Free Culture News writes: "Desktop Nexus, a wallpaper sharing site that you might recall was threatened by Toyota over user-created wallpapers a while ago, has received a trademark claim under the DMCA. Hanson Beverage Company, through the firm Continental Enterprises, sent Desktop Nexus a DMCA notice about wallpaper featuring Monster Energy Drink. After a second notification and a list of three more wallpapers flagged by the company for removal, Desktop Nexus removed the wallpapers. Before the second notice, Desktop Nexus asked for clarification on what actions the company was to take, as the original claim was not clear. The reply, which came after the removal of the wallpapers, claimed that trademark law, not copyright law, was the rationale for removal. The legality of this move is quite questionable, given that the DMCA is designed to deal with copyright infringement and not trademark infringement."
Harry Maugans writes: "Are you tired of searching Google Images for your wallpapers, sorting through odd sizes and inaccurate images? A new startup called Desktop Nexus aims to fix that. From the article:
Finally no more scouring the web for 2560x1600 resolution versions of Ubuntu wallpapers. With the community at it's foundation, meta-moderation allows members to choose which wallpapers are high enough quality to be added to the galleries, and which deserve to be deleted. AJAX and RSS enhance the site's functionality, and tagging brings wallpapers together. The next Flickr or YouTube? It may be too early to say, however this site does have a lot of potential."If someone uploads a 1024×768 wallpaper, Desktop Nexus will automatically resize and remaster that wallpaper for another visitor who requests it in say, 1600×1200. It then goes a step farther and will show an AJAX script to allow any user to instantly crop (interactive) or stretch the wallpaper to create a widescreen version for anyone who requests it... so essentially one wallpaper of any size is uploaded, and Desktop Nexus will make it available to anyone with any resolution... completely bypassing previous limitations of wallpaper sharing, standard aspect ratio or widescreen.
Desktop Nexus writes: "The official Terms and Conditions of Cingular now restrict the anchor text you can use to link to Cingular's homepage. Harry Maugans discovered a paragraph of the TOS that states:
I'm sure this is not legally standing, however it is amusing they'd attempt to restrict your links."You are granted a limited, nonexclusive right to create a hypertext link to the homepage of the Sites, provided such link does not portray Cingular Wireless or any of its products and services in a false, misleading, derogatory, or otherwise defamatory manner. [...] This limited right may be revoked at any time.
word munger writes: "The F-word is censored from nearly all U.S. broadcast TV (except when someone like Bono slips it into a live telecast), but people use it every day in casual conversation. Meanwhile vicious insults like "nappy-headed ho," while they did result in Don Imus's firing, are repeated ad nauseum on every newscast covering the event. What curse words are truly offensive, and who do they offend the most? On Cognitive Daily, we surveyed over 700 readers to find out. The results? The F-word is only mildly offensive — not even as offensive as "ho." What's more, as people get older, they react more negatively to some words, like "suck" and "ho," but other words bother them less. It all suggests that censoring particular words makes less sense than evaluating words in context. Depending on who is watching and when, the FCC might want to reassess its censorship policy."
TheAmazingSam writes: "nVidia are releasing their GeForce 8800GTS 320MB graphics card today which is around 20% cheaper than the regular 640MB version. TweakTown has spent some time with the card and compared it to the more expensive edition. Can we halve the memory and not see a major reduction in 3D gaming performance? Looks like it!"
An anonymous reader writes: Does anyone else think e-mail is completely out of control? If so, what can be done about it? Is there any way out of e-mail hell? My only hope is that e-mail will eventually collapse under its own weight. I work at an office where e-mail is the primary communication mechanism, or rather, it was. I get 100 e-mails a day, and can only get to about half that number — if I stay late an extra hour or two. The volume of e-mail is so overwhelming now that my boss is considering a permanent out of office reply telling senders to call her if it's important because it could be days before current e-mail is read. Then I come home to at least 30 new e-mails in my personal inbox. Who enjoys the thought of spending their whole life reading and responding to e-mails? The movie "You've Got Mail" was cute in its day, but will we soon see a new movie akin to "Office Space" that, rather than denouncing cubicle life, will comment on the horrors of living a life sifting, sorting, reading, and replying to endless and increasingly meaningless electronic messages?