Their twitter feed is saying to expect a restock this weekend.

The voicemail was left on the mailbox of a recipient. A voicemail is a knowingly made recording, and one that has no reasonable expectation of privacy.

I'm no lawyer, but if a voicemail sender retains copyright on their message, I have no idea how a site like Audioo (which shares embarrassing voicemails with the world) hasn't been sued into oblivion yet.

As far as the images of Jake (Buckyballs CEO) used in the presentation go (which are images from Google Images, all freely available, used as a representation of a subject matter at a low resolution), I am extremely doubtful. I'm not a lawyer, and it's why Zen is consulting one.

There was no other property belonging to Buckyballs. The trademark was identified as that of a competitor, so there's no basis for a trademark infringement claim. The rest of the video was recorded entirely by Zen Magnets.

A DMCA notice has to include a statement that, under penalty of law, the person filing it knows they have a copyright being infringed and their statements are accurate.

As you might imagine, the difficulty is proving that in court.

The origin of the name Buckyballs is not the toy.

Google was honoring Fullerene, not the toy, although Buckyballs put out a press release saying it massively boosted their sales as a side effect.

The summary here links to reddit. And not every Slashdot user visits reddit regularly.

It's been mirrored by other people on Youtube.

The reddit link seems to indicate that they're in the process of making sure they're completely clear:

Decision is we're going to do a counter-notification, but we're gonna have a lawyer back us up. (Especially since there have been good points about potential $$$ damages for perjuring a false copyright take-down.)

The video has been reuploaded to Youtube by a few others though.

If you upgrade from a Northwood Pentium IV to an i7, was the processor not good enough to begin with, or did your needs change? It's much more likely to be the latter.

As a web designer, I'll agree that IE needs improvement. However, dismissing the work of the IE team is wrong. At one point, the IE team consisted of a couple of people doing basic patch support on IE6. Competition forced Microsoft to do better and bring back the team. Why do you think the IE team sends a cake every time Firefox puts out a major release?

Anyhow, IE6 was relatively fast when it came out. It was a security nightmare too. Firefox 1.0 was blazing fast when it came out too, but as we moved towards web apps, complex Javascript, bigger images and bigger everything, it wasn't sufficient. Wave (shelved, I know) still brings browsers to their knees after you get to 100+ threads in the Wave.

Also, keep in mind Microsoft has heavy marketing potential. Nerds may want much better stanedards compliance and speed. The average user may just be coaxed into downloading it because Microsoft advertises it, convincing the user into downloading IE9.

A lot of people were on the Vista beta too. Just keep that in mind.

Having the master key = impersonating whatever display you want or creating new ones. It would be a game of cat and mouse if hackers could only impersonate, and since hackers can also make new displays, firmware upgrading isn't a solution at all.

From what I understand,the leak makes revocation useless:

"The master key allows you to recover every other key in the system and lets you decrypt [HDCP video content], impersonate a device, or create new displays and start selling HDCP compatible devices."

While [Intel and content providers] are spending millions on HDCP, he says, they will be denied the benefits of research that can help fix the technology. Ferguson predicts that a year from now, someone will post a HDCP master key on the Internet, and the money spent on the system will be wasted.

Upgrading the firmware of players to disable HDMI altogether isn't possible at this point. I'm not sure of the exact process, but since you can make new displays, you can create a device that just makes up a random one if it doesn't handshake in five seconds. Also, you can impersonate any existing device- and blocking every existing monitor on the market isn't feasible either.

I could buy an iPad with the money I have but I'll take a regular textbook any day, namely because they can't take the book away from you.

Additionally, the hardware is more of a novelty than anything else at this point- too expensive, too fragile (especially for middle schoolers), too much of a target for theft, and not advanced enough.

The textbook companies love this concept, since it kills secondhand ownership. You can sell licenses to eBooks just like software!

Also, math input without a stylus or keyboard (and I doubt they're teaching LaTeX for any sort of efficient math input) can't be fun.

The SEC filing (part of the summary) states that the money from the offering will be used for "general corporate purposes", but this becomes more interesting when put in perspective of their prospectus, where they want to grow in four areas:

First, we believe that there is a significant opportunity to grow our user base.

Yawn. Most companies are going to claim this. Next!

Second, we believe that we can generate more communications revenue from our users by improving awareness and adoption of our paid products and introducing premium products such as group video calling.

They want to charge for video calling, even though Oovoo and others offer it for free? Good luck, unless you're going to split it into free group calling or do a freemium model (certain group calling features are limited to paid users).

Third, we will continue to develop new monetization models for our large connected user base. We currently generate a small portion of our net revenues through marketing services (such as advertising) and licensing, which we expect will grow as a percentage of our net revenues over time.

They want to make more money off of the people who aren't paying for Skype. I predict more ads and third party ads within the Skype application.

Fourth, we will broaden our user base to include more business users. For example, we have recently released and will continue to develop and market Skype for Business products that aim to capitalize on demand for Skype from small, medium and large businesses.

This is where the money could be useful: scaling up development and investing in new technologies and getting businesses aware. This requires people and time, which takes money. Right now, Skype isn't big in the corporate world from what I've seen, with big warnings from my company not to install it (and heavy filtering on anything Skype related). If they compromise and possibly allow a business client that keeps within the network for anything that isn't a call to an outgoing line (and maybe integrates with the desktop app), I could see Skype getting a major foothold.

Just some observations. I'm not wowed by this IPO either, and the lack of specificity of how they're going to spend the money makes me wonder if they've even gotten that far yet.