23 01 2010

so, Im sitting here reading over a specific forum i visit, replying to a comment about France attempting to tax Google when someone in France clicks on one of their ads and i happen to look down and see the Google ad at the bottom of the page.  I know this doesnt fall under the normal catagories of what we do here, but i just had to share. Everyone should know by now that Google tends to do its advertisement based on the information of the page its being displayed on. This page is talking about the key words: FRANCE TAX and GOOGLE. Here’s a screenshot of the ad


Triple Article Wednesday

4 11 2009

I wanted to be sure to get an article in today about something, especially since I was really urging to post yesterday but nothing really crossed my desk that I felt was worthy of sharing with all my loyal readers. Today, when I first checked my sources, I found two topics that just popped right off that I had to write about. The third came not too long ago while re-checking my sources and what have you. So without further ado, I give you, Triple Article Wednesday.


            RIAA and the Performance “tax”

This story actually was brought to me by a radio ad telling me I need to know more about the “performance tax”. After some light research on the subject (yeah like I’m really gonna research hard core. Just the facts Ma’am) I found that this bill? (I’m not sure what to call it, its up for discussion on capital hill so in honor of the song… I’ll call it a bill) is to get radio stations to pay a tax, or royalty, or fee for playing copyrighted music. (Writers note: I just spent hours looking deeper into this and ended up writing my rep and senators so pace may change here). This idea is Ludicrous (haha like that, how I used a recording artists name to get my point across). The only thing that this would do aside bring even more money to the RIAA is reduce either the amount of music we hear on the radio (i.e. some radio stations may stop playing music all together) or reduce the amount of other things we hear about (i.e. traffic, sports) to get the most for their money. I myself like to know that I’m about to roll up on the biggest wreck ever known to man so I can make that attempt to avoid that nightmare. Its worked so long for 80 years, why change it now?


Artist’s side/argument:

Radio’s side/argument:


            ATT Sues Verizon

My next story is about the lawsuit that ATT has on Verizon. The “There’s a map for that” commercial seems to have burnt ATT so hard that they felt they need to take it to court to get the ad pulled from the airwaves. ATT argues that this commercial leads to the false impression that outside of the blue area on ATT’s map, there is no coverage what so ever.




Based on what I see.. and the fact that it states 3G coverage.. and they are using the brands color to blot the map.. I would assume that the white areas are non 3G coverage. I mean come on, I’m not going to go on an ad frenzy to show off a map that shows I got areas that don’t have coverage regardless of if its less then the other map or not. Be the judge for yourself though.


            Verizon Early Termination Fees

In my final story, we turn right back to Verizon, who, for contracts beginning or after November 15th 2009, will be charging up to $350 per line for early contract termination fees on “advanced devices”. Verizon does pro rate the ETF by $10 per month, but if you stay on your contract for 23 months that’s still $120 left to pay (that’s only $55 difference from the previous full charge). All I can say is I’m glad I stopped doing business with this company, even though I’m sure that everyone else is going to follow suit until the FCC steps in.