This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is virusdetected with some predictions about the future of the unicorn licensing lawsuit that a judge forcefully deferred:
This case is likely to be a fantasy, too
Determining what merchandise is infringing will require incredibly painful analysis. An Amazon search for “unicorn merchandise” yields over 1,000 hits. A similar Google search produces too many hits to be worth counting. The artist’s trademark isn’t exactly crisp (neither are her images) and it’s unclear what, exactly, she copyrighted. References to unicorns seem to date back to the 4th century B.C. and subsequent descriptions and illustrations cover pretty much every imaginable variant of a four-legged animal with a single horn. This feels just as shady as some of the music copyright disputes (“sorta sounds like” == “sorta looks like”). The judge has exhibited far more patience that the “damn fool” attorney deserved.
In second place, we’ve got Igualmente69 with some thoughts on one of the RIAA’s favorite legal strategies:
“that the DMCA actually requires internet access providers to completely kick users off upon the receipt of multiple (unproven) claims of copyright infringement.”
If this is correct, then it is another part of the DMCA that is unconstitutional. The government mandating punishment without judicial determination of guilt blatantly violates the guarantee of due process.
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out with Bt Garner who has a question for the Houston police chief who wants to prosecute false statements about COVID-19, first amendment be damned:
How far up?
There have been some wildly inaccurate statements from the top of the US government, wonder if he wants to investigate those falsehoods too?
Next, we’ve got wereisjessicahyde with an observation about Adam Mossoff’s argument that longer patents are needed to incentivize the development of coronavirus vaccines:
The 3rd sentence of his own piece reads…
“Biotech companies are racing to develop these vital drugs at record speed with massive investments of time and money”
… so it’s pretty clear not even he believes his bullshit.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is David with another response to the unicorn dispute:
if due to your inaction unicorns are extinct next year, you will be the reason for it.
Frankly, I’m fed up with those buggers anyway.
In second place, it’s DannyB with a question about Jonas Salk choosing not to patent the polio vaccine:
But what incentive would he have without a patent?
If he didn’t get a patent, then what could possibly explain why he would develop such a vaccine? What incentive could there possibly be other than unbridled greed? It doesn’t make cents.
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with That One Guy getting sarcastic about AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson’s record compensation:
I mean it takes some real skill to lead a company that lost literally millions of subscribers and tens of thousands of employees, so it’s no wonder they gave him millions more in pay than the last year, that kind of talent is clearly worth the pay to keep around.
And finally, for those of you who follow law Twitter and, especially, Techdirt friend Ken White aka Popehat, it’s Tim R latching on to one particular detail in our post about the Baltimore cop facing criminal charges for stealing three kilos of cocaine:
“It’s former leader, Sgt. Wayne Jenkins, is serving a 25-year sentence on federal racketeering charges.”
I guess it really is RICO every once in a while.
That’s all for this week, folks!