Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.


Record Companies Rip Off Musicians? Say it ain't so!

The suit, filed at a federal court in Manhattan, claims Sony has failed to live up to a contract requiring that it pay its musicians half of the net revenue it receives from licensing songs to download services like iTunes and Napster.

Sony has been paying the aging rockers less than that amount, in part because their record deals predate the existence of legal music sales over the Internet.

According to the suit, the record company is treating digital downloads like traditional record sales, rather than licensed music, triggering a different royalty deal.

Under that old rubrik, the record company deducts fees for the kind of extra costs they used to incur when records were pressed on vinyl, including packaging charges, restocking costs and losses due to breakage.
ANd here they go saying they are out to protect the interests of those very same musicians when they go after file sharing. However, as long as THEY own the file sharing, as in the case of Napster, then it's ok to rip the musicians off.

The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off

Republicans Self Destruct

President Bush's no-longer-secret surveillance program employing the National Security Agency came under a two-pronged attack this week on both political and legal fronts.

First, a key Republican senator said Thursday that he was contemplating pulling the plug on the NSA spying program by cutting funding--unless, that is, the Bush administration comes clean on how the program works and whether it complies with privacy rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
"When you're withholding funds, here you're talking about real authority," Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol. Specter said he met with Bush on Wednesday but was unable to find common ground.

Second, on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in the northern district of California set two hearing dates over the next two months for a lawsuit that seeks to prove that AT&T illegally cooperated with the NSA and violated federal wiretapping laws in doing so. One date is May 17 and the other is June 21.
Republicans VS republicans, the way it oughta be.
The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off

Phishers New Way of Getting Your Information

It seems that phishing is getting more sophisticated.

In a new twist on phishing, fraudsters are sending out e-mail that attempt to trick people into sharing personal information over the phone. The caller is connected to a voice response system that is made to sound exactly like the bank's own system, The phone system identifies itself to the target as the financial institution and prompts them to enter account number and PIN.
The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off

Walmart Intimidation

For up to two years Wal-mart lobbyists have successfully waged a war against a fair viewpoint on Wikipedia's Wal-mart page[1]. Although the Wal-mart page was originally highly critical of Wal-mart, it has slowly shifted to a very positive perspective. Although Wikipedia maintains a 'Neutral Point of View' (NPOV) policy[2], the Wal-mart page is highly biased. Additionally, all criticism has, contrary to policy, practice, and the general opinion of those concerned, been moved to a Debates Over Wal-mart section[3]. Even that page has noticeable resistance to negative points of view about Wal-mart.
My query into Wal-mart and Wikipedia started on Friday, April 14. I went to the page to find information on Wal-mart's union issues in Quebec, which had been a large issue in the media here. I found just one small entry on a timeline, saying '2004: Wal-Mart employees in Jonquière, Quebec, Canada vote in favour of becoming the first unionized Wal-Mart in North America. Five months later, Wal-Mart announces that it would close the store, citing poor sales.' The corresponding page, Debates over Wal-mart, has no mention of the issue, or even Quebec at all. I found it very curios that such an important and popular issue was barely discussed.
The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off

Telephone Companies Desperate for Control

With the advent of VOIP threatening traditional long distance and as more and more people get away from traditional land based lines to VOIP and cell phones, the telecom giants like AT&T are scrambling to figure out where they are going to get their money from.

In one bill, they are trying to create a two-tiered Internet where they can restrict your downloads from companies that do not pay them extra money.

Tech Giants' Internet Battles Web titans like Google and Yahoo! are battling some of the smartest lobbyists in the business. And they've just lost a big one on Capitol Hill.

A host of tech outfits, from Google to Intel, suffered a setback in a battle over access to the Internet on Apr. 26. At issue is whether telcos like AT&T and cable operators such as Comcast, which maintain the country's vast broadband networks, can favor one provider's Web traffic over another's. A measure that would bar the practice was shot down by a Congressional committee.
Of course it was shot down by a committee of senators who have been paid off by the telecom companies. A look into each of those who voted the bill down shows a lot of support from the telecom industry through campaign bribes, I mean contributions.

The Internet should not be restricted by the telephone comapnies. They already charge us for access to the Internet and now they want to control what we download, which music we listen to, and which videos we watch. Those companies willing or able to pay them will be able to distribute music and video. Those that cannot or will not pay their toll will not be able to. That is just wrong on so many levels.

If the above information does not convince you that the phone companies are out to tax every aspect of the Internet, read this.

More things that just piss me off


Very Interesting Article - A Must Read!

Musicians Oppose RIAA, DRM, and Major Record Companies

For too long major record labels and the RIAA cheated musicians out of their money. In the 50s and before between payola and the way they cheated musicians qualified the major record labels as organized crime.

Then years later with new technology and the ability to share music in different ways, they come out and say they are the benevolent ones who are protecting the artists from the evil file sharers. They begin suing 12-year-olds to prove it.

They claim to speak for the artists. Ooops, Canadien artists have spoken up for themselves and it isn't what the RIAA, the major record labels, and their lawyers wanted to hear.

CMCC Members: Barenaked Ladies, Avril Lavigne, Sarah McLachlan, Chantal Kreviazuk, Sum 41, Stars, Raine Maida (Our Lady Peace), Dave Bidini (Rheostatics), Billy Talent, John K. Samson (Weakerthans), Broken Social Scene, Sloan, Andrew Cash and Bob Wiseman (Co-founder Blue Rodeo) all form a coalition against the copyright lawsuits and DRM.

Click the billboard to see what the canadian musicians have to say about the copyright infringement issue

More things that just piss me off


America's Most Gullible People

This is a perfect example of how stupid the public can be at times. I hope you are one of the smart ones, but so many people watch TV and believe everything they see.

Border Patrol catch one of "America's Most Wanted"

Louie Gilot
El Paso Times

Among 16 undocumented immigrants stopped Monday near the Zaragoza Bridge was one of “America's Most Wanted,” a woman wanted in Illinois for allegedly being part of a lottery scam that targeted elderly Latinos in Illinois.

The case was featured on a segment of the television show “America's Most Wanted” that aired last month.
Wow! Sounds like that America's Most Wanted TV Show is doing great things!

Maria Gomez, 49, is “one of three suspected con artists who tricked the elderly into giving them money to cash fake lottery tickets in Illinois,” Border Patrol officials said in a written release.

Gomez has an active warrant for her arrest on charges of theft by deception over $10,000 by the Wheaton, Ill., police, officials said.

Border Patrol officials said Gomez had previously been arrested for a similar scam in Hialeah, Fla.

The high-profile arrest occurred Monday evening when Border Patrol agents witnessed a group of people crossing the river four miles from the Zaragoza Bridge.

Agents identified Gomez during a routine fingerprint exam through the IDENT/IAFIS criminal database. Gomez was turned over to the El Paso Police Department and will be detained in El Paso until her extradition to Wheaton, officials said.
So . . . you mean that they didn't actually recognize her from the show, America's Most Wanted, but would have caught her anyway due to a routine fingerprint check? Yet America's Most Wanted still gets the credit?

So if I can post every single wanted fugitive in America on my website, and if any of them get caught, even if no one has actually seen my website, and my website had nothing at all to do with the capture, I can still claim credit for it? Cool!

Why? Why are people so gullible? Ask this guy. He wrote the story.

Louie Gilot may be reached at; 546-6131.

Most Wanted Blog
More things that just piss me off


Congress Letting the RIAA and Software Companies Write the Law again

Because of the complexities of copyright and other intellectual property issues and the inability of our politicians to even pass the FCAT test, they are allowing the companies to write the laws themselves. Yes, those big corporations like Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, and others will look out after our best interests, don't you worry one little bit. These multinational corporations have your best interests at heart . . . Trust Me.
For the last few years, a coalition of technology companies, academics and computer programmers has been trying to persuade Congress to scale back the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Now Congress is preparing to do precisely the opposite. A proposed copyright law seen by CNET would expand the DMCA's restrictions on software that can bypass copy protections and grant federal police more wiretapping and enforcement powers.
The draft legislation, created by the Bush administration and backed by Rep. Lamar Smith, already enjoys the support of large copyright holders such as the Recording Industry Association of America. Smith, a Texas Republican, is the chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees intellectual-property law.
And that support comes in the form of campaign contributions don't you know?

Rep. Lamar Smith stopped to smile for the camera though.
"The bill as a whole does a lot of good things," said Keith Kupferschmid, vice president for intellectual property and enforcement at the Software and Information Industry Association in Washington, D.C. "It gives the (Justice Department) the ability to do things to combat IP crime that they now can't presently do."
Of course, the SIIA's board of directors includes Symantec, Sun Microsystems, Oracle, Intuit and Red Hat, so you can trust their opinion completely.
During a speech in November, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales endorsed the idea and said at the time that he would send Congress draft legislation. Such changes are necessary because new technology is "encouraging large-scale criminal enterprises to get involved in intellectual-property theft," Gonzales said, adding that proceeds from the illicit businesses are used, "quite frankly, to fund terrorism activities."
As all funds from anything illegal always are, well as long as bush and associates are in office. "it's all for the children!" "It's to help fight terrorism!" "It's so we can keep you safe!" are the lines this administration feeds us every day. Have you been fed your lines today?
The 24-page bill is a far-reaching medley of different proposals cobbled together. One would, for instance, create a new federal crime of just trying to commit copyright infringement. Such willful attempts at piracy, even if they fail, could be punished by up to 10 years in prison.
Wait! There's more!
But one of the more controversial sections may be the changes to the DMCA. Under current law, Section 1201 of the law generally prohibits distributing or trafficking in any software or hardware that can be used to bypass copy-protection devices. (That section already has been used against a Princeton computer science professor, Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov and a toner cartridge remanufacturer.)

Smith's measure would expand those civil and criminal restrictions. Instead of merely targeting distribution, the new language says nobody may "make, import, export, obtain control of, or possess" such anticircumvention tools if they may be redistributed to someone else.

"It's one degree more likely that mere communication about the means of accomplishing a hack would be subject to penalties," said Peter Jaszi, who teaches copyright law at American University and is critical of attempts to expand it.
Even the current wording of the DMCA has alarmed security researchers. Ed Felten, the Princeton professor, told the Copyright Office last month that he and a colleague were the first to uncover the so-called "rootkit" on some Sony BMG Music Entertainment CDs--but delayed publishing their findings for fear of being sued under the DMCA. A report prepared by critics of the DMCA says it quashes free speech and chokes innovation.
The SIIA's Kupferschmid, though, downplayed concerns about the expansion of the DMCA. "We really see this provision as far as any changes to the DMCA go as merely a housekeeping provision, not really a substantive change whatsoever," he said. "They're really to just make the definition of trafficking consistent throughout the DMCA and other provisions within copyright law uniform."

The SIIA's board of directors includes Symantec, Sun Microsystems, Oracle, Intuit and Red Hat.

Trust Us . . . This won't hurt a bit.
Jessica Litman, who teaches copyright law at Wayne State University, views the DMCA expansion as more than just a minor change. "If Sony had decided to stand on its rights and either McAfee or Norton Antivirus had tried to remove the rootkit from my hard drive, we'd all be violating this expanded definition," Litman said.
The proposed law scheduled to be introduced by Rep. Smith also does the following:

• Permits wiretaps in investigations of copyright crimes, trade secret theft and economic espionage. It would establish a new copyright unit inside the FBI and budgets $20 million on topics including creating "advanced tools of forensic science to investigate" copyright crimes.

• Amends existing law to permit criminal enforcement of copyright violations even if the work was not registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

In other news:
McNealy steps down as Sun CEO
Rambus wins in patent case
At Maker Faire, time to tinker Extra: Radio feeds the content beast
Video: Engineer touts his 100-mpg hybrid
• Boosts criminal penalties for copyright infringement originally created by the No Electronic Theft Act of 1997 from five years to 10 years (and 10 years to 20 years for subsequent offenses). The NET Act targets noncommercial piracy including posting copyrighted photos, videos or news articles on a Web site if the value exceeds $1,000.

• Creates civil asset forfeiture penalties for anything used in copyright piracy. Computers or other equipment seized must be "destroyed" or otherwise disposed of, for instance at a government auction. Criminal asset forfeiture will be done following the rules established by federal drug laws.

• Says copyright holders can impound "records documenting the manufacture, sale or receipt of items involved in" infringements.

Jason Schultz, a staff attorney at the digital-rights group the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says the recording industry would be delighted to have the right to impound records. In a piracy lawsuit, "they want server logs," Schultz said. "They want to know every single person who's ever downloaded (certain files)--their IP addresses, everything."

So use it and get these republicrooks out of office soon!

CNET's Anne Broache contributed to this report.

More things that just piss me off


It's only laws - ignore them if they don't fit

The newly created Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council is charged with sharing information aimed at protecting the nation's infrastructure, cybercomponents included. Michael Chertoff, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary, cited security reasons when he signed off on exempting the council from the Federal Advisory Committee Act, or FACA.
I agree 100% that there needs to be some meetings here that are not made immediately public, but why is it that every time the bush administration thinks a law is hindering national security, they just ignore it instead of going through the process of changing the law?

GW Bush has fostered an atmosphere of "we will follow whichever laws we want and ignore any we don't like." No need to use the democratic process, bush just gets to decide what is or isn't a good law. That would be what a King believes, not a president.

Bush reviewing laws he doesn't like.

More things that just piss me off

Bush - "I Invented The IPOD"

"The government funded research in microdrive storage, electrochemistry and signal compression. They did so for one reason: It turned out that those were the key ingredients for the development of the iPod."

Well, George, Al invented the Internet and it's still bigger than your ipod!

More comments on Bush's iPod invention.

More things that just piss me off

The bush dance

Lets see, both of these statements are by the same GW Bush in the same story, in the same speech.

""Massive deportation of the people here is not going to work," Bush said as a Congress divided over immigration returned from a two-week recess. "It's just not going to work."
Then he said . . .
"it's important to enforce border laws that are on the books and boasted that 6 million immigrants have been captured and turned back since he took office."

More things that just piss me off


It's Legal if we get a Percentage

It's amazing at how many illegal things you can do as long as the right people make money on it.

Take pyramid schemes for example. They are illegal. However, if you can run a pyramid scheme that can make a lot of money, it's ok. Why? Because the maximum fine the government can give out on that is one million dollars each year. So if your pyramid scheme makes 10 million per year, you simply give the government their 10% cut and keep going. A certain door to door vacuum cleaner company does business this way and has for years.

Now sending out spam is also illegal, but AOL and some others want to have a paid email system that will send unwanted emails to it's users, as long as they get paid.

In other words we will filter out all spam, except those that pay us. Then it's not spam, it's paid email access. So all you successful spammers who are actually making money rejoice, just pay AOL their cut on the spam and you are now legitimate.

Esther Dyson is an advocate for paid email, but then this is the same Esther Dyson that, when associated with ICANN, ignored what individual users wanted as far as the Internet is concerned in favor of what the big corporations wanted.

Esther follows the money. If Esther is for paid email, then she will be making money from the spam. Count on it. She has a plan.

The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off

Bush Hires Civil Liberties Guru?

Now, this is good. GW Bush appointing a Civil Liberties Protection Officer. Now we can all breath easier. Oh, GW will still abuse civil liberties, he just has someone appointed now to say he isn't doing it. I thought that was what Karl and Dick and ANdrew did.

The Rest of The Story

More Things That Just Piss Me Off


Bush's No White Child Left Behind Act

It seems that there are loopholes in the law or no child left behind act that allow schools not to include test scores by many minorities so that the average test score will look higher than it actually is.

Since minorities have historically scored lower than white children on tests, the schools are leaving out minority children's test scores so they can continue to get the funding they want.

Yeah, why should teachers have to improve and teach minority children to do better when they can just ignore the test scores that say they need more help?

The Rest of The Story

More Things That Just Piss Me Off

Intellectual Property Owners after more Domain Names

It never ceases to amaze me at how far intellectual property owners will go to obtain more domain names. The arrogance of the IP community is absolutely ridiculous. I'm going to quote from a story here and comment on it.

THE number of "bad faith" domain-name registrations raises concerns that trademarks are increasingly being infringed online, the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property has found. Bad-faith registrations are where a party deliberately and unlawfully sets out to benefit by registering a domain containing another party's business name and associated trademarks.
Exactly. The domain name must have been registered with the INTENT of infringing on someone's trademarked name. Simply registering the name is NOT an infringement. It must be used in the same type of commerce as the holder of the trademark is engaged in.

The present process of domain-name registration does not require the registrar to check whether the same or similar domain names are already listed. The same situation applies to the registration of company names and business names. "There is a public misconception that registrars check for existing prior rights, such as registered trademarks, when registering a domain name," ACIP says in a report.
Registrars have no reason to check the domain names against registered trademarks because nowhere in your trademark application does it guarantee you will also get the domain name that corresponds to your trademark.

IP interests constantly make the mistake of equating domain names with trademarks and feel that trademark holders should not only get the domain name that EXACTLY matches their trademark, but that they should also get all domain names that sound a even a little bit similar to their trademark.

What the IP interests like to ignore is that owning a trademark does not mean you own the word or phrase you applied for. It means you are allowed to use that word or phrase to do commerce in a specific class, such as publications, the sale of clothing goods, etc. Trademarks are specific in this regard, so if someone else wants to use the same name or phrase to sell something else, they can also get a mark and do so.

Therefore, no trademark holder owns the name or phrase exclusively and domain names are not in any specific class, so trademark holders have no reasonable assumption to ownership of any domain name. When ICANN gets a clue and starts allowing new TLDs that reflect specific classes, trademark holders will have protection on the Internet.

They deserve no protection in current generic TLDs like dot com, which stands for commerce, which is not a class you can register a mark for. If they had dot publications or dot pub, then someone who owned a trademarked word or phrase to do business as a publication would have reasonable rights to the domain name in that TLD that exactly matches the srting of letters they registered as their trademark.

ACIP recommends mandatory searching of trademarks to ensure there is no conflict prior to registration; amending the Trade Marks Act to give registered business and company name owners protection against identical and confusingly similar registrations; and a single business name system to replace the state-based one used at present.
Of course, they are the advisory council that represents the interests of trademark holders who wish to have more rights with domain names in relationship to their trademarks than they would ever have offline.

* Clothing maker and retailer Supre operates more than 100 stores across Australia and New Zealand.

It first registered the name Supre as a trademark in 1990; it also owns the domain name

In 2000, another party registered a business name that was very similar to Supre's trademark in Western Australia; and further registered a confusingly similar domain name in 2001. The business name was cancelled in 2003.

In 2004, Supre's lawyers lodged a complaint with the domain authority, claiming the other name should be transferred to them because it was "confusingly similar" to their brand. The other party did not respond, and the panel transferred the domain to Supre.
There is one of the rubs. They don't want just domains that match their trademarks, they want all similar domain names as well. Trademarks are specific to the string of letters you are granted a mark for. They do not guarantee you no one will ever start any kind of business anywhere with a name that is similar to yours. This is simply large companies with IP lawyers who believe it is their inherent right to have anything they want and to have it their own way.

A domain name is akin to a phone number. You do not own a domain name anymore than you own your phone number. They are both services you must pay for periodically. A doimain name was created to represent the string of numbers, which is your real internet address. It was created because it would be easier to remember than the numbers to your website.

Can supre sue me if my phone number, using the letters associated with each number, spelled supre? what about phone numbers thta spelled a word that was similar to supre? See how ridiculous their assumption is? But through cybersquatting laws and the ability to slant the news through advertising dollars, big corporations and their lawyers have many people convinced that they have rights they do not have.

If one of these corporations goes after your domain name and you feel they are wrong, fight them. If you do not have the money or the time to fight them, transfer the name to me. I'll fight them.

The author, Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic has been involved in domain names since 1995. He has bought and sold more than 500 domain names, has helped to fight off corporations who tried to reverse hijack domain names from people, and has helped to represent individual users and owners of domain names through participation in the DNSO, the General Assembly, and currently on the GNSO mailing list.

More Things That Just Piss Me Off


.tel or Dot Tel or Dot Anything

This is just so ridiculous, it defies the imagination.

ICANN, the body responsible for creating top-level domains, is reportedly considering a new one. Conceived as a way to easily manage contact information in an age where many people have numerous contact numbers, the proposed .tel TLD would allow individuals and companies to keep all of their contact information in an easily accessible location. Companies would get while individuals would be able to register
Go to their company website and click "contact us". That might be a way to get the contact info you are looking for. If it's an individual, they may already have a dot name, another ICANN smokescreen invented to keep them from having to create real new commercially viable TLDs.

Those with .tel sites could then keep them updated with all their myriad contact information, including address, phone numbers (e.g., home, work, cellular, Skype), fax numbers, and instant messaging handles. Those who wish to remain anonymous could happily ignore the new TLD and continue to keep their contact info restricted to those they want to have it.
A whole TLD for people and companies to put their contact page from their existing website. Next ICANN will create dot about for the about us page.

ICANN has been on a new TLD streak lately. Most recently, ICANN opened up public registration for the European Union-specific .eu TLD, resulting in a rush to register domain names with the new suffix. Other TLDs approved since 2000 include .info, .biz, . jobs, .travel, and even .mobi for handheld devices. ICANN has also mulled over the creation of a .xxx TLD for adult sites, but that has yet to materialize due to concerns on the part of some countries which believe it would result in more pornography on the Internet. New child-centric legislation proposed last month in the US would call on ICANN to revive .xxx.
dot eu was viable as a ccTLD, nothing more. dot info was one of the only three sensible choices ICANN has ever made. dot biz was a poor excuse for a commercially viable TLD and it infringed on the rights of the dot biz that had already been created by someone else.

dot jobs is commercially viable and it is the second choice ICANN made in regards to TLDs that might make sense. dot travel is the third one. It represents an industry. We need more TLDs that reflect commercial categories.

dot mobi is just a joke. You can make any website available to mobile devices and they are building devices to handle viewing websites. The industry is handling that in a technical manner and are not going to restrict mobile devices to only be able to surf to dot mobi websites.

They didn't mention two of ICANN's proudest moments, the creation of dot aero and dot museum. Yeah, those are commercially viable and a real threat to dot com. We need TLDs created that can compete with dot com domains. ICANN is doing everything they can to keep from creating any TLD that can do that.

And dot xxx is the biggest joke of all. First of all, porn is legal. They currently have dot com, net, and even org websites. That industry has spent millions promoting those domain names. They are not going to abandon all of their link popularity and current traffic to move to a dot xxx domain name. They may buy some dot xxx names to compliment their current business, but they aren't going to just move because people say they should.

You cannot force them to move without offering them reimbursement for the business they will lose as a result. Who pays for that? ICANN? The US Government? What about all of the companies in porn that are not in the US? You can't just pass a US law and expect every country to abide by it. Ain't gonna happen.


by Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
More things that just piss me off


Bush in 2008

I can't wait until 2008 when we get to do this with GW Bush. Click Here

Statue of Liberty and Immigration

Found this on a website. Kind of sums up many people's thoughts on the illegal immigration issue.

"There's a sign on the Statue Of Liberty that says, "Give me your tired your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" It welcomed my forefathers to this country and, unless yours came across the Bering Straights, it welcomed them too. It is representative of my country and as long as it's there I'm standing right beside it with my arms wide open saying, "Welcome .... as long as you're not trying to sneak in... come on in ..... you'll be safe here'll be free here ..... and we're sincerely glad to have you. Incidentally, when you get here, you will learn my language, respect my government, pay your own way, follow the same rules that I do, and not criticize or discriminate against any of the other races or religions here .... or .... I'll do my best to kick your sorry ass back to where you came from.""

Another one;
"There's this word - "illegal" - which I understand to mean, well, illegal. If something is illegal you can't do it. Excuse me, but what's the deal with government benefits for illegal immigrants? I don't like it when somebody walks in my house, uninvited, and says, "I'm here, take care of me."
source; Johnnie McCoy

More things that just piss me off

Taxing the Internet

Here they come. We know the US and state governments want to tax the Internet so bad they can taste it, so now they are going after music downloads.

Does my state tax digital downloads?

Our politicians should have to take a test before they run for office to make sure their IQ isn't one more than a rock, and one less than a tree.

If they tax companies on the Internet, the companies will move their operations offshore to avoid paying them.

Pretty simple concept to understand. Look at the online gambling industry. However our astute politicians do not grasp this concept.

For many politicians and for many American citizens, the US seems like it is the whole world. It isn't. Laws we pass here about the Internet mean absolutely nothing to people in other countries. Those laws mean nothing to the governments of those other countries.

If we pose a tax on businesses on the web, some other countries will seize that opportunity to invite those companies to move to their country to do business. Those governments will give these businesses a great deal and these businesses will be employing people in that country instead of this one.

The rest of the story.

by Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
More things that just piss me off


ICANN Considers Dot Tel?

ICANN will do anything it can to keep any real viable commercial-use TLDs from coming out that will compete with their friends in big business.

According to a story I just read;

"To help people manage all their contact information online, the Internet's key oversight agency is considering a ``.tel'' domain name. If approved, the domain could be available this year.

As proposed, individuals could use a ``.tel'' Web site to provide the latest contact information and perhaps even let friends initiate a call or send a text message directly from the site. Businesses could use a ``.tel'' site to determine customers' locations and route them automatically to the correct call center.

Its proponents also envision ``.tel'' as a place from which the various people-finding services on the Internet could pull the latest contact information as individuals move about. Now, data typically come from third-party sources like phone listings, which may be old or incomplete, particularly if an entire household is listed under one name."
You can already do all of those things with a myriad of software applications and you can do it from websites on ANY TLD. This is just like saying that you should only stream video from websites that end in dot tv.

ICANN will approve this one though because there is no chance for it to be any competition to those with dot com domain names. ICANN is stifling competition at every turn through it's process of choosing which TLDs it will approve or disapprove.

Just like dot museum and dot aero, this TLD, dot tel is a sham to make people think ICANN is approving new TLDs like they are being asked to do.

What we need are viable commercial alternatives like dot lawyer, dot doctor, dot medical, dot auto, dot realestate, dot construction, dot design, and others that reflect real business categories. That would increase competition on the web and that is good for everyone.

Not only is promoting competition good for everyone, it is one of the prime directives of ICANN's Memorandum of Understanding. Many on ICANN's Board of Directors cater to big business who wants to maintain the advantage they have in owning premium domain names. They want opportunity, then they want to shut the door on anyone coming after them.

Until people start hammering ICANN about creating more commercial-use TLDs, they will continue to hand over the Internet to the big multinational corporations. Their board is just a bunch of puppets with Vint Cerf being the lead puppet.

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off

Software Update Frauds

This really pisses me off. Software companies are constantly putting out new versions, supposedly to improve them and make them better for us. In some cases that is true. However in most cases it isn't.

Let's start with Microsoft first. They don't sell you software, they lease it to you. Why don't they just call it a lease? You HAVE to update with them or lose necessary functions, patches, and support. If you have to pay them again every year, it's no longer a sale, it's a lease.

Microsoft has deadlines to put out their new versions of windows. They release them as close to that deadline as possible even if the code isn't finished. Then they put out patches. In other words they are still writing the program they just sold/leased to you as a completed work. That is about as close to fraud as you can get, but I'm sure it isn't due to some slick fine print legalistic disclaimer somewhere in the terms of service no one ever reads.

Other companies do this as well. And what really gets to me is that many times the update is a much worse product then the predecessor. It's more of a downgrade. But they need to make money so they come out with a new version whether you need it or not.

Then some of them move all of the buttons and functions in the program. There was a learning curve to be able to use the software in the first place, now thanks to their wonderful update, you have to learn it all over again.

Then they want to force you to give them more money. I bought RealPlayer G2 when they told me that it was the greatest thing since sliced video. They promised support and updates. Then they came out with their new version of realplayer. Not only did they not provide anymore support or updates for G2, they disabled it's ability to play the files they said it would play when I purchased it.

I don't care if they sue me for saying this. That is fraud. Real Fraud. They should trademark that term. Get RealFraud now!

I personally will never download even the free version opf realplayer that also installs the spyware and aol messenger, whether you want it or not, on my computer. If I go to a website that only has video you can see with realplayer, I just go somewhere else to buy what I need.

What ever happened to simple software? You needed to perform a specific function on your computer and you or someone wrote a program that just did that one little function. The software wasn't bulky or buggy.

Now every program wants to perform everything all at once. Your photo-editing program wants to be an html editor. Your html editor wants to be your ftp client. Your word processor wants to be your graphics program and email client all at the same time. Windows wants to do it all.

Give me simple, small, and complete programs any day over these bulky, bug filled, overpriced software “solutions”.

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off

AT&T and the NSA Wiretapping

Well, now, if you wondered exactly how some of the NSA wiretapping was done and how some corporations gain government favors, here is an interesting post for you.

Many large corporations need the cooperation of the US government to keep out of anti-trust trouble, to gain lucrative government contracts, to get licensing for specific ventures, etc. But just how does one go about getting those special favors from the government>

Cellphone companies needed airwaves that were controlled by the US military. The US military declined. Then cellphone companies decided that the US government idea of tracking people through their cellphones was a great idea. The US military decided that they could let the cellphone companies have the airwaves they were seeking and now the US government can track you through your cellphone to know where you are within 60 to 100 feet. Coincidence?

Microsoft lost an anti-trust suit. They were ordered to split the company into 5 seperate companies. Never happened. What did Microsoft give the government? What exactly is in the new Vista source code?

Now we have documents leaked out of AT&T that allegedly show that they have been helping the NSA wiretaps. What did AT&T get in return? Will they win the lawsuit forcing Google, Ebay, and others to pay them more money because they are using more bandwidth than my blog? Where will that stop? Will we all have to pay bandwidth charges to AT&T over and above the charges for the Internet Service we already pay for? Will AT&T win the lawsuits to allow them to charge everyone for VOIP services?

Read more about AT&T and the documents here.

More things that just piss me off


Microsoft Writes Privacy Law?

This is a great example about how software companies are controlling all laws related to software. In Oklahoma, they wanted to pass a law about spyware. So what do they do? They outsource the writing of that law to Microsoft.

Microsoft wrote the law that bans some companies from installing spyware on your computer, but also wrote in that a select few companies, ones that Microsoft approves of, can go ahead and look around inside your computer without your knowledge.

That’s like allowing collection agencies to write the laws on how collection agencies can collect debts from people. Its like allowing Wallstreet stock brokers to write the laws that have to do with Insider Trading and corporate accounting.

Our government is so ignorant when it comes to technology and so much of their campaign money comes from these software companies that there is no way we will ever get a fair law concerning software manufacturers.

The rest of the story

More things that just piss me off

Walmart Designing Your Computer Games

In a great example about how major corporations use their power, Walmart now controls which pc games will be developed and how they will be designed.

"Do you buy your electronic games at Wal-Mart? Never mind, doesn't matter. The retail games you buy at GameStop or Best Buy or online are the games Wal-Mart has decided you can buy.

Publisher sales reps inform Wal-Mart buyers of games in development; the games' subjects, titles, artwork and packaging are vetted and sometimes vetoed by Wal-Mart. If Wal-Mart tells a top-end publisher it won't carry a certain game, the publisher kills that game. In short, every triple-A game sold at retail in North America is managed start to finish, top to bottom, with the publisher's gaze fixed squarely on Wal-Mart, and no other."
I understand business. I understand they want to meet the needs of their biggest buyers.

However, when a company gets as big as Walmart, they gain the ability to influence creativity or stifle it, whichever they please. The potential to abuse that power is there. If we suddenly get a Walmart CEO that believes we should not be playing games with girls who are heroes for example, can basically decide that no new games will be produced where females are heroes.

What if we get a Walmart CEO that secretly doesn't like black people? Or what if he decides that all violence in games is bad? or sexual content? It's not whether you agree with any of those things or not. Do you want the head of Walmart sensoring what games you can or cannot play?

Do you think I'm exaggerating here? Read on;

"Tom Gilleland, with the indie developer BeachWare (which has sold casino games through Wal-Mart), says, "Wal-Mart is working from a very strong position that enables them to dictate the content of their software product line.

They also have a very complicated situation in terms of public image, so they avoid controversial products. Thus, because of the company's influence, nowadays it is practically impossible to market a game that contains nudity. "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity - we're just not going to do it," Wal-Mart spokesman Tom Williams told Reuters in October 2002."
Now, I can understand Walmart choosing to not sell a game that has nudity in it. That is their choice and they have the right to choose. But again here we have a corporation who can decide what "vulgarity" is for us?

"Developers have produced "special Wal-Mart editions" of some games, such as Duke Nukem 3D and Blood, that delete the two principal bugaboos, nudity and excessive gore. Other developers just sanitize their games across the board. As a Ritual Entertainment developer remarked in an online chat promoting their Heavy Metal: F.A.K.K. 2 game (2000), "There's not much nudity other than statues. Wal-Mart is picky about that. When you have to decide between feeding your family or putting nudity in the game, you choose food."
Still think I'm exaggerating here?

The Rest of the Story.

More things that just piss me off


Apple Against Freedom of Speech

Blogs are media just as much as television, radio, or newspapers and magazines. it's a fact. But as bloggers we have a battle ahead oif us to maintain the same rights those other forms of media enjoy, such as protection of sources and freedom of speech.

Click the title of this post and you will see one of the latest attacks on bloggers by the corporate world.

More things that just piss me off

Government Help for the Phishing Industry

In yet another example of government inefficiency and lack of technical understanding, a Florida County, (Broward), is making a lot of personal data available to the public through their website.

This article tells all the details.

"The Social Security numbers, driver's license information and bank account details belonging to potentially millions of current and former residents in Florida's Broward County are available to anyone on the Internet because sensitive information has not been redacted from public records being posted on the county’s Web site.

A county official said the information available on the Web is in full compliance with state statutes that require counties to post public documents on the Internet."
Ahhhh, I see. It's okay to put all that personal information out there. It's our fault because we want public records to be public. The government can't be bothered with filtering out the personal data before posting the public data.

"Sue Baldwin, director of the Broward Count Records Division, said the county is aware of Hogman’s concerns but said that her office is in compliance with state laws requiring all state recorders to maintain a Web site for official records."
Okay, since they are in compliance with state law, everything is okay now. Wouldn't want to go above and beyond the call of duty or anything. Wouldn't want to go ahead and use any common sense. Do the very minimum you have to in order to comply with the law. Anything beyond that would be like . . . wow . . . having to think and stuff.

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off

ICANN Continues to Lie to the Public about New TLDs

ICANN claims that it is concerned with the stability of the Internet. The ICANN Board of Directors falls back on that statement every time new TLDs are brough up. They say they need to have the long drawn out process they currently have for creating new TLDs for the sake of the Internet and it's users.

They say too many TLDs could somehow damage the Internet. There are other roots with hundreds of TLDs that work just fine, like the Pacific Root or the The Atlantic Root

So that theory is just a bunch of bs and a smokescreen to keep the public believing that the reason they don't create more TLDs is for stability. This keeps the control of the Internet in the hands of a few corporations like Verisign who was recently granted a monopoly for the .com registry by this same ICANN Board of Directors.

Let's talk about what is really needed to be able to run a TLD. Let's look back to how it was done before ICANN took over.

In this article, the questions are being asked to the operators of dot UG for Uganda.

"What did the registration then entail and what were the requirements?

I was part of the global network of pioneers known to each other in an informal way through a network of IT experts.

We applied first to Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), filled in a form but we were required to demonstrate that we were competent and can access the Internet, which entailed having access to electronic mail everyday. They needed a permanent administrative and technical contact."
So that was and IS all that is really necessary to begin a new TLD. ICANN wants you to submit your business plan for their approval when they are not even business experts. They want all kinds of technical requirements that are not necessary and that only a few large corporations can provide. That way they keep the ability to create a new TLD out of the hands of small business and the little guy.

"So you did not pay any money?

No, not at all. The Internet was created, based and managed by the Private Sector. It involved creativity, flexibility and most importantly a spirit of community service that is why it was created for community service."
Yet ICANN makes you put up a $50,000 deposit to even apply for running a new TLD. They have yet to return the deposits to several companies that they refused to grant new TLDs to in the last round of TLD creation a few years back. Again, they know only large corporations can risk $50,000 just as an application fee that may not even be returned if you are rejected.

ICANN was created to be a technical body. They were not created to make policy. They were not created to hand the Internet over to a handful of corporations.

All of the stuff you hear from ICANN about the "process" of creating new TLDs is total BS. For years it was done as simple as filling out a form and showing you were technically capable of running it.

That is all that should be required now.

by Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
More things that just piss me off


Webmaster Whiners and Google Page Rank

There was a recent update from Google where the page ranks of many websites changed. Some of my websites did very well in the last shakeup, but who knows what will happen next time Google decides to change the way it figures your page rank?

But I cruise around on many of the webmaster forums and read the posts from all the whiners. Some claim they got a low page rank because somebody must have hacked google. Some say google made a mistake. Others say that google is having problems and that this update was just bogus.

Get real. If you don't have the page rank you think you deserve, you blame google? Google does not promise to be consistant with PR. Google doesn't promise if you do this or do that, you will get the PR you think you deserve. Google doesn't even promise to index your website at all and doesn't have to if they don't feel like it.

Do you really believe not indexing your website or granting you the PR you think you deserve is going to make a big difference to everyone in the world who uses the Internet? Do you think if your website wasn't given good PR or indexed by Google, that their stock prices might fall?

Check your egos at the door. Work hard at building the best websites you can. Provide quality content to people who surf the web. Don't use popups and other garbage like disabled back clicks and exit consoles that you know annoys people.

In the long run your website will do well is you just focus on quality content. All search engines love good content. That never changes. Everything else you try like metatags, alt tags, link farms, trading links with everyone you can, and all of the other SEO guru tricks don't work for you in the long run.

Are you here to stay? Then quit trying to manipulate the PR and search results with all of the cute tricks and scripts. Write or provide quality content. In the end, you will be the winner and all the gurus will still be whining.

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off
Affiliate Website Design
Article Content Provider .com

Justice - A Matter of Perspective

jus·tice ( P ) Pronunciation Key (jsts)
The quality of being just; fairness.

The principle of moral rightness; equity.
Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness.

The upholding of what is just, especially fair treatment and due reward in accordance with honor, standards, or law.

Law. The administration and procedure of law.

Conformity to truth, fact, or sound reason: The overcharged customer was angry, and with justice.

do justice to
To treat adequately, fairly, or with full appreciation: The subject is so complex that I cannot do justice to it in a brief survey.

Main Entry: jus·tice
Pronunciation: 'j&s-t&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Old French, from Latin justitia, from justus just
1 a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair b : the principle or ideal of just dealing; also : conformity to the principle or ideal of just dealing

2 a : the administration of law ; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to law or equity b : fair, just, or impartial legal process

3 : JUDGE; especially : a judge of an appellate court or court of last resort (as a supreme court)

Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.


n 1: the quality of being just or fair [syn: justness] [ant: injustice] 2: the administration of law; the act of determining rights and assigning rewards or punishments; "justice deferred is justice denied" [syn: judicature] 3: a public official authorized to decide questions bought before a court of justice [syn: judge, jurist, magistrate] 4: the United States federal department responsible for enforcing federal laws (including the enforcement of all civil rights legislation); created in 1870 [syn: Department of Justice, Justice Department, Justice, DoJ]

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University


is rendering to every one that which is his due. It has been distinguished from
equity in this respect, that while justice means merely the doing what positive
law demands, equity means the doing of what is fair and right in every separate

Source: Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary

Justice means different things to different sides. Let's take the illegal immigration issue that many protests are scheduled over today.

An article on
ABC's Website talks about the upcoming protests;

"If groups that advocate changing immigration law to create a path for the nearly 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States to become U.S. citizens get their way, today could be the biggest day of coordinated protests in the country's history.

They're calling it the National Day of Action for Immigration Justice."
To the illegal immigrants, justice means they should get amnesty and be granted citizenship just because they are here and working anyway.

To others, justice is punishing people for ANY crime they commit, including crossing the border illegally.

Some don't really think they should be punished, but they certainly do not think granting them citizenship as a bonus for crossing the border illegally can be considered justice.

Others, who have gone through the legal process of becoming a US Citizen certainly don't believe allowing others to get citizenship given to them is justice. After all, they had to spend all that money and time becoming a citizen, so what gives the illegals who cross the border more rights than they had?

Last, but not least, we have the politicians who believe justice is when they get votes because they say what people want to hear about the issue.

What is your version of justice in regards to the immigration issue?

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off


Web Hosting - Buy 1 Year - Get 1 Year Free

People who read my blog often know I do not put much emphasis on advertising anything. I took down the google adsense stuff because it was just cheesy and I don't blog to make money. I blog because I like to blog.

However, when my hosting company offers a deal like this, I feel like sharing it. They are offering a free domain name, plus an extra year of hosting for signing up for one year of hosting at less than $100.

Anyone who thinks that is not a good deal, doesn't know anything about hosting. And before you ask, yes that link is my affiliate link and I make a commission if you sign up with powweb.

However, I've been an affiliate with them a long time and never posted about it. This is a good deal. It's only good until May 1st. I host all of my websites with Powweb. So I recommend them from personal experience.

by Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
More things that just piss me off

You still don't have a blog?

Blogging is something everyone has heard about, but most still don't believe they have any need for a blog. They don't feel like posting, they don't like to write, they don't have the time to write a post each day, are all some of the excuses that I hear when I suggest starting a blog to people.

The fastest growing sector of the Internet is blogging. If you feel your company can ignore the hottest method of getting traffic on the web, then you haven't got a clue.

Many people do not understand the power of the blogs. In this article, I will try to explain to you why, if you have not already started a blog, you should.

First, some of the reasons you might need a blog. Personally, I recommend you have no less than two blogs. I'll tell you why later in the article.

If you are an individual and new to the web, but want your own website, then a blog is the easiest way to do that. While you learn about putting up your own website, you could be blogging and getting traffic.

Then when you put your website up, you can send that traffic to your new website. You can also use a lot of your blogposts you made as content for your new website.

If you own a company, whether online only, offline only, or both, you can benefit greatly from blogging.

1. You can use the blog to talk to and make announcements to your employees.

2. You can use the blog to update your customers about new offers and announcements.

3. You can use your blog to create a buzz about your website, your company, or new projects.

4. You can use your blog to help push more traffic to your website.

Those are just some of the reasons your company should have a blog. I'll add one more. Blogs have been responsible for taking down Trent Lott for his indescretions, 60 minutes for their false reports, John Kerry for his stories about his Vietnam war record, and the blogs have taken on mainstream media and won several times.

If simple bloggers can take down these powerful people, what do you think a few bloggers could do to your business if there was ever a scandal or even a simple misunderstanding?

By having your own blog, you get to tell your side of the story. By having your own blog, you are putting out so much positive information about your company, that anyone trying to put out negative information would have a hard time getting it found in the search engines.

Someone searching for your company name would find all you have written. If a negative comment or two is also found, it doesn't seem so important. Without your own blog, they would search your company and likely only find the negative stuff the blogger/s wrote about you.

So, it is simple self-defense to have your own blog, besides all the positive aspects of doing so.

Now, how should I set up my blog? Why should I have two blogs or more? How can I have a blog if I don't have time to post to it everyday? And Why should I post to it daily? Those are the next questions I will answer for you.

How should I set up my blog? and why should I have two or more blogs?

You can set up your blog inside your own website, or you can set your blog up outside of your website as a whole other identity.

A blog inside your own website is of course completely identified with your company. By posting to it regularly, you are adding new content all the time. Search engines love websites where the content is updated constantly and consistantly.

You benefit from more frequent crawls by the search engines due to all that new content you keep adding every day.

A blog outside of your website can be set up for free at someplace like, but even if you do that, I still recommend you purchase a domain name for it. (By clicking that link, you can register a domain name and have the money go to a missing children's organization)

A blog outside of your main website creates another related website that links to your main website. It will get crawled regularly because of the updated content you add daily, just like the one inside your website would. This is new traffic that you can push toward your main website. People that have not or might not have ever found your website will find your blog. Everyone can use more traffic.

Another benefit is that it is an easy way for your company to basically have two websites. If I have two locations and you only have one, my chances of getting search engine placement, PR, and traffic are twice that of your chances.

You can do both. The blog inside your own website will add new content to your website and give you those benefits, while you still get the benefits of the outside blog. Make sure you don't just post the same post in both blogs. That will not help you. They must be distinctly different.

One idea is to use the inside blog for updating your customers about new projects and products you offer and use the outside blog to help you create a buzz about your company, service, or products to the general public. You can probably think of other ways to make the two blogs different that work better for you.

How can I have a blog if I don't have time to post to it everyday?

It's called the autoblog. You email several blogs that have content that is related to your products or services and ask if you can post their RSS Feed daily in your blog. Those that wish to syndicate their content will agree.

They are already posting to their blogs daily. If not, don't ask for their feed. By installing the autoblog software, you log in once per day, press a button, it pulls all the posts from those feeds you got permission to use and posts them into your blog.

I don't recommend that is all you do. You should post to your own blog as much as you possibly can. However, by having those extra feeds, you can keep it updated daily even when you don't have time to post. You are also adding even more relative content everyday that people will want to read and it will keep your readers coming back for more.

The autoblogger includes links to the authors website and leaves all of his or her credits and links intact, so it benefits them as well. You get content, they get link popularity and maybe some traffic too. To get this installed for you, email me at

Why should I post to my blog every day?

There are millions of blogs. However, many of them have simply been abandoned after only a few posts, many update about once per month or per week. Those who update every day get crawled more often by the search engines and there are many blog search websites that only include blogs that are updated regularly.

So if you are going to set up a blog, you need to post to it every single day. If you cannot do that, install the autoblogger. That way you will still update your blog daily. It takes me about 5 minutes a day to update the autoblog I own on another website.

If you have any questions, need consultation about setting up your own blog or autoblog, email me at

by Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
Article Content Provider .com

Spyware Distributor Sued by Elliot Spitzer

It's about time someone started going after companies who think that it is okay for them to use your computer, your memory, your bandwidth, and anything else they want without your permission.

Companies who install spyware, malware, badware, or anything else on your computer that you did not ask for or that they used deceptive practices to get you to agree to are no better than the kids who distribute viruses and worms for malicious purposes.

You can read the entire article here.

More things that just piss me off


Visa's Keeping Microsoft and Others from hiring more Foreign Labor

This is probably the saddest post I have ever had to write. Microsoft and other companies including entertainment companies are complaining to congress about the slow visa process in certain countries.

The entertainment company in the article said that 75% of their venues were hiring foriegn entertainers and now only 60% do.

Microsoft and other companies complain that they can't hire their foriegn workers in a timely manner due to this slow processing.

Many in congress are sympathizing with them about the slow visa process and saying that something should be done.

Gosh, you mean that because of the slow visa process in some countries means these people have to hire more Americans?

That is just totally unacceptable! These companies should be able to hire foreigners and not be bothered about that whole homeland security and visa thing! It's interfering with their bottom line by golly! Having to pay more money to hire Americans vs all the money they can save by hiring foriegners is just wrong!

Now don't you just feel sorry for microsoft and those entertainment companies dammit?

by Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
More things that just piss me off



There is a company. This company wants to run a new TLD and make the big bucks selling domain names. The new TLD they want is .XXX.

Bush and religious organizations are against it. They say it will give legitimacy to the porn industry.

Florida's ICM Registry, which hopes to run the domain, argues that the "responsible online adult entertainment industry" will flock to the new address, making it easier for internet users who do not want to see porn to avoid it.

"Several governments are emphatically opposed from a public policy perspective to the introduction of .xxx," says Malaysian bureaucrat and ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee chair Sharil Tarmizi.

Want to know the real deal? Read on;

1. It will not protect children from porn or porn spam. There will still be porn on other TLDs like com, net, and org. Those who don't care who sees their porn are not going to do the responsible thing as suggested above.

2. Porn is not illegal. Therefore, they are legal business entities. They cannot be forced to move all of their websites to dot xxx.

3. and other domain names are worth millions of dollars. These companies have spent millions of dollars to advertise and brand their names just like mainstream companies do.

4. They have spent years building up link popularity and traffic to their domain names.

5. Is the government or ICANN going to reimburse them all that money the domain names, branding, and traffic is worth? If not, and they force them to move to dot xxx, how long do you think it will be before they sue the government and ICANN for that money?

You may not like porn, but until it is illegal, their businesses get the same rights under the law that any other business gets. Your opinion does not make them illegal.

I am not defending them on a moral basis. We are a nation of laws though and those laws are to be applied equally. You cannot say, I don't like porn, they are bad people, and they should all have to go where we tell them. This is not only illegal, it's a childish point of view at best.

All this is about a company wanting to make some money selling domain names. They will make a big hype about how valuable these new domain names will be because all porn will be moved there.

Speculators will rush in and buy up tons of domain names believing the hype. The actual move will never happen. Those established porn websites will be in the same place they have always been, but maybe they will have a few additional domain names in dot xxx as they speculate or protect their IP interests.

The bottom line is this. If you are anti-porn, of you think too much trashy content is being offered on the web, why aren't you producing a ton of good content on the web to counteract it?

Many like to complain about the web's content, but most, including churches are ignoring the fact they can reach millions of people through the web. They are not blogging every day and putting up websites about the "good" things they consider to be good. They are not working as hard to put good content on the web as the porn industry is working to put more porn on the web.

Put your money where your mouth is. How many websites with good content for children have you built or funded? Are you going to just whine about it or are you going to take back the Internet by providing enough good content that it someday will outweigh the bad content out there?

If you are not doing anything about it, then shut up.

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off


Professor Dufus Speaks

This is the level of education that most business professors have in regards to the Internet. Click here to read about the NEW .com land rush this professor has discovered.

"The very cool thing is that you don't have to have a business or even a Web presence to stake your claim to a name. That can come later, as long as you beat your competition to the name."
Except that proves you have no legitimate interest in the domain name and a business with a similar name can take it away from you if they want to.

"The Internet truly is the next superhighway of commerce and there is no better place to be than in Fairbanks if you want to get in on the ground floor."
The ground floor? Next superhighway? Where has this professor been for the last 12 years? This guy is teaching business?

"According to a study done in 2002-03 by Dr. Ping Lan, associate professor of business administration at the University of Alaska Fairbanks School of Management, the opportunities for ground floor e-commerce in Alaska are exciting."
In Alaska? The Internet is worldwide, so e-commerce is not constrained to any one territory or region. Yet another professor teaching business that doesn't get it?

"I got mine and my wife got hers by going to and trying combinations until we found appropriate domain names available. We then reserved them for five years with automatic renewals."
There is one born every minute. GoDaddy will be so proud of you!

"There is a new land grab going on today. If you're in business, or you are thinking about business and not staking your claim right now--this afternoon--within the next 10 minutes, then prosperity may pass you by, just as the automobile zipped by buggy whip makers."
Right now! This minute! New land grab! This professor really knows his stuff! Did godaddy pay you to write this?

This is just one example of how students are learning about the Internet in college and on graduating, they suddenly put up websites and call themselves Internet Gurus and Webmasters.

The professors that taught them didn't have a clue so they don't have a clue. If a professor who has never made one dollar on the Internet through a website that he built, then how can he teach anyone else to do it?

Then if you search jobs for webmasters at or, etc. every company requires that precious college degree plus you must know how to use front page to build websites with. Only those who don't know anything about html would use frontpage. If I've insulted you . . . uh . . . who cares.

by Chris McElroy
More things that just piss me off

Powered by Blogger