Its been nearly 20 years since the whole Exxon Valdez fiasco, and this crap is still in litigation. For those too young to remember, the Exxon Valdez, a huge oil tanker, crashed under the command of an alcoholic, spilling millions of gallons of oil into Alaskan waters, killing hundreds of thousands of marine and shore animals, and effectively destroying the region's fishing industry. Now call me stupid if I'm wrong, but although fishing isn't Alaska's only industry, I can't really imagine there being much more beyond it (although I hear they got some crazy hydroponic...)
So now, tell me, why is ExxonMobil, a company that has posted record profits in recent years, (2005 - $36.13 billion, 2007 - $39.5 billion) being such asshats about paying up a measly $2.5 billion in restitution to the fishers, et al that suffered from the catastrophe? That figure is already cut in half by an appeals court from an original award of $5 billion. MARY, HOLY MOTHER OF JOSEPH!!! Its been nearly 20 years and these assholes STILL haven't paid the $2.5 billion? Can I get their lawyer? I got some speeding tickets I'd like to postpone payment to indefinitely!
For Christ's sake, they're making claims that the $2.5B is unconstitutional, that it is too high a fee, especially since they already paid loads of cash to clean up. What about those dead animals? What about the dead industry? What about those poor people left without jobs because of your idiocy? Clean up is your FCKING DUTY, not your choice.
They also claim that they shouldn't be held liable for Captain Joseph Hazelwood's (the idiot that rammed the ship ashore) actions, as he violated company rules. Last time I checked, if I worked at Starbuck's, and something compelled me to throw hot coffee in someone's face, the company could get sued, even if the company has "clear rules against" such action. Maybe I need to read my law books again.
One thing that bugged me most about this whole ordeal is that the case is now in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, and the justices are split 4-4. But wait, aren't there 9 justices in the SC? Yep. Except Justice Alito has elected to stay out of this because he owns between $100- and $250 thousand in ExxonMobil stock. You mean, the highest court in the land can have monetary ties to huge corporations??? I understand his decision to stay off as it would be a conflict of interest, but who's to say other decisions that don't directly name ExxonMobil are not in conflict of interest? Why are Supreme Court Justices even allowed to own stock?
I guess justice is blind in favor of those with the deepest pockets.
Jesus! I need a beer.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Wanna give me a gift card? Gimme cash instead you thoughtless jerk!
I dislike the concept of the gift card as a primary source of gift giving, because frankly, it screams "I didn't bother to get you a thoughtful gift, so I'm basically giving you money. Except I decided where you're gonna spend that money." As a former Best Buy employee, I can assure you its a win/win situation for the retailer, and not quite so for the customer/recipient of said cards.
The concept is simple, you spend money on this card, which holds that money as credit at the store, and it works just like money. Except, no other retailer will accept it as such. Nor will anyone else for that matter (Unless you're scalping gift cards. Stranger things do happen...) So now you are obligated to spend money at this store, even if they don't carry/have in stock what you want.
What if you want a refund? No such thing for gift cards. What if you lose that card? Guess you lost money. What if the store you have credit at goes bankrupt? SOL sucka.
Which is exactly what's happening as San Francisco-based retailer Sharper Image files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. An estimated $25 million in gift card debt is owed to customers who will possibly never receive either money nor goods, as the retailer is no longer accepting the cards as payment at its stores or online as of this writing. Company reps say "never say never again" as they try to salvage their no-longer-so-sharp image by hinting that maybe, just maybe they will be taking the cards as payment once again sometime in the undefined future. Jesus, I don't have time to wait for you idiots to settle your bad finances. I have enough with my own.
Some retailers, like Brookstone (never heard of it, don't really care...) are offering a 25% discount to those surrendering their Sharper Image gift cards while purchasing goods at their retail stores. Cool, that $50 gift card is now a 25% off coupon. Somewhere else.
Please folks, if you're gonna give anyone anything as "convenient as money," just give them the money. At least that still holds some value until the Euro completely destroys the Dollar. But that's another rant for another day.
The concept is simple, you spend money on this card, which holds that money as credit at the store, and it works just like money. Except, no other retailer will accept it as such. Nor will anyone else for that matter (Unless you're scalping gift cards. Stranger things do happen...) So now you are obligated to spend money at this store, even if they don't carry/have in stock what you want.
What if you want a refund? No such thing for gift cards. What if you lose that card? Guess you lost money. What if the store you have credit at goes bankrupt? SOL sucka.
Which is exactly what's happening as San Francisco-based retailer Sharper Image files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. An estimated $25 million in gift card debt is owed to customers who will possibly never receive either money nor goods, as the retailer is no longer accepting the cards as payment at its stores or online as of this writing. Company reps say "never say never again" as they try to salvage their no-longer-so-sharp image by hinting that maybe, just maybe they will be taking the cards as payment once again sometime in the undefined future. Jesus, I don't have time to wait for you idiots to settle your bad finances. I have enough with my own.
Some retailers, like Brookstone (never heard of it, don't really care...) are offering a 25% discount to those surrendering their Sharper Image gift cards while purchasing goods at their retail stores. Cool, that $50 gift card is now a 25% off coupon. Somewhere else.
Please folks, if you're gonna give anyone anything as "convenient as money," just give them the money. At least that still holds some value until the Euro completely destroys the Dollar. But that's another rant for another day.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
WILL SOME1 PLS THINK OF THE RAPERS!!!!!1!!!
As I was scouring the internet for nude pictures of Margaret Thatcher, I came across this old article on Slate.com regarding a so-called "sample troll" operating under the moniker Bridgeport Music Inc. Essentially, the one-man corporation squats on old copyrights and sues anybody that samples the material without permission. So... what's wrong with that? Isn't that what copyright laws exist for?
Well, apparently, the writer of said article happens to disagree. As he quaintly puts it, "the trolls are turning copyright into the foe rather than the friend of musical innovation." Now wait a minute there Sally... You mean, if I take someone else's recorded material, cut a little piece of it out and loop it over and over again, ramble about "bitches" and "cheese" (why anyone would write music about dairy products is beyond my understanding...) every once in a while having a rhyming verse or two, it can be considered "musical innovation"? No fcking way!!!
My problem with the article is the view that, somehow, the rappers making money from these samples are somehow "innovative" or "creative." I'm sorry, cut-and-paste + infinite loop isn't innovation buddy. Not only that, they're somehow exempt from copyright laws, as they don't have permission from the original artist nor pay royalties for using their music.
He continues to ramble with the determination of Fred Durst trying to destroy his musical career by continuing to exist, by saying "imagine that the copyright owner of The Lord of the Rings had sued every fantasy book or magazine that dared used the words elf, orc, or troll." Except that, Rings being heavily influenced by Norse mythology, they'd be full of sht to claim property of such words. Elves, dwarves, and well, humans, existed in Norse mythology waaaaaay before Tolkien stole them. In fact, the whole mythology involved in the novel is down right a rip off of Norse mythology. "Middle-Earth," the name of the land where the book takes place sounds suspiciously similar to "Midgard," the plane of existence where humans exist in Norse mythology. But I digress. The writer of the article is a complete moron and I already forgot the point of this post.
BEER ME PLS KTHX
Well, apparently, the writer of said article happens to disagree. As he quaintly puts it, "the trolls are turning copyright into the foe rather than the friend of musical innovation." Now wait a minute there Sally... You mean, if I take someone else's recorded material, cut a little piece of it out and loop it over and over again, ramble about "bitches" and "cheese" (why anyone would write music about dairy products is beyond my understanding...) every once in a while having a rhyming verse or two, it can be considered "musical innovation"? No fcking way!!!
My problem with the article is the view that, somehow, the rappers making money from these samples are somehow "innovative" or "creative." I'm sorry, cut-and-paste + infinite loop isn't innovation buddy. Not only that, they're somehow exempt from copyright laws, as they don't have permission from the original artist nor pay royalties for using their music.
He continues to ramble with the determination of Fred Durst trying to destroy his musical career by continuing to exist, by saying "imagine that the copyright owner of The Lord of the Rings had sued every fantasy book or magazine that dared used the words elf, orc, or troll." Except that, Rings being heavily influenced by Norse mythology, they'd be full of sht to claim property of such words. Elves, dwarves, and well, humans, existed in Norse mythology waaaaaay before Tolkien stole them. In fact, the whole mythology involved in the novel is down right a rip off of Norse mythology. "Middle-Earth," the name of the land where the book takes place sounds suspiciously similar to "Midgard," the plane of existence where humans exist in Norse mythology. But I digress. The writer of the article is a complete moron and I already forgot the point of this post.
BEER ME PLS KTHX
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
