Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    42856
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Disney could be gambling that they'll be enjoined from infringing IP or will voluntarily stop. And, they may be gaining an advantage in that by licensing, OpenAI can return pure Mickey Mouse or Moana results or whatever, whereas most copyright infringement by AI is based on either a) less than identical similarity to copyright content or b) minimal no similarity, just the infringing act of training on and making unlawful reproductions of copyright content in the process.
  2. I dunno, man. I won't argue about BBQ, of course, but even the best CFS is inherently a bit dry. And the flavors tend not to be as subtle as a fine smoked brisket or other cut.
  3. Interesting that many if not most of the breaches occurred with SCADA controllers. Those way predate the internet, but I guess at some point remote control became a thing, without the robustness of more modern remote control via internet.
  4. WAG? I suppose their strategy is to be a "first adopter," that is to let AI freely use their content/characters to generate license revenue and/or promote the characters. It wouldn't surprise me if the investment is tied to some sort of SEO to return Disney characters more often than any other licensed property, and certainly over unlicensed and presumably infringing characters/IP. I'm not a big fan of AI and would probably prefer it if IP owners boycotted entirely and just kept suing. But that's probably not commercially realistic.
  5. Well, they're also licensing their IP to OpenAI for an undisclosed sum. This is, presumably, what all IP owners want from AI.
  6. I'm not trying to pick a fight, really. The notion that government charity (but why not private as well?) incents poverty and dependency is conservative orthodoxy. Much like trickle down. Maybe it does, but there are plenty of indicators that maybe it doesn't. And as a recovering conservative, I am skeptical of that orthodoxy.
  7. She means the darkies.
  8. Interesting point. Trademark registrations have to be renewed every 10 years and part of the renewal is alleging and proving that the Trademark is still in use. Use in the Trademark sense means, for goods (if goods are what is recited in the registration) selling product bearing the mark in interstate commerce. For services, it means advertising the services in interstate commerce while being ready willing and able to deliver the services. The basic registration for the Oilers is this one. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=73104154&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch The mark is "Houston Oilers," words only, no logos, for the following services: EDUCATIONAL AND ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES IN THE FORM OF PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL GAMES AND EXHIBITIONS That's pretty standard for a football team registration. Or any sports teams, sub out "football." So, the last time the registration was renewed, this was submitted as a specimen, that is proof that "Houston Oilers" is in use. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn73104154&docId=SPE20180105155702&linkId=2#docIndex=1&page=1 It's a page from the 2017 Tennessee Titans Media Guide showing the logo history of the Oilers. That ain't advertising football games and no one is ready willing and able to provide an Oilers football game. That's pretty much not trademark use, even for the loosey-goosey standard for service marks. So, if someone were so inclined, I think they could cancel this base registration pretty easily because it's not used on the services and therefore abandoned. What you also notice, though, is that the attorney is not for the Titans, it's for "NFL Properties." That tells you that the league really controls the trademarks and team names and they're not about to let the Texans or anyone else revive the Oilers name, whether the registration could be cancelled or not. Note also that there are registrations for "collateral goods," like team apparel. The Titans/NFL still sell Oilers gear, so the mark is actually in use there and not abandoned.
  9. What's surprising to me is that they even got the green light to prosecute this. It is in Cali, though.
  10. But not enough to elect McCain and McCain laid that pretty directly at her feet. Those that adored her were probably the precursors to Trump's base (she's an idiot, just like us!).
  11. This is completely true. We're not budging "the base." They've been the same since 2016, but they can't win an election by themselves. But if these fault lines can develop and open up among the true believers, that does not bode well for them in the future.
  12. My inbox is polluted with MAGA shit presumably because my voter registration card used to say R. Or my voting history prior to 2016. That's kind of scary.
  13. To the extent clarification is required, you seem to be arguing that overextension of charity (implicitly through government programs) has increased dependency because it has reduced stigma. I.e. "social programs incentivize laziness and poverty." I argue that the number of dependent people is about the same as it ever was, but they are more noticeable because they're now concentrated in urban ghettos rather than being dispersed over a rural-agrarian area. The poverty percentage in the US has been pretty stable for a good long time now, indicating that there really isn't an increase in the dependent. And, if there is an increase in dependency, it is probably more due to other factors, like wealth inequality and bad housing policy than to "incentivization" through social programs. Now, if you want to extend the discussion to those who view themselves entitled to various government benefits that aren't dependent on them, like corporations, I might buy that.
  14. To be honest, I'm not sure any of that is actually true. It is a story that we have been fed. I no longer trust the motives or veracity of those who told us that story. I think there are certain people that are going to feel a stigma or shame, or at least gratitude for charity private or public. And then there are others that are not. And so it has always been and will always be. I do think perhaps that urbanization has concentrated the latter in ghettos, where they are more noticeable and perhaps promulgate a culture of it. And if anything has increased the latter mentality, it is more likely wealth inequality than social programs.
  15. And popehat's follow up, which is trenchant.
  16. Well, it is a 7-2 red state, so not like he's bullying librul states.
  17. I have the Kanno diver. It runs fast as to be expected from a cheap, unregulated movement. But the fit and finish on the case, dial, and bracelet is really (really!) something for the price point.
  18. If you can override the veto, you can start impeaching and convicting some motherfuckers.
  19. That's why they were trying to get her transferred to federal prison. Goddamn these people are bad at law.
  20. So is most of Larry's wealth. But he is somehow able to monetize it without liquidating it, or paying taxes. Hmmm.
  21. Didn't you read the national security strategy?
  22. Well, my point was, when you start invidiously discriminating (anti-wokeness), it gets kind of hard to stop with just brown people and women. Pretty soon, you're onto blind, deaf, mental handicaps, physical handicaps, fat people, Jews. Catholics and so on. Like the meme says, "everything I don't like is woke," "this engine is woke."
×
×
  • Create New...