It took me two of his books, but I'm fully committed to Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space/Chasm City/Glitter Band world he built. Currently on the 3rd book of that whole series.

Love Weaver but I'm not sure he has to be guarded at the 3 point line. he doesn't need to be at the 3 point line anyway.

We need to score early and often to do well in this game, imo. If we don't, we stand a very good chance of dropping this game to KY. I can't predict if we will show up and play hard. I hope so.

I don't think that that's right - I'm recognizing that we limit these types of protections in a lot of instance, as not-a-lawyer I assume that that is because doing so is beneficial to society. And then I'm saying that misappropriation of a brand is potentially very harmful to a business and does not benefit society in any way at all that i can think of. In the absence of a benefit to society, I don't understand why we would allow purely parasitic actors to harm a business. I'm sure examples could be brought forth that would make sense, although giving free reign to junk vendors to build businesses selling royalty free team gear isn't it imo. this makes sense to me if you're selling shit with old defunct company logo stuff. With song publishing, if I commercially release a song then anyone is able to make and release their own commercial recording of that same song. They have to pay a royalty but I can't say no. Unless they're trying to take that song and incorporate it into a different song, which is when I can say no - this is why you've never heard Bruce Springsteen sampled by hip hop artists. I wonder if there is any of that kind of protection here - can I take the Penn State logo and... well I was going to say mash it up with NAMBLA but that probably has some kind of free speech satire protection. Could I make a shirt with Joe Paterno wearing a MAGA hat and have it emblazoned with "NITTANY LIONS" and sell that? It is an interesting thought exercise. If I hadn't been a practicing alcoholic with rockstar ambitions through college (or maybe if I hadn't woken up with alcohol withdrawals on the day of the LSAT) I probably would have tried to pursue law. I was always amazed and curious about the kinds of patents that my previous company would try and pursue parallel to my work as a product manager. We're trying to slap a commercially available sensor in an industrial processor and hook it up to a PLC to do some control and then display data about the process through a webpage - I would have to sit with lawyers while they try and draft a patent that says that nobody else can use that kind of meter to measure that kind of thing in that kind of process - what the fuck, isn't that the whole point of the meter? There are only two companies that make them, we're allowed to try and say that nobody else can use them in this industry? I assume that that is normal, although I also learned to suspect that there were a lot of idiosyncrasies about that as a result of it mostly being run by scientists in business positions.