Nolan's Corner - Business

Intellectual Property and oDesk

sneakin — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:31:30 -0700

I followed the link TechCrunch posted to oDesk since I need some work. I found some job posting that I found interesting and proceeded to sign up. Low and behold the first service agreement I read just wasn't palatable. From my understanding of their Professional Services Agreement, any pre-existing intellectual property that is incorporated into a project can essentially be used for whatever purposes oDesk wants.

I wouldn't have an issue if this granted a license to the company that has requested the work, but it is oDesk—the site that connects professionals with those that need work done. I have a body of code that's gradually getting larger that allows me to be more productive, and I like to set my own terms on its use. Sorry, I won't grant an unlimited license to it to a company whose unstated business is to hoarde IP.

Pubbed Out, Part Two: Bob Speaks

sneakin — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 21:29:40 -0700

Bob Wyman has spoken about the rumor originally posted on TechCrunch. He describes their issue as a problem with a minority of PubSub's shareholders which points to their problem: one man, one vote. So the moral of this story is to stick with the policy of one share, one vote.

Is That the Smell of Money Burning?

sneakin — Mon, 08 May 2006 22:35:59 -0700

Om Malik has commented on SkypeOut going free along with the purported Vonage IPO. One part is worth commenting about:

The buzz on the Street is that the Vonage IPO is on the rocks. They HAVE to raise money or they are in a world of hurt. Their investors don’t want to put another penny in and the company seems to still be bleeding cash, $75 million in the first quarter of 2006.

It's obvious where the money is being burned: marketing (and possibly flying out to many potential employees, I included).

I can't go a day without seeing a Vonage TV commercial or ad banner. I even saw an ad banner for developers yesterday on Slashdot. There was even a brief shot of their Indy car on the local news during coverage of the Indy 500.

Yes, they're sponsoring a fucking Indy car. That's where the money is being burned.

They really need to start reading the books by Seth Godin, the guy who's managed to successfully market a useless site. Of all the big Internet companies/sites, there are very few if any that I can think of that have used a marketing campaign such as Vonage's. All of them have been based on some variation of word of mouth, having a product people talk about, or requiring my friends use it too. Sadly, being "the Internet phone company" just isn't one of them.

Legal Question

sneakin — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 03:28:06 -0700

I'm reading about the IP Protection Act of 2006 on CNet. There's a paragraph that describes provision 1201 of the DMCA: "Section 1201 of the law generally prohibits distributing or trafficking in any software or hardware that can be used to bypass copy-protection devices."

The proposed law is supposed to beef that provision up, but I'm left wondering. Does that provision cover pencils, paints, guitars, cameras, and compilers? The very tools used for creation?

Another question is also nagging me. I program. I write. I also used to draw and paint. In other words I create. Why do things like the DMCA and the above bill leave a bad taste in my mouth?

Hamburgers, Only Fifty Cents!

sneakin — Tue, 06 Dec 2005 13:33:15 -0800

I got an HP/Compaq catalog the other day. It had a pretty nice looking Compaq laptop in it that I decided to check out the full specs of the machine. I had to see how much the one I wanted costs, so I played with the customizer to get a price. As usual, I managed to double the price from $699 to over a $1000. The only place I manage not to double the price is at the Apple store, and thank God I don't there.

This got me thinking: what if McDonald's priced their hamburgers like most computer companies price their laptops?

McDs advertises their hamburgers at fifty cents. It's just meat on a bun. Obviously you want something more like a BigMac, so you add (note: all prices are arbitrary):

cheese for 30 cents
another patty for 40 cents
ketchup and mustard for 15 cents
lettuce and tomato for a quarter
and that BigMac middle bun for 15 cents

Adding that up you now have a hamburger that costs $1.75.

That's not terrible since food is cheap, but what if they only listed on their menu board and in their advertisements was the fifty cent hamburger? What if in your mind you always thought of them as being cheap and affordable because their burgers are only fifty cents? If you and most people always ended up with a $1.75 hamburger, would their marketing somehow be dishonest?

Simple: yes, Working: no

sneakin — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:31:04 -0800

It was 37signals that pointed out Odeo's redesign. They praised it for its simplicity, which it is. Poking around the new and simple site, I'm left with the nagging question: what does this site allow me to do?

They've simplified things to much. The only way I'm going to sign up is if I'm either told in detail what the site does or better yet, show me. Yes, let me get in and try the service without signing up. Let me use my phone to see what Odeo does with it. I'd like to see it in action. If I can get my free sample, then I may just sign up. I might even pay too!

Short of signing up or finding someone who has, I'll never know what Odeo does. All I can gather is that it's something with podcasts, phones, and sharing—gasp, a site that lets you share music that you've heard when you got put on hold!

By Executive Order You Must Collect Data

sneakin — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:59:05 -0700

I was applying for a job and got this (emphasis mine):

Under Executive Order 11246, the federal government requires [company name] to report the sex and race/ethnic origin of its applicants for employment. Your submission of any of the information requested is voluntary, and your decision not to provide it will not subject you to any adverse treatment. Your cooperation is appreciated.

It then goes on how they don't discriminate. My question is why does the federal government want this information? My only guess is that it's to make the companies provide the data that could be used against them if they don't meet some quota.

It's HBO

sneakin — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 22:23:17 -0700

Slashdot made a post about HBO attacking BitTorrent. I made a comment that will probably never get modded up, so here it is:

Let's do some math:

HBO: $13/month * 12 months = $156

Rome DVD: $20

Rome in DivX: $4/episode * 12 episodes = $48

Now lets see, HBO has at least four decent series, and I'll let you do the math. I think $4/download for each hour long series they do would compensate them more than enough.

It's time media companies adapt and grow up.

I would pay what I pay for a pack of cigarettes to download each episode, so long as they weren't DRM crippled. I've watched and enjoyed at least four of their series so that covers the yearly fee that my household pays to get HBO. In sum HBO could be making more money if they let me download the episodes of each of their series.

A Laissez Faire Corollary

sneakin — Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:23:20 -0700

Here's a laizze-fare corollary:

It is wrong for the government to interfere with business, thus it is also wrong for business to interfere with government.

I believe that's logically sound. If not I think it has merits anyway and is worth further thought. It would also be some sort of ideal too, since government will most likely keep putting its hand into business forcing business to interfere with government. My that's grand!

Bob Parsons & Real-time Information

sneakin — Sun, 18 Sep 2005 09:03:22 -0700

Courtesy of WorkHappy I read a piece by Bob Parsons, the founder of GoDaddy, about the secret of John D. Rockefeller. It's only worth mentioning because he used headlines like "Quick decisions based on real-time information made Go Daddy #1!", "Real-time information about your business is critical", and "Old news has little value". I'll leave it to you to find out why and to let your imagination roam.