think all of them are feasible, or even advisable. But do you want to live in a country where the three branches of government are Microsoft, Coca-Cola and Exxon/Mobil?

Think about it.

---

Stumble This!

Open Letters: Dear Congressman John Carter (R, TX)

---

Congressman John Carter of Texas' 31st District has me on his mailing list. I don't know why. I don't live in Texas, and to be brutally honest I can't think of a single issue that he's dropped in my in box that I agree with him on. That by itself is hardly unique. After all there are at least two legislators from North Carolina (where I do live) that can claim the same distinction. Normally I don't read Carter's blather because it only nauseates me to hear a guy lip sync to Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. But for some reason I read all of his diatribe against H.R. 3962 (Affordable Health Care for America Act). Apparently Congressman Carter called upon his constituents to call every member of congress and try to convince them to vote down the bill. Typical, and predictable. But I think it was his closing statement that caught my attention the most. And I quote:

"This debate isn't about healthcare," says Carter. "It is about seizing political power and control for the few at the expense of the many. Win or lose on this vote, Americans can now see why we have got to throw this Congress out in 2010."

Actually Congressman, this debate is about seizing political power from the few who have held the throats of the many under their boots for far too long. As for "throwing out this congress", that process began in 2006, continued in 2008 and if God is merciful, will continue in 2010. You and your power hungry "old boy network" are done. The American electorate has spoken in two consecutive elections. You have not listened. And as a consequence you will, God willing, find yourself out of a job by this time next year.

We have seen case after case of abuses of power by monolithic insurance giants. Cases of denials of coverage for some of the most preposterous of reasons. When a rape victim is denied coverage because she followed her doctor's orders and took a course of antiviral drugs as a preventive measure against possible HIV infection¹ (which, it's worth noting, she did not have), this is an egregious breach of good faith. I challenge you Congressman, I challenge you or any member of Congress to defend this unconscionable action. I challenge you and your cronies on Capitol Hill to defend an insurance company that refuses to cover the cost of treatment for injuries sustained by a victim of domestic violence by having the gall to deem it a "pre-existing condition".² Go ahead Congressman, I'm waiting.

Well?

Perhaps you'd like an easier question. I'll work on that for you.

---

¹ For more of this story, check out this article in The Huffington Post.
² For more on this story, start with this article from the SEIU Blog

---

Stumble This!

Is Anyone Surprised By This?

---

"What a Maroon"
Washington, DC - September 2009 (Click to embiggen)

---

Stumble This!