Brad Ideas - Random Ideas - Comments

Money

Anonymous — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:27:48 -0800

You don't have to formally register a trademark. Claiming (TM) is enough. All a formal registration does is add your trademark to a searchable list and give you an additional element of proof. In theory I could've sued over "Think Different" and the advertising campaign that followed but I didn't have anywhere near the amount of money needed to pursue it. I may still have some form of legal claim to "Think Different" and the advertising concept but the last of the online evidence evaporated a couple of years ago. The joke is it's also possible I could be sued for libel for alleging my IP was stolen.

I'm feeling a bit pissed about this which is understandable but if I could get some formal acknowledgement by Apple or TBWA that I created the slogan and concept that would be enough to keep me happy. I'd settle for that especially as the IP is mostly played out now and people have moved on. I might look into that as it's just possible the evidence has been archived offline but without that or a formal acknowledgement by Apple and TBWA I'd look like a right tool. Can't remember the name of the woman but Martin Luther King's "I had a Dream" routine was swiped in a similar way and most people don't know or even care when the evidence is undisputed.

It's hard to swallow this especially as great ideas are pretty rare but the pitch I'm selling to myself is that if I'm so damn clever and capable then I should spend time developing that. It's a tougher road to walk but if you've got something about you developing that can be its own reward. Sure, some other guy has the big name recognition and a mountain of money but that doesn't mean they're the real deal and that's something they have to live with. The alternative is just to get angry and bitter and that doesn't do anyone any good. To be fair, Apple did spot a winner and TBWA did make a polished campaign out of it, and I can appreciate that. Damn shame they're not so generous.

Is your claim valid at all?

Phillip Helbig — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 08:14:51 -0800

"I never registered the trademark claim and any ownership claim I may have legally had is almost certain to have expired by now."

As Brad points out in his section on copyright, trademarks have to be used if one wants to claim them. One can't just register it and do nothing, like parking a domain.

Think Different

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:54:29 -0800

Most people believe Apple created the "Think Different" slogan. Others are a little more informed and believe that TBWA created the slogan only they'd be wrong as well. I'm the guy who first created the slogan "Think Different" and claimed it as a trademark. This took place in a well known high traffic forum where I had a rep as a crazy muthafucker and where I also outlined what "Think Different" meant. Little did I know that two weeks later TBWA pulled together a similar pitch to squeak within Apple's submission deadline.

The first thing I knew about TBWA's plagiarism was when Apple's "Think Different" campaign rolled out six months later. It took a few years for the behind the scenes information to leak out so I could piece together a timeline but that's about how it was. The evidence was lying around on the web for a few years afterwards but it's all gone now. I never registered the trademark claim and any ownership claim I may have legally had is almost certain to have expired by now.

Am I pissed about this? Sure. Is anyone going to acknowledge my claim? Not a chance. Sometimes you can be right and people will stick to a narrative for purely political reasons. They may know they got it wrong, or stole something, or didn't pay what they should've paid because it would ruin the myth. You see this sort of thing all over the place and what happens if you take it on. Staying quiet is often the least worst option.

The point is, the sequencing is getting cheap

brad — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:10:59 -0800

In a few years, full genome sequencing will be quite cheap. But even today, if a DNA target is identified as the cause of a side effect, one can design a test for just that DNA which is very cheap. However, before long, people will just be getting a sequence as a routine part of their medical regimen (though hopefully keeping possession of the data.) Besides, if you are about to take a new expensive heart drug, a DNA test to see if it will work properly or not makes sense because it’s still cheaper than the drug.

Re DNA sequencing for participants in trials

PlanetHabitGal — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 07:05:41 -0800

This is an intriguing idea that I've never considered before. It could explain a lot. One problem I see with this is, even if the DNA sequencing determines specific DNA markers of persons who should not take a particular drug, every person would require DNA sequencing before taking the drug...or run avoidable risks.

Perhaps, if everyone's insurer offered to pay for one-time DNA sequencing just as they require a physical exam before coverage is permitted, it would work. But, otherwise, the situation would devolve into where the wealthy who could afford DNA sequencing would benefit from tested drugs, and the have-nots, unsurprisingly, would not. Nevertheless, it seems an excellent idea for pharmaceutical companies to, as you suggested, do the DNA sequencing.

Unless the second projector

Minus — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:10:52 -0800

Unless the second projector was behind the audience, they would have light shining in their eyes-making the first projector harder to see. The closer to the back wall it was, the smaller the projected image would be (rrom size would be key, as would audience size). If you listen carefully to the presenter you would'nt really need to pay attention to him, his eyes or whatever it is you would rather be distracted by. I would gladly have the presenter present from another room if the information he was giving was going to be better. Im really not bothered whether he looks at me...Unless of course he was a she and she was Halle Berry!

Ebay feedback

Sean — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:54:13 -0700

I hear ya about non-paying bidders and the toothlessness of the dispute process. I recently had a non-payer who promised to pay when his payday came around. 2 weeks went by and no payment, no contact. I sent several Emails over the course of 3 weeks. Still no reply. Finally, I filed a non-paying bidder dispute. He was awarded a non-paying bidder strike and I got my fees back. A few days later the non-paying bidder strike was removed..........as I was told because he requested it to be removed. Ebay sure wouldn't do that to negative feedback I've received.....even if the feedback was not fair or accurate.....ugh!!!!!!

I was looking for some trick

drawing — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 04:16:39 -0700

I was looking for some trick so that my photos can more be clear and infrared thing can be corrected. I have got a Nikon digital camera and Sony camcorder in which I always had such problems and was not able to get the solution. If you could put some suggestion, it'll be very helpful.

Just be good

Will — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:02:19 -0700

I am an agnostic, Was raised christian, and i dont think i live my life any different from most belivers, or non-belivers(atheists).

Great Explanation

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 23:45:41 -0700

Great differentiation between agnostics and atheism. I think a lot of people throw around both terms not fully understanding what they mean. Great Job.

I think you would be a great addition to Officially Atheist - A social network for atheists....so we can unite, share our views, learn, and debate about various aspects of religion and science.

programming against the GOH speech

Gary Farber — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 19:50:11 -0700

"I've heard from people who are upset that a GoH speech doesn't draw as many people as the Masquerade, but a policy of cancelling anything more popular than the GoH speech seems self-defeating unless your goal is to downsize to a narrowly focussed con."

I won't address any of the other issues, but I'm in the camp that says the one thing there should be no counter-programming against are the GOH speechs. It's disrespectful to the GOHs. If people aren't interested in listening to the GOHs -- which is completely legitimate -- they can entertain themselves for that hour, or hour and a half. It's not the duty of the the con to supply alternatives at every moment, and the GOH speech is a unique moment.

Of course, immediately upon writing that, I realize that I'm so old-fashioned, I momentarily forgot we no longer have only two Guests of Honor, a Pro and a Fan.

But I'm stodgy enough to then argue that this demonstrably an example of how having more than two GOHs diminishes being a GOH. Once you have 5-6 of them, you've gone from half (okay, we all know the pro GOH got far more attention than the Fan GOH) the honor and attention going to each GOH to a fifth-to-sixth the honor and attention.

If it's a problem to stop Worldcon five or six times for each GOH event, then maybe that's too many Guests of Honor?

(Let alone noting the Worldcons that have had more than 6!)

By the way, am I the only person bothered that the Raleigh NASFiC has decided to have a "GOH" followed by an "Artist GOH" and a "Fan GOH," which implies that the first, with no modifier, is greater than the other two, modified, forms of GOH? Or am I being persnickety in noting that, so far as I can recall/have noticed, no Worldcon or NASFiC has ever used such nomenclature and made such a distinction before?

It reads to me as if they're saying there's a "real" GOH, and two lesser ones. But maybe that's just my own idiosyncratic reaction?

And you kids get off my lawn!

Why you can overprogram

brad — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 17:23:01 -0700

Fans are diverse, but a convention exists to come together. That’s why shared experience is essential to any convention, not just in SF. Worldcons don’t try to be all things to all people, nor should they. Now perhaps I may have a particular strong niche interest, but that had better not be all I am interested in because there I am better served at the world convention for that niche, and for most of them, there is one.

No, I will come to go outside my niche and to focus on some of the things the worldcon is strongest at — appreciation of written SF in particular, and a bit of the FIAWOL culture (fanzines, con running etc.)

If you try to have something for everyone you overdo it. You must strike a balance. A balance that brings people together, rather than sticks them in their pigeonholes. I would rather see a superb panel about one of my lesser interests than a mediocre panel about my strongest interests, and I am not alone.

You overprogram if people don’t feel the programming left them time for other things. You overprogram if people feel they ad to constantly travel long distances to get to sessions. You overprogram if you have a noticeable number of sessions with just a smattering of people. You only underprogram if people start staying, “The program usually had nothing to interest me” (when they are the sort of people who like programming.)

Overprogramming

Tom Galloway — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 16:13:16 -0700

I'll disagree there's no such thing as overprogramming, and can give an example from Anticipation that played out pretty much exactly how I expected.

In general, I thought Anticipation overprogrammed evenings, particularly given that the convention center was a 10 minute or so walk to the party hotel (i.e. people wouldn't duck in and out of evening program with respect to parties). But there was one case in particular I figured wasn't going to work. I was scheduled for an evening item that had, as its competition, 1) the Masquerade 2) Neil Gaiman reading a Cory Doctorow story with Cory in the room 3) Win Robert J. Sawyer's Money (note that Canadian author Sawyer is particularly popular in, well, Canada) 4) Parties. And probably another item or two I don't recall as not being as significant as those. My item had no one on it with any significant name draw; no offense to anyone else on it, and I include myself in this category, few if any would have anyone on that item on their "I really must go to this because this person is on it" list. Also, the topic wasn't one with strong intrinsic interest, such as a science or tech topic.

And, as I pretty much expected, no one showed up for it except the panelists.

It's also the case that an item often really only works if you get a certain number of people in the audience. My Monday morning panel was hurt by being in one of the "I'm surprised the signs aren't in Chinese since we're that close to Chinatown" rooms at the very far end of the Palais. By that point, at least one person posted they were picking which items to attend by how far down the long hallway the room was. So we had a < 10 person audience. We did a good panel, with lots of audience interaction, but honestly it would've been much better if we'd had even 20 people. It probably would've been better, at least for that time slot, to have had one or two fewer items in it so that each item would've had a better chance for a significant audience.

Re: Not necessarily dinner

Petréa Mitchell — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 13:20:38 -0700

"While there are people who, like you, want to spend as much time in programming as possible, my estimate is that they are a small fraction."

On what do you base that estimate?

I'm not disagreeing with you; I think you could take any single person's description of the ideal Worldcon experience and it would only be representative of a small fraction of the Worldcon population. But if you're basing it on anything more substantial than intuition, I'd be interested in seeing that information myself.

"How many people think there is not enough programming at a typical worldcon?"

Anyone who thinks their particular subthread of fandom was unjustly ignored.

More solid answer: Go to the gripe sessions for 2-3 Worldcons and see for yourself. 2-3 because no Worldcon is ever absolutely typical.

I don't think there's any

Deirdre Saoirse Moen — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 12:44:31 -0700

I don't think there's any such thing as overprogramming. One of the things I love about going to a Worldcon is the diversity of topics. There is no One Fandom; we all have different interests and a Worldcon generally tries to do a number of topics well. Often, they succeed in some areas but not others.