1. One thought comes to mind. The Seventh Circuit and District Court concluded that the plaintiff's name did not have commercial value. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the plaintiff's name has de minimis commercial value? There are ads that feature "real people" who are probably compensated for appearing in the ad. Their personas may not have a great deal of commercial value, but there is some value there. Should it be different for this particular plaintiff?

    That being said, the suit strikes me as a silly one. It is more likely that the search engines returned results based upon her first name–distinctly female–rather than her complete name. In addition, shouldn't her ire be directed at the purveyors of the products and services rather than the search engines?

  2. Very informative and interesting show. I revere the experience of physical books but acknowledge that ebooks and other new digital forms are undoubtedly part of our future. I accept that, even see the many benefits. A personal note: my n…ow 14-year-old grandson and I have always read together, and just this summer finished the timeless, powerful classic, "Lord of the Flies". Sharing literature, especially using physical books with our children and grandchildren as mentioned on your show, is a rich, educational and loving experience that has no equal. Long live analog books.
    solicitors regulation authority

Comments are closed.

Did you enjoy this post? Then please share it with your friends and colleagues: