zombie political thriller

I have to ask - is this where McCain wins the election?

Also ... the "teabaggers" have plans to dump 1 million teabags in Lafayette Square today (they've promised to dump them on tarps and clean up after themselves). Attendance was, reportedly, low. It's raining.

Yeah, but you have two Seders.

You have no idea how much family arguments that saves for the whole "where we'll do it this year?" thing.

Our seder is always at my aunt and uncle's apartment. They keep more kosher than any of the rest of us, so they couldn't come if it were at anyone else's house.

zombie political thriller

I have to ask - is this where McCain wins the election?

Heh. Coincidentally enough, the book focuses on a presidential campaign where the candidates appear to be thinly veiled versions of Obama and McCain even though she wrote the book long before the 2008 campaign.

billytea, sorry about the layoff. Boo.

Damn, I like these [link] but only available in a size 5.

These are nice, too, but still spendy for sale price: [link]

Jumping in to ask our attorneys:

Do any of our attorneys have a decent grasp of copyright law?

We have a whiny jackass author who wrote an article that basically says that all of the zinc lozenge formulas available in stores are ineffective, and there is only one formulation -- available for purchase only on the internet -- that is available.

Guess who owns the company that makes/sells the "effective" zinc lozenges?

We found that out and said, whoa, conflict of interest, dude, so we're not going to run your self-serving article.

He's now threatening to sue us because our acceptance of his article for publication is a "contract" that his article will be published.

Note that, before we ever accept an article from ANY author, they have to sign over all copyright to us (which IS a contract). So we hold copyright on this jackass's article, we decide to not publish it since it turns out to be one big shill and we don't want to put ourselves in a situation where it looks like WE are shilling for him.

We release the copyright back to him, and he says he's going to sue.

I say he has absolutely no legal leg to stand on, but I also don't know copyright law very well, past the basics.

Damn, I like these [link] but only available in a size 5.

Oh you know I clicked on those too! Adorable!

These are nice, too, but still spendy for sale price: [link]

They take the 40% off when you add it to your shopping cart. But it looks like those are actually out of stock now.

He's now threatening to sue us because our acceptance of his article for publication is a "contract" that his article will be published.

Not a lawyer but this sounds like total bullshit to me. There may be any number of reasons an article accepted for publication may not be published!

There may be any number of reasons an article accepted for publication may not be published!

That's what I said. Our company holds the copyright on the article right now, and as the copyright holders, we can choose to not publish something. We don't even *have* to release the copyright to him, but we're willing to do that. We just won't publish his self-serving crap.

What a douchebag, Steph. It always pisses me off when people running scams act like they're entitled to run their scam.

So we hold copyright on this jackass's article, we decide to not publish it since it turns out to be one big shill and we don't want to put ourselves in a situation where it looks like WE are shilling for him.

We release the copyright back to him, and he says he's going to sue.

If you've reverted rights back to him, he's free to sell it elsewhere. You reneged on the promise to publish, yes, but with cause, and you followed through by reverting rights to him. He's got nothing.

Okay, I see you didn't revert rights yet, but you're willing to. Same thing. As far as I know, any standard contract gives a publisher the right to publish something, but it doesn't mandate it.