Random Culture

Case Study In Shortsightedness: Scrabulous

You may have heard by now that Hasbro and Mattel are trying to get the plug pulled on Scrabulous, the user-created Scrabble application created for Facebook. It's one of the most popular applications on the site, with nearly 600,000 daily users... myself included. There's no argument that Scrabulous is violating their copyright, but why would Hasbro and Mattel stick their head all the way up the gift horse's mouth and rip out its intestines? I'm not sure if they've been paying attention, but with all the entertainment options available today, people aren't exactly tripping over themselves to snatch up all the board games on the shelves.

Clearly, anyone can see that Scrabulous has been the best thing to happen to Scrabble in a long time. I'm a case in point for this... I own the Scrabble board game, but I've only played it twice. Once Scrabulous came along, it gave me a renewed interest in the game. I have several games running concurrently now, and yes, I've actually played the REAL board game a few more times because of it.

I can only think about the sheer amount of angst that Hasbro and Mattel are creating because of this demand to pull Scrabulous from Facebook. Think about how much more positive press and brand affinity they would have created for rewarding the ingenuity of the Scrabulous creators by purchasing it from them. This is ingenuity they obviously can only pay for...

Yes, I'm a bit sore on the subject because I love Scrabulous soo much. And the folks at Hasbro and Mattel can rest assured that if they succeed in this dim-witted legal task, there will be one less Scrabble board game in existence, because I will boycott the tiles for life.

More from the BBC here.

Join the Facebook group, Save Scrabulous!

Google vs. Viacom: Get Ready to Rumble!

Yesterday, Google issued a response to the $1 billion lawsuit Viacom filed against YouTube for "massive copyright infringement." In short, Google's response alleges the following:

"By seeking to make carriers and hosting providers liable for Internet communications, Viacom's complaint threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment and political and artistic expression,"

Google held a news conference in Mountain View, where managing counsel Michael Kwun said the lawsuit should have never been filed.  One of Google's key defenses is the safe harbor provision in the DMCA, and Kwun was quick to point out the irony of the situation. According to a Business Week article, Kwun said of Viacom:

"These are the very people that helped to design the law. Suddenly, they don't want to live with the other end of the deal."

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. I've picked a side, and here's a hint: the name of the folks I'm cheering for doesn't start with a "V" and end with "iacom."

Goverment and Social Networking Don't Mix

Once again, we're offered proof that our government, even with the best intentions, doesn't understand technology. The example? House Resolution 5319, The Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA). This resolution, if it becomes law, will require schools and libraries to block social networking sites and chat rooms. If they do not, they could lose federal Internet subsidies. The law might also have an impact on a far larger array of websites using social networking features. Some folks, such as social networking expert Danah Boyd, see this as an erosion of our freedoms more than a protection for minors.

I'm all for protecting minors against online predators. Like I said, I think our elected officials in the house have the best intentions. However, technology has clearly outpaced the tech skills of our representatives in Washington. What we need is more Internet savvy politicians. I think the chances are pretty high that in coming elections, we will see MySpace profiles being used as campaigning tools.

Link via TechCrunch.

Save the Internet!

Hopefully you've heard about the Net Neutrality debate happening right now. Net Neutrality suffered a defeat when the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted down the proposal, but now, Net Neutrality is moving to the Senate. Net Neutrality is being called the Internet's "First Amendment", and we should all be pushing our senators to back the Net Neutrality proposal, and educating them about what it means. If we don't it could mean giving telcos ridiculous power over how we use the web.

You can learn more about what could happen if Net Neutrality fails in the Senate by watching this video from savetheinternet.com:

Everyone should be contacting their senator about this issue. I don't often post about this type of thing, but I felt it was important enough to bring up.

ABC iTunes Blunder?

Podcasting News points out that ABC is in hot water with the Screen Actor's Guild for selling episodes of their TV shows on iTunes. The Screen Actor's Guild has issued a statement about their intent to pursue arbitration against ABC. According to a statement from SAG president Alan Rosenberg:

"In violation of our collective bargaining agreements, ABC recently began selling Lost and Desperate Housewives for digital download to iPods without first bargaining with Screen Actors Guild. Today ABC advised the Guild that it intends to pay residuals to performers based on the videocassette formula - a formula that does not apply to this new platform."

This is something you need to pay attention to, particularly if you're repurposing content. As an example, if you are an agency releasing commercials and "behind the scenes" video on iTunes as a podcast, you need to secure the rights to do so.

Don't You Steal Our Ideas!

Adfreak points out an interesting feature on the Goodby, Silverstein & Partners site... They've put a legal disclaimer that must be accepted on the home page! That's right, you can't see anything until you've seen the legal disclaimer and accepted it. Here's what it looks like:

So according to the copy on the site, their work is "exclusively" for viewing by clients, prospects and employees. Never mind other agencies, awards shows, the media, family, friends and everyone else I'm forgetting to mention. If they wanted "exclusivity", they should just password protect the whole site.

I have never seen an agency site do anything like this. It's simply a bad user experience. Even in the industries where it's legally necessary, like with alcohol or pornography, people still hate these legal splash pages...

Adobe: Copydetected.com

Adobe has launched Copydetected.com, a microsite with "webisodes" aimed at software piracy... and the execution is less than stellar. The videos aren't entertaining at all, and I feel the same reaction as I did hearing the RIAA blabber on about how every time music is downloaded, a kitten dies. The Copydetected.com site asks the question: "Haven't you ever thought that copying could seriously damage your image?"

Um... No, actually. Does Adobe really believe anyone is swallowing this marketing speak?

Adobe isn't only insulting people's intelligence and failing to entertain them, they're frustrating people before that can happen. According to Adverblog, they found out about it in the following way:

"This morning I received an email from Adobe telling me about the webisodes. I didn't know I signed up for such email (I received it on my private account), but this is not the point. The email was well designed but it contained a huge video attachment of about 2MB. I wonder which are the results of such mailing. How many recipient have actually downloaded the full message? How many opened the attachment?"

EFF Blogging Guide

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has released a legal guide for bloggers. The guide addresses subject such as legal liability, intellectual property, defamation and more. It's definitely worth a read.

Link via Blogumentary.

The Apple Crusade

Some new developments in Apple's crusade against online journalists to reveal their sources. Apple's crusade has made the blogosphere pretty irate, but it's also brought many influential people together to show support and fight for the rights of us all. A number of influential folks including Feedster, Gawker Media, Doc Searls, Joi Ito and many others filed an Amicus Brief in the case.

According to the EFF site: The amici urged the court to adopt "a functional test for the newsgatherers' privilege that does not discriminate between reporters, regardless of the medium in which they publish." They urge the court to "adopt a test that will not impede journalists' use of the Internet to report news by limiting their constitutional protections when they publish there."

And that's just the beginning. According to an AP story in the Mercury News, "Eight of California's largest newspapers and The Associated Press submitted a court brief Thursday asking that the online publishers be allowed to keep their sources confidential."

It feels like Apple almost wants to take their reputation down a notch...

Links via BoingBoing and Kottke.

Tremor: The New Bzz?

Remember all that bad buzz recently that centered around BzzAgent, and all the ethical questions surrounding their tactics? Well, yesterday I received my monthly Trendwatching newsletter. In it, they mention a Procter & Gamble initiative called "Tremor." According to Trendwatching,

"In only two years time, this focus group cum sample/coupon dispersing network signed up 280,000 US teens, ages 13 to 19, who actively promote new products to their peers, and may be asked to place coupons and product samples in living rooms, schools and any other relevant location."

Hmm...

Fred Durst Sues Gawker?

I seem to have missed this posting on Friday, but the folks over at Screenhead point to a rather curious item. Fred Durst is suing Gawker...

The lesson: blogs are a great way to showcase ineptitude.

Wal-Mart Fact Checker

About a month ago I posted about the PR campaign Wal-Mart had started to "set the record straight", launching a website and running full page newspaper ads to dispute claims about the companies' treatment of employees...

Well, it seems that not everyone is swallowing it. In fact, some people are fighting back. Check out the Wal-Mart Fact Checker.

Tecmo Suing Gamers?

CNET has a story that game maker Tecmo is suing the admins of a website that offered hacks for DOA Xtreme Beach Volleyball that allowed gamers to put new "skins" on the scantily clad women in the game, rendering them naked.

Wait a second... this time last year, it was announced that Tecmo was offering a life size pillow (dakimakura) for a DOA promotion with XBOX in Japan...

Regardless of the fact that I think game makers need to see these "hacks" as an integral part of the marketing of games, this seems like contradictory behavior on the part of Tecmo.

Think Secret Exposed

The operator of Think Secret, the focus of an unpopular lawsuit by Apple, has revealed himself as a 19 year old Harvard undergraduate.

Nicholas Ciarelli revealed his identity to the Harvard Crimson, which he also works at. I think the most impressive part isn't that he's 19... but that the site is 6 years old! The idea of a serious teenage journalist isn't so far fetched, is it?

Downhill Battle: Naughty & Nice

Downhill Battle is sending lumps of coal to the RIAA and MPAA for every $100 donation to the EFF, Public Knowledge and IPac...

Marvel Pulls a Sony?

Boing Boing posted about the recent legal issues that Marvel is having. It seems they are suing the makers of "City of Heroes," a massively multiplayer role playing game, because some of the players are creating characters that resemble Marvel superheroes...

As the article at Law.com says:

Yes, you read that right -- Marvel's claim is based on the idea that private individuals who pretend to be Wolverine for fun in a video game are breaking the law. Since when is it illegal to pretend to be your favorite superhero?

This certainly doesn't do wonders for Marvel's image. They must be taking lessons from Sony.