Davis has now ordered a retrial.

From Wired's Threat Level blog:

The RIAA, which is the music industry's lobbying and litigation arm, fought hard to keep Jury Instruction No. 15 in play. The group told the judge that copyright infringement on peer-to-peer networks is implied, and that it shouldn't have to provide proof of an actual transfer — because it's impossible.

"Requiring proof of actual transfers would cripple efforts to enforce copyright owners' rights online – and would solely benefit those who seek to freeload off plaintiff's investment," RIAA attorney Timothy Reynolds said in a court filing.

The judge also took issue with the amount of the verdict.

"While the court does not discount plaintiffs' claim that, cumulatively, illegal downloading has far-reaching effects on their businesses, the damages awarded in this case are wholly disproportionate to the damages suffered by plaintiffs. Thomas allegedly infringed on the copyrights of 24 songs -‐ the equivalent of approximately three CDs, costing less than $54, and yet the total damages awarded is $222,000 – more than 500 times the cost of buying 24 separate CDs and more than 4,000 times the cost of three CDs."

Judge Declares Mistrial in RIAA-Jammie Thomas Trial [Wired Threat Level]
(Photo: AP)

The main problem with the system, researchers contend, is that enforcement agencies are only looking at IP addresses of those participating on peer-to-peer networks and don't focus on the actual files being transferred. The article says,

In two separate studies in August 2007 and May of this year, the researchers set out to examine who was participating in BitTorrent file-sharing networks and what they were sharing. The researchers introduced software agents into these networks to monitor their traffic. Even though those software agents did not download any files, the researchers say they received more than 400 take-down requests accusing them of participating in the downloads.

The research team, including Michael Piatek a graduate student, says these takedown notices should be viewed with some skepticism. He says, "Because current enforcement techniques are weak, it is possible that anyone, regardless of sharing content or using BitTorrent, could get a D.M.C.A. takedown notice claiming they were committing copyright infringement."

Mr. Kohno, an assistant professor at the university said, "Our study scientifically shows that flaws exists." He adds, "It’s impossible to prove that other flaws don’t exist, especially since current industry practices are so shrouded in mystery. Ultimately, we think that our results should provide a wake-up call for more openness on the parts of content enforcers."

We hope that these kinds of studies help to bring about changes in the way that DMCA takedown notices are issued. Copyright infringement lawsuits have turned into big business for trade groups but they continually fail to consider the innocent victims which are being snagged in their massive net. To accuse someone of a crime is serious business, it is only fair that the method by which they are accused be just as serious.

The Inexact Science Behind D.M.C.A. Takedown Notices [New York Times]
(Photo: Getty)

Earlier this month the RIAA voluntarily dismissed the case—then refiled it last week but didn't mention it was the same lawsuit, which means it was assigned to a different judge. Now the RIAA is demanding immediate discovery (which includes depositions and hard drives), which the previous judge had blocked pending a rule on the dismissal motion. We tip our hats to you, RIAA lawyers. You bring every evil-lawyer cliche from TV to life.

"These people are psychos," Beckerman said in an interview.

Also, the case was captioned under the name Does, meaning the RIAA was somehow pretending it didn't know the family's name allegedly behind the IP address in question.

"This case, it's the exact same internet access account," he said. "It’s the very same act of copyright infringement charged. It's no different."

The RIAA did not immediately respond for comment.

Beckerman has penned letters to both judges alerting them to the switcheroo.

"They're trying to force a settlement and frightening people," Beckerman said in the interview. "That's the only point of this."

"Lawyer: RIAA Gets Sleazy in Disputed Downloading Lawsuit" [Wired Threat Level] (Thanks to Chris!)
(Photo: Getty)

Among other things, ACTA will outlaw P2P (even when used to share works that are legally available, like my books), and crack down on things like region-free DVD players. All of this is taking place out of the public eye, presumably with the intention of presenting it as a fait accompli just as the ink is drying on the treaty.

Wikileaks points out that the U.S. politician behind ACTA is Howard Berman from California, a Democrat whose top four campaign contributors for 2006 were Time Warner ($21,000), News Corp ($15,000), Sony Corp of America ($14,000), and Walt Disney Co ($13,550).

So what can you do, other than shake your head in disgust? Well, here's a list of members of the subcommittee overseeing the U.S. side of things, so you could start by seeing if your rep is listed and contacting him or her directly. One Boing Boing reader suggests contacting your representative regardless of committee membership—you can find the correct contact information here using your zip code or address.

"Proposed US ACTA multi-lateral intellectual property trade agreement (2007)" [Wikileaks via Boing Boing]
(Photo: Getty)

Comcast is facing a potentially heavy fine from the FCC for (possibly) improperly interfering with Internet traffic, and they're hoping that this new "protocol-agnostic" method will be more palatable.

It sounds like bad news for heavy users, however:

The new Internet traffic method will put the online traffic of ordinary Internet users ahead of heavy users at certain times to maintain overall Internet speeds, Douglas said. Thus, the Internet experience for heavy users - so-called Internet hogs - could slow during periods of Internet congestion.

If successful, Comcast will implement it throughout the system by the end of the year.

Comcast to test 'Internet hog' controls [Philly.com]
(Photo: cmorran123 )

Although it won't affect other cases, the RIAA was handed a small smackdown this week when a U.S. district judge rejected their request for a summary judgement, and ruled that putting song files in a shared directory was not enough proof that infringement had occurred.

The judge said that the RIAA "must prove that the songs were actually downloaded," which is not a distinction past judges have made. Whether or not this ruling will cause other judges to look at the RIAA's future claims in a different light remains to be seen, however.

Wake's ruling pretty much contradicts many of the legal arguments the RIAA has presented in those peer-to-peer lawsuits the organization has brought against individual users. However, not that many cases actually make it to court, mainly because defendants often opt for settling for a few thousand dollars instead of shouldering expenses for a jaunt through the civil legal system.

The three main points of Comcast's argument, which Ars Technica covers in greater detail, are:

1. "Congress has not given the FCC authority to act on this matter"

2. "The FCC's Internet Policy Statement does not give the agency the authority to deal with the issue"

3. "Regulating Comcast's ISP policies may violate the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)"

The article concludes that this may just be "legal saber rattling" on Comcast's part—but that it might also be "a warning to the FCC to expect a lawsuit following any action against ISP P2P blocking. FCC Chair Martin says he hopes to finish his investigation of Comcast by late June. "

"Comcast: FCC lacks any authority to act on P2P blocking" [Ars Technica]
(Photo: Monty Python)

One distinctive tool in this situation is Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), who introduced an amendment that would explicitly deny funding to schools who didn't comply, but then had his staffers pull the amendment at the last minute with the excuse that he wasn't there in person to introduce it. We'll apparently have to look forward to Rep. Cohen's industry-friendly amendment at a later date.

"Controversial college funding bill passed—P2P proviso intact" [ArsTechnica]
(Photo: Getty)

FCC to Probe Comcast Data Discrimination [AP]
(Photo: AP)

EFF Releases Reports and Software to Spot Interference with Internet Traffic [EFF]

Not surprisingly, analysts aren't exactly bowled over by Fox's take on the future of digital commerce.

"If it doesn't work on the iPod, then it doesn't exist," said Michael Gartenberg, vice president and research director at New York-based analyst firm Jupiter Research. "It's the right idea and they're taking steps, but it's just not enough," he said. "Consumers want to do the right thing, but they are dealing with a plethora of devices."

RELATED
"Die Hard DVD Will Ship With Ripped Movie File Included"

I have read many comments and articles that I had my hard drive replaced after I learned of my suit. This could not be further from the truth. What most people don't know, if I did have my hard drive replaced after I was served the initial complaint to this suit, that would be considered spoliation of evidence, which is a criminally prosecutable offense. All the following dates, keep in mind so you can see the timeline yourself.

The day MediaSentry (the RIAAs 'investigative' company) said I was caught illegally sharing songs over KaZaa was February 21, 2005. My computer crashed approximately 2 weeks later. The only reason I know why it crashed is this: my boys were playing a video game and in the middle of some epic battle on their game, the computer froze up, then the screen went black, and in my child's frustration, the side of the computer was smacked. After that, the computer would not load and I would receive error messages.

I brought my computer into Best Buy for repairs on March 7, 2005. Remember, I brought it in for repairs under the extended warranty, not to have the hard drive replaced. And if anyone who has used a large chain electronic store to repair their electrical equipment knows, these companies do not replace hard drives on the whim of the customer if they have to pay for the hard drive replacement covered under warranty. They try to do whatever is cheaper for the company, which normally means fixing the issues with the hard drive. With my hard drive, the issues couldn't be fixed so Best Buy, not me but Best Buy, made the decision to replace the hard drive.

The RIAA didn't subpoena my personal information from Charter until late April 2005, almost 2 months AFTER my hard drive was replaced. As with all RIAA subpoenas to ISPs, I was not notified of the court date when the subpoena was issued. I was only notified after Charter Communications was served with the subpoena. This letter came late April 2005, again 2 months AFTER my hard drive was replaced. I didn't officially hear from the RIAA until late August 2005, almost 6 months AFTER my hard drive was replaced. The lawsuit itself wasn't officially started until April 2006, over 1 year AFTER my hard drive was replaced.

As you can see, I did not replace my hard drive to hide any evidence of anything. The replacement wasn't my choice and I would have to be psychic to know 2 months in advance my personal information was going to be subpoenaed and a year later, I would be sued.

Yes, all this information was given to the jury during the trial. The main problem that arose concerning my hard drive was the date I gave my attorney for when the hard drive was replaced. I didn't check the records for Best Buy before I gave my hard drive to Mr. Toder, so when I told him the hard drive had been replaced, the date I gave was January or February of 2004. Obviously, after we received all the information from Best Buy, we saw that the hard drive was replaced in March 2005. We also found out I didn't even own the computer until March 2004, one month after the date I told my attorney.

This story raises some interesting questions about the implications of surrendering broken hard drives to retailers like Best Buy. Interesting questions, and scary ones, too.

Jammie Thomas: her story in her own words [p2pnet](Thanks, David!)

What do you think about OiNK being shut down?
Trent: I'll admit I had an account there and frequented it quite often. At the end of the day, what made OiNK a great place was that it was like the world's greatest record store. Pretty much anything you could ever imagine, it was there, and it was there in the format you wanted. If OiNK cost anything, I would certainly have paid, but there isn't the equivalent of that in the retail space right now. iTunes kind of feels like Sam Goody to me.

I don't feel cool when I go there. I'm tired of seeing John Mayer's face pop up. I feel like I'm being hustled when I visit there, and I don't think their product is that great. DRM, low bit rate, etc. Amazon has potential, but none of them get around the issue of pre-release leaks. And that's what's such a difficult puzzle at the moment. If your favorite band in the world has a leaked record out, do you listen to it or do you not listen to it? People on those boards, they're grateful for the person that uploaded it — they're the hero. They're not stealing it because they're going to make money off of it; they're stealing it because they love the band. I'm not saying that I think OiNK is morally correct, but I do know that it existed because it filled a void of what people want.

Trent Reznor and Saul Williams Discuss Their New Collaboration, Mourn OiNK [NY Mag]
(Photo:AdamL212)

She has some interesting thoughts about DRM vs Downloading, and we're somewhat inclined to agree with her...

TF. Do you think its legal or illegal to copy a CD or DVD?

- Some men right, they sell you a DVD at the market but when you get home it doesn't play, that's illegal.

TF. Why is it illegal?

- Duh!! Because they tell you it works and when you get it home it's rubbish and jumps in the middle and its a waste of money!

Inside the Mind of a 9 Year Old File-Sharer [TorrentFreak via Kottke]

"Sandvine already counts top U.S. cable provider Comcast Corp (CMCSA) among its customers, Barron's said." - Easing network debate may aid Allot/Sandvine-paper, Reuters, Sun Apr 8, 2007

Here's the orginal Barron's article (subscription required): Here's How the Drama Over 'Net Neutrality End

Sandvine also posted the article in the press archives section on their very own website.

Oops. Hard to play the no comment game when the facts are already in print.

PREVIOUSLY:
LEAKS: Insider Tells Us There's Proof Comcast Contracts BitTorrent Sabotaging To Sandvine
Comcast's "We Don't Throttle BitTorrent" Internal Talking Points Memo

A Comcast insider tells us, however, that in the Comcast trouble-shooting system there is a list of third-party vendors. Sandvine was on the list.

UPDATE: Damning Proof Comcast Contracted To Sandvine

"Comcast has made a major mistake in attempting to hinder peer-to-peer file sharing as an aspect of its network management," Rick Boucher, D-Va told CNet's Chris Soghoian. "The inability of customers to (share files) significantly diminishes their ability to utilize the Internet for one of its most important applications, which is user-to-user content."

He also noted that "file sharing is already being used for a wide variety of perfectly lawful and appropriate applications."

That's nice, but will Comcast's shady dealings with BitTorrent prompt congress to address net neutrality? Reply hazy. Try again.

Congressman to Comcast: Stop interfering with BitTorrent [CNet]

There aren't many FCC regulations against traffic shaping—"the act of throttling a given piece of Internet traffic based on its type, like BitTorrent or VOIP"—but Comcast's selective targeting and disruption of P2P services is the strongest evidence of a company intentionally degrading service by "actively impersonating" its customers' computers.

Comcast's technology kicks in, though not consistently, when one BitTorrent user attempts to share a complete file with another user.

Each PC gets a message invisible to the user that looks like it comes from the other computer, telling it to stop communicating. But neither message originated from the other computer — it comes from Comcast. If it were a telephone conversation, it would be like the operator breaking into the conversation, telling each talker in the voice of the other: "Sorry, I have to hang up. Good bye."

"Comcast blocks some Internet traffic" [MSNBC]
"Comcast Screws with File-Sharing Traffic" [DailyTech]
(Photo: Getty)

"This is what can happen if you don't settle," RIAA attorney Richard Gabriel told reporters outside the courthouse, according to Wired. "I think we have sent a message we are willing to go to trial."

RIAA Jury Finds Minnesota Woman Liable for Piracy, Awards $222,000 [Wired Threat Level]

ArsTechnica has a detailed analysis of the emails, concentrating mostly on MediaDefender's "entrapment" website MiiVi. Earlier this year, MediaDefender was outed for surreptitiously operating the video upload service offering high speed downloads of copyright-protected content. While MiiVi's true purpose is still not known, emails from before and after MediaDefender's affiliation with the site became public show that MiiVi was intended for public use and was not "an internal project" as MediaDefender founder Randy Saaf told the press.

Shortly after the public launch of MiiVi in June, developer Ben Grodsky e-mailed Saaf and his colleagues to inform them that the site was beginning to receive traffic. "We have some success! 12 people have signed up on [the] page. 7 have installed [the] app," wrote Grodsky. "This is from about 3,000 uniques from limewire redirects." Grodksy sent another user count status update a week later revealing that the site had drawn 19,000 unique visitors from LimeWire redirects. He also informed Saaf that his team was "working on putting Google Analytics all over MiiVi" in order to "better track what people are doing on the site."

MediaDefender went to great lengths to obscure its affiliation with MiiVi. "I don't want MediaDefender anywhere in your e-mail replies to people contacting Miivi," Saaf instructed company employees. "Make sure MediaDefender can not be seen in any of the hidden email data crap that smart people can look in." Grodsky and Saaf also began discussing new ways to drive traffic to the MiiVi site. "If we want more users, Dylan's eDonkey messages would get us a lot of Europeans that are a little bit older crowd," Grodsky wrote. "I would like it if our pictures were indexed with goggle [sic]. We need to get as much search traffic as we can," Saaf replied.

In addition to the information about MiiVi and Viide, Ars reports that the New York Attorney General's office and MediaDefender are working together to provide the AG's office with data collected from P2P users.

Although the full scope of the project cannot be extrapolated from the e-mails, the information available indicates that MediaDefender intends to provide the Attorney General's office with information about users accessing pornographic content. Other kinds of information could be involved as well. The e-mails clearly indicate that the data provided by MediaDefender was intended to be used for law enforcement purposes. In an e-mail to Mairs, Bartram says that the system must be specifically designed "to satisfy the legal and evidentiary requirements" before use.

"On your end, the peer-to-peer crawler will be identifying files matching the established search criteria from various hosts," wrote Bartram. "This data will then be collected, filtered for New York resident ip addresses (to the accuracy limits imposed by geo-query tech). The data will then be transferred to us where; on our end, a separate piece of software will use that data to connect into the network and download the file from a host and store it on our servers for evidence retention and further analysis."

One month of media defense on a single track will cost you $2,000. An entire album brings in $4,000 a month.

MediaDefender targets the following networks: FastTrack, Gnutella, IRC, Usenet, DirectConnect, eDonkey, MP2P, Kademlia, Overnet, BitTorrent, SoulSeek, and Shareaza.

More at Ars Technica. Interesting stuff.

Leaked Media Defender e-mails reveal secret government project [Ars Technica]

Violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is against the law. If you are caught downloading copyrighted material, you will lose your ResNet privileges forever. No second notices, no excuses, no refunds. One violation and your ResNet internet access is gone for as long as you reside on campus.

University of Kansas adopts one-strike policy for copyright infringement [Ars Technica]
ReNet [University of Kansas]
(Photo: AP)

In the fall of 2003, the RIAA filed its first copyright-infringement lawsuits against file sharers. They've since sued more than 20,000 music fans. The RIAA maintains that the lawsuits are meant to spread the word that unauthorized downloading can have consequences. "It isn't being done on a punitive basis," says RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol. But file-sharing isn't going away — there was a 4.4 percent increase in the number of peer-to-peer users in 2006, with about a billion tracks downloaded illegally per month, according to research group BigChampagne.

Despite the industry's woes, people are listening to at least as much music as ever. Consumers have bought more than 100 million iPods since their November 2001 introduction, and the touring business is thriving, earning a record $437 million last year. And according to research organization NPD Group, listenership to recorded music — whether from CDs, downloads, video games, satellite radio, terrestrial radio, online streams or other sources — has increased since 2002. The problem the business faces is how to turn that interest into money. "How is it that the people that make the product of music are going bankrupt, while the use of the product is skyrocketing?" asks the Firm's Kwatinetz. "The model is wrong."

Kwatinetz sees other, leaner kinds of companies — from management firms like his own, which now doubles as a record label, to outsiders such as Starbucks — stepping in. Paul McCartney recently abandoned his longtime relationship with EMI Records to sign with Starbucks' fledgling Hear Music. Video-game giant Electronic Arts also started a label, exploiting the promotional value of its games, and the newly revived CBS Records will sell music featured in CBS TV shows.

"The record companies needed to jump off a cliff, and they couldn't bring themselves to jump," says Hilary Rosen, who was then CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America. "A lot of people say, 'The labels were dinosaurs and idiots, and what was the matter with them?' But they had retailers telling them, 'You better not sell anything online cheaper than in a store,' and they had artists saying, 'Don't screw up my Wal-Mart sales.'

The Record Industry's Decline [Rolling Stone via BoingBoing]

Cory Doctorow over at Boing Boing expertly skewers them:

The RIAA's approach to PR is much like their approach to culture in general: read-only. The RIAA issues statements like the Pope emitting a bull, and we mortals may squabble over its meaning among ourselves, but they are not available to participate in any further discussion. This is reminiscent of the RIAA's approach to things like YouTube lipsynch videos: "our songs are released to be listened to and nothing more; should you dare to make them part of your life, we will use the copyright law we bought to break you."

What a collection of assholes. Luckily, they couldn't be doing a worse job promoting DRM: their extortionist tactics couldn't be doing a better job of driving people away from purchasing from them. It's all going to come around.

RIAA's "abundance of sensitivity" ends harassment of grieving family [Boing Boing]

In Michigan, in Warner Bros. v. Scantlebury, after learning that the defendant had passed away, the RIAA made a motion to stay the case for 60 days in order to allow the family time to "grieve", after which time they want to start taking depositions of the late Mr. Scantlebury's children.

We're sure the RIAA will be kind enough to offer a settlement to Mr. Scantlebury's fatherless children. After all, they wouldn't want to seem inhuman.

RIAA Wants to Depose Dead Defendant's Children; But Will Allow them 60 Days to "Grieve" [Recording Industry Vs. People] (via Boing Boing)

An Oklahoma mother, Debbie Foster, was sued by the RIAA in 2004 for illegally downloading music. - "Lonely Room" -

The RIAA claimed that her internet account was used to share files - "Kansas City" - and offered to settle for $5,000. - "I Cain't Say No" -

Braver of bears and tornadoes, Mrs. Foster decided to take her chances in court and 'rassle the RIAA like a rattlesnake in a coal mine. -"People Will Say We're In Love" - She asked for the RIAA to provide the specific dates and files that were downloaded, - "Pore Jud is Daid" - and when they failed to do so, filed a motion for a summary judgment. - "Laurey Makes Up Her Mind"-

- "All Er Nuthin'" -The RIAA cut and run, - "The Surrey With the Fringe On Top" -and the judge awarded Debbie attorney fees this July.

"Oh What a Beautiful Mornin'

"RIAA Loses in File Sharing Case" [ArsTecnica]

But get this. When Cassi mentions she can't afford $3750, being an MIT student already up to her eyeballs in a lifetime's worth of debt, the RIAA helpfully countered: So? Drop out of school so you can afford it.

We have no idea if Cassi's guilty or not. Hell, she probably is — she's a college student, after all. But leaving aside the martian moon man fallacy the RIAA always bases their extortionism upon — namely, that copyright infringement equals theft, and that downloaded mp3s equals lost money at the street rate of the price of the album, neither of which is true — the RIAA is suggesting that a fair punishment for a purloined Evanescence album is only to give up your dreams, aspirations, career and future. Or as Cassi put it:

The Recording Industry of America would rather see America's youth deprived of higher education, forever marring their ability to contribute personally and financially to society — including the arts — so that they may crucify us as examples to our peers. To say nothing of wrecking our lives in the process. I finally understand what the RIAA meant when they told me "stealing music is not a victimless crime" — the victims hang for all to see.

Run Over by the RIAA, Don't Tap the Glass [The Tech]

As we previously reported, the Consumer Study of Radio and Music Survey found:

• Downloading makes up for less than one-third of the music on downloaders' computers'.
• Downloaders often test run songs on P2P [peer to peer] services before buying.
• The largest downloading demographic is also the largest music buying demographic.

Finally, proof: pirating saves lives.

At least, those were the conclusions Michael Geist, the Research Chair of Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, drew after reading the report and published on his blog. The commission responded to his posting and accused him of selective interpretation.

Thus reaffirming that pirating, does after all, lead to prenatal crack addiction.

Read the study for yourself (click Appendix A).

Previously: Study Finds File Sharing Is Good For Music Industry

We go on quite a bit, so more after the jump...

We think the distinction is important to make, because various media industries are doing their damnedest to prosecute and persecute file sharers, as opposed to adjusting their core business strategies to market to them. The legality of file sharing and technologies are largely gray areas in international law still... mostly because organizations like the RIAA and MPAA hope to never have to back-up their claims. Instead try to make sure it never gets to court (and the legality clarified) by relentless class action lawsuits against not criminals, but people who recognize the Internet for what it is: an amazing way to disseminate ideas, art and culture in the 21st century. For the average Joe caught in these organization's targets, they usually can not afford a protracted defense, and instead must capitulate, regardless of the legal precedent for the industries' claims.

We're against piracy for the simple reason that we think those who entertain us and give us delight should be able to make a living off it. But we're fascinated by this article on The Pirate Bay — a huge Swedish Bittorrent site for file sharing — simply because they are launching a battle against the media industries who hope to maintain the status quo by cowing the rest of us. In Sweden, file sharing laws are more murky than elsewhere, and the status of Bittorrent trackers break no laws. Because of this, The Pirate Bay has been able to operate with impunity even while other similar torrent sites are shutdown.

Amazingly, in response to recent rumblings that Sweden's file sharing laws were about to change, The Pirate Bay has formed a Pirate political party, promising to "to strengthen Swedish privacy protections, weaken copyright laws, abolish the EU Data Retention Directive and roll back government surveillance legislation". Even more amazing, they seem like they might actually win some seats on Swedish parliament: only four percent of the country's file-sharers (Correction! 4% of the nation's voters) need vote for them to get some seats.

Even if you don't agree with their message — and frankly, we don't — it's still a fascinating look at the file sharing movement and how they can fight the intimidation of the big media business.

Link: The Pirate Bay: Here to Stay?

• Quizno s - if there s a more expensive sandwich run through a broiler that takes 2 months to make prepared by trainees, I haven t found it.
• Home Depot - Thank God the only entrance to their store is conveniently located. Why don t they just put the freaking entrance around the back of the building, instead of all the way over to either the right or left of their stores.
• Home Depot Part Deux - If they could have [fewer] registers open for more customers, thus clogging the center lane with contractors and their 50 sheets of plywood, that d be the icing on the cake.
• Verizon - I just need a phone, not a 21-member family plan, add-on extra-minute monthly prorated upsale to something else.
• Any software company that offers insane price cuts for educational versions. And the oil companies gouge? Here s my full-on rant about THAT sore spot with me.

Bill, the reason why it takes Quizno s so long is that all their employees are just those floating, singing rat squibs dressed up in human suits. Looking over Las Vegas shoulder, Home Depot places the entrances and exits in awkward places so as to confuse and entrap you in a desperate home improvement spiral whose only escape is the purchase of more grout sealer. Verizon, inspired by capitalism, is the worst cell phone company except for all the others. Regarding exorbitant Adobe prices let us introduce you to a little black cabal best known by its playful euphemism, file sharing.

Add your best shotgun kvetching via email or comments. If they strike a chord with us, we might even grace you with useless but amusing answers in a future edition of 'Micro Kvetch.'