More importantly, they're wasting the other person's time. Fuck with Company X, be prepared for a hassle. This is the message they want to send, imo.

I didn't realize that the movies were made during his lifetime. Besides, you being sure of something is not a legal reason for invalidating a trademark.

That's exactly the point I was making. I'm not suggesting that Tolkien invented elves, or have any rights to elves in any way. But that the usage of 'Tolkien' to describe a type of elf gives the word Tolkien a secondary meaning. You're arguing the same points I was making.

And I'm not saying that what happened in this particular instance is valid. I was stating that names can in fact be trademarked. Xerox and Canon are trademarked.

That's a frightening concept. At least I'll be entertained while he takes me to the land of the dead.
And by the way, fire engine red is a color. #CE2029.

Sorry, I wasn't clear on my meaning. If you were to say "Tolkien elves', that would identify a 'type' of elf saparate from 'North Pole elves', etc., being immortal beings leaving on boats as opposed to little pointy eared beings who make toys. The usage of Tolkien in that phrase has a meaning secondary to that of J.R.R. Tolkien, and thus is legally able to be trademarked. I wasn't trying to suggest that the Tolkien estate has rights to the concept of elves by any means.

Well, you can, actually. It's not easy to do, but certain people have done it. Martha Stewart, for example. Personal names are included in the class of common words that may not secure protected trademark status until secondary meaning has attached. Tolkien would certainly fit in this category. What kind of elves are they? Tolkien elves you say? Certainly fits the criteria of a secondary meaning.

Actually that's (possibly) not true. The climate has been superheated before, but not from 'natural' means, it was speculated that a meteor (the one that eliminated the dinosaurs) superheated the atmosphere and the ocean, forming hypercanes, and completely destroying the ozone layer. Unfortunately I don't have a link or source available (as I saw this on a documentary), but if this theory is correct, than the Earth has suffered far worse before, and got better. Now, us being alive through all that is another matter.

Nah, that's Facebook you're thinking of, not Google.

Judging by the name of the article, nobody has invented it yet, it's more of a suggestion. Researcher, Create Computer That Fits On a Pen Tip. That letter S is kind of important.

That's only true to a degree, as the numbers are assigned by zip codes near a given social security office, not by city. If you were given the mailing address of the child (instead of just the city), you could feasibly narrow the numbers down more. I'm not saying you'll be able to get it right even all of the time, but even if you only get it right 30% of the time, that's alot of SSNs.

On a slightly off note, on June 25, 2011, they plan to do away the geographical connection between the place of birth and the first three digits. One less thing, I guess. In this instance it would make this 'guessing the first five digits' much, much harder, if not impossible. http://www.socialsecurity.gov/employer/randomization.html

Yes, the last four digits are repeats for each region. But, if you provide the last four digits of the SSN (which is typically the only truly random part), the city of birth, and age of the child, and you have a pretty solid means of determining the complete social security number. I'm not saying I buy into this conspiracy nonsense, but it's not outside the realm of probability either.

It isn't his wifi network, it belongs to the courts...how is he authorized to give people access to it?

That sounds like FUD, but just to be safe....where can I buy some tom-toms?

If you don't have anything to hide, why buy curtains?

That's because it was an actual movie with a plot. Idiots don't like plot, they like predictable. A good plot means you have to think, and people don't want to think, because then they aren't enjoying themselves. They want to laugh at a few jokes and blunders by the main character, and have themselves led down the same familiar plot over and over again, albeit in a slightly different setting or circumstance each time. Those are the movies that tend to do well. That does not make them good.