DISQUS

hello there jack, as the one and only information overlord :-) since 2004 I have obviously instructed the lawyers to go after you and Clive LOL.

<abbr></abbr><abbr>scotts last blog post..Google launches another blog - do we care?</abbr>

As a iPhone owner (and fan of sorts) i agree with the general gist of this piece, and I think in 18 months time this end of the phone market will be very interesting - esp as the revamped/relauched symbian should also not be discounted from the battle.

I think red suits you. A good look.

Also, forgot to add, that it is a rather fine drinking establishment too, with rather good sausages ...

Ah. Monday drinks and tuesday hangovers - one of my favourites. I shall be there.

Annoying yes. But the reason is quite simple. The makers of theses programmes sell the rights to broadcast them to broadcasters in different territories for a LOT of money. In the UK BskyB paid around 3/4 million per episode for first broadcast rights to Lost for instance - which allows them to broadcast it before anyone else in the territory )the Uk for example. Do you think Sky etc are going to pay that if people can just watch the US broadcast free?(leaving aside bittorrent sites). It actually has very little to do with copyright - It is all about contract law.

Newspond the "most advanced news site on the planet" so advanced that it doesn't need rss. "most useless" would be a better tag. YES, it LOOKS lovely, but so far I don't see any reason to go back.

of course not GL ..., surely the other way around :!:

Whilst I do still think we should be blogging ourselves, I'm pleased to see my lot actually getting involved in blogging, even in a sponsorship way. A good site to choose too (sorry GL!)

What is this 'Binge' of which you speak? I have been known to drink many things, beer, bourbon, wine etc, but never Binge. I feel I may be missing out. I presume it is some eastern european spirit which tastes like lighter fuel but for which you develop a strange liking for after the first half dozen shots, but I could be wrong.

It is worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it, when it comes down to it. Personally, I think they should have taken the money ($1 billion) Yahoo offered them last year.And let's not forget all you're buying is a url. Yes, you get all those users too... BUT ... It's a social network and all those users can just as easily jump ship to the next 'hot' network (and in this day and age only a fool would bet on this not happening to some degree) leaving any buyer with a whole lot of nothing. My take is that if anyone offered them over $3 billion they'd bite their hand off to accept.

I'm a fan of Herr Redwood from his good ol' days back cutting the red tape of national anthem learning from his time as Sec of State for Wales. Oh how we laughed in Swansea. Obviously I agree with what is being said. Blair was a pussy. What we need is someone like JR to restore pride in UK plc. An empire would be quite nice too. All this protection at work really isn't letting those running companies make nearly enough money, and indeed making people work longer hours should be compulsory. Crime? no-one will have to time to commit any. Genius. And as for the chance to see small children stuck up chimney's again, who among us can honestly say they don't want a return to those days.

Bah Humbug :evil: (I also object to having to do sums this early in the morning for spam protection)

The directive as originally worded 'might' have resulted in problems for bloggers, however the directive will only apply to "audiovisual media services" and the European Parliament clarified that an AMS does not include services where the provision of audiovisual content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose. The Directive " does not cover activities which are primarily non-economic and which are not in competition with television broadcasting, such as private websites and services consisting of the provision or distribution of audiovisual content generated by private users for the purposes of sharing and exchange within communities of interest. The definition excludes all services not intended for the distribution of audiovisual content, i.e. where any audiovisual content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose."

Lib dems (bless 'em) have launched a petition against this, and are asking Gordie and Davie to sign up http://www.ourcampaign.org.uk/foi.
According to Ed Davey:

“There should not be one law for MPs and one for everyone else. Exempting politicians from Freedom of Information requests only adds to the public perception of Parliament being opaque and clouded in secrecy.

“If Gordon Brown is serious about reforming our democracy this is his first real test. If David Cameron is serious about new politics now is the time to show real leadership rather than grandstanding.”

vote: netvibes.

I think you'll find the issue of what the word 'free' means even more entertaining, although to be fair to the ASA they have been good at pointing out to companies - telcos mostly - that if something is an inclusive part of a line rental or call package then it is not free. Expect to see Talk Talk's 'Free Broadband for Life' ads/claims get shot down anytime soon. Of course sadly the ASA doesn't really have any teeth, so the advertisers know they can make such claims, accept the slap on the wrist, and still get their ads out there regardless.